Topic 'Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting' in forum '' - dslreports.com

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Thu, 06 Jan 2011 18:36:32 EDT

cramer posted : Wrong. DISH and Directv are legally prohibited from offering network feeds to people who can receive local over-the-air broadcasts. It's about protecting ad revenue for local broadcasters.

quote:
DNS (Distant Network Signal) is any television station delivered outside of its home DMA. Federal law prohibits the delivery of DNS programming to any subscriber who does not meet the strict eligibility requirements associated with this type of service.

(Directv's definition of "DNS")

How is eligibility for DNS determined?
Who determines the rules for delivery of local and distant network programming?
Why is only a single East or West Coast feed available for digital DNS service?

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:41:25 EDT

kpfx posted : The FCC rules do not say anything about retransmission of the national network feed. The DMA is setup so the broadacster serves the community and as such the FCC only cares about the local content that the broadcaster generates.

said by cramer:

...otherwise DISH and DTV would simply carry 6 national broadcasts and drop the thousands of local stations -- and the billion dollar satellites they built to broadcast them.

Dish/Direct don't do this because ABC, NBC, CBS, etc won't allow it because it would harm their relationship with the local affiliates.

However, the difference in this case is FOX has essentially dropped the gauntlet and acknowledged that they really don't need their affiliates as much as they did in the past... and I wouldn't put it pas NBC, CBS, etc to do the same in the near future.

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Wed, 29 Dec 2010 14:23:49 EDT

cramer posted : It doesn't matter what agreement they have with FOX. FCC retransmission rules are very clear here... the national feed(s) cannot compete with local broadcasters. (otherwise DISH and DTV would simply carry 6 national broadcasts and drop the thousands of local stations -- and the billion dollar satellites they built to broadcast them.)

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Wed, 29 Dec 2010 14:03:33 EDT

bn1221 posted : I would pay 10 bucks a month for Discovery and History in 720p

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Wed, 29 Dec 2010 09:14:15 EDT

fifty nine posted : A cable company's revenue depends on the number of subscribers. If the number of subscribers drops because cable companies drop a channel and competitors have the channel, then the cable company is losing revenue.

If TW-San Antonio drops the FOX channel, and outlying areas can't get it via antenna, then the station will have to produce a better signal to retain the lost eyeballs, else they're going to lose revenue.

Or customers could simply switch to a dish or telco competitor.

In all these retransmission agreement arguments, cable companies should play hardball and drop the station. A test case is needed to see how long before the stations cave in.

Been there, done that.

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Wed, 29 Dec 2010 09:11:41 EDT

fifty nine posted : Are you willing to pay $12 - $14 per channel? That's what premium, ad free channels charge.

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Tue, 28 Dec 2010 22:17:36 EDT

Streetlight posted : As noted in other postings here, an over the air station's ad revenue depends on the number of eyeballs viewing its product. If that number drops because cable drops the stream and it cannot be picked up by antenna, then the station's losing revenue. If TW-San Antonio drops the FOX channel, and outlying areas can't get it via antenna, then the station will have to produce a better signal to retain the lost eyeballs, else they're going to lose revenue.

In all these retransmission agreement arguments, cable companies should play hardball and drop the station. A test case is needed to see how long before the stations cave in.
--
There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact.

Sherlock Holmes in
The Boscombe Valley Mystery
A. C. Doyle
Strand Magazine, October 1891

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Tue, 28 Dec 2010 21:05:33 EDT

dvd536 posted :

said by Streetlight:

If not, will subs see a price reduction?

Cable bills only go one way and its NOT down.
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Tue, 28 Dec 2010 19:04:12 EDT

kpfx posted : With KABB (Fox) here in San Antonio, you can't get them outside the city without a 22ft antenna because they've got such an awful transmitter.

However, an interesting twist in this case is that Time Warner has a national agreement with FOX to continue showing the network feed in the event of the loss of the affiliate... so in effect we're loosing out on KABB's local news (which is a joke compared to the other 3 here) and I think one or two Spurs games (which I'll just go to the bar to see).

»latimesblogs.latimes.com/enterta···oup.html

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Tue, 28 Dec 2010 18:54:35 EDT

gorehound posted : I am lucky to have cut my cable cord years ago but I do live in Portland.I had TW as cable for over 10 years and never cared about more than 10 or so channels.i finally just told them you can lower my rate or I am taking a hike.They didnot want to do the ala carte thing so I cut my cable.I am not unhappy over that fact.

The thing is these retransmission disputes will only hurt the consumer in the end.We have seen that happen again and again.

Re: TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Tue, 28 Dec 2010 18:50:00 EDT

WhatNow posted : Let's see the stations give it away for free but want to be paid if it is on cable. If I am paying more will I see less ads. The business buying ads should demand to pay less if they lose all those cable eyeballs.
The content providers had better be careful they could kill the goose that has been paying their bills. When people cut the cord the station gets nothing.

TW vs. Sinclair Broadcasting

Tue, 28 Dec 2010 18:32:25 EDT

Streetlight posted : TW subscribers who want to view Sinclair Broadcasting stations can put up an antenna. Of course this would only work for folks who have the proper digital tuner equipped TV sets or digital to analog converters. TW could assist folks who want to do this. Most cable set top boxes don't have such tuners built in.

Eventually a deal will likely be signed. If not, will subs see a price reduction?