dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
908
share rss forum feed
« TWC
page: 1 · 2

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to Alex J

Re: The Great and Powerful Google

ATT does NOT demand to be above the actual requirement for safety of linemen and then demand they will NOT pay them their wages. such as Google did. ATT also is NOT making people beg for services to build "fiberhoods" the same as Google, just to get another Press Release out.

And a beta means Google will NEVER keep this project, the same as the Nexus unlocked phone beta, they dropped that like a rock after it did NOT take off. The same as this will.

And AT&T made it easy for companies like Google to actually enter the TV market. Google didn't have to go to KC they went to the state.

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to KrK
And i don't like Apple either thank you. Got any more things I am?

And they do NOT want to revolutionize the industry. This will NOT change anything. If the MSOs wanted to do this they could every easily. The same as with AT&T

And being in Tulsa- this does NOT benefit you.

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to KrK
the same as ANYONE ELSE that wants to pay for them. Pay for them or don't use them. It's that easy. Instead Google doesn't think they should have to pay for them.

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to iansltx
And yes TWC does have those available, has since the network went FTTN. Just pay for them. Oh wait, that's not the thing anyone wants, they want it for FREE.

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to JPL
Doesn't matter if Google wants to pay for it or not. TWC should NOT be forced to give their content up. But instead Google wants the FCC to decide and force regulation on them, that should not be there. And if TWC did offer Google a price, Google would still bitch that its not free like Apple did on their "TV" product.

and its not unfair. Google wants it, Google can build their own.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to hottboiinnc
Clearly personal axe to grind is clouding your objectivity.


techguyga
Premium
join:2003-12-31
Buford, GA
reply to hottboiinnc
Wasn't Gmail originally a beta program?

biochemistry
Premium
join:2003-05-09
92361
reply to hottboiinnc
Where does it say that Google does not want to pay for access to the channel?

JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc:

Doesn't matter if Google wants to pay for it or not. TWC should NOT be forced to give their content up. But instead Google wants the FCC to decide and force regulation on them, that should not be there. And if TWC did offer Google a price, Google would still bitch that its not free like Apple did on their "TV" product.

and its not unfair. Google wants it, Google can build their own.

The problem with what you've written - WHAT TWC IS DOING IS ILLEGAL. Well, kinda. We had this fight about the terrestrial loophole over the last couple years. Verizon went to the FCC complaining about it, and guess what? They won! The FCC allows for exemptions from it. By what process? The provider who wants access to the channel has to go to the FCC and make their case. So... Google is doing just what the FCC articulated the SHOULD do, and that's considered 'bitchin to the FCC' in your mind? Huh? Google is following the procedure that the FCC laid out for handling such disputes. That's not bitching. That's the process as it's currently laid out in the regulations.

As for the problem with Google building their own... sigh. That's exactly the case that Verizon made with this when they won. They CAN'T create their own! Say Google wanted to start their own RSN. Which teams, exactly, would they be tailored for? Because the RSNs today all are tied to local professional sports teams. Google would need to petition, say, the MLB, get them to agree to a franchise expansion for another KC team, get them to start the team, and THEN Google could get the rights to that team. Wow... yeah, they have the same option... please. They don't.

The FCC held that RSNs specifically hold a very special place in the grand scheme of things. First, they are a totally limited resource. It's not like opening up another pizza place to compete with the one down the street. In this case TWC has a monopoly (which I thought we hated in this country) on regional sports broadcasting. That's what the FCC found - because of the unique nature of RSNs, because they are a fixed resource, and because they have regional appeal, preventing a carrier from having the channel provides an unfair competitive advantage for the provider who owns the channel. Not to mention the fact that the region partially pays for the content on the channel. Think about how much of your tax dollars go to the local professional sports teams. Only allowing one company access to that programming is to give them, in essense, a special tax break that's not open to other providers. Yep... totally fair. Um, no, it's not (which is another reason the FCC ruled as they did).

Besides, this just deals with channels that are fed terrestrially. If TWC beamed that channel off a satellite, they couldn't stop Google from taking it if they wanted to.

Point is... all this has been argued, for years, at the FCC, and the FCC ruled in favor of allowing exemptions to the loophole - exemptions that were tailored pretty specifically to RSNs. Google just has to follow the procedure, submit to the FCC why they're being hurt by not getting this channel (which is a no-brainer for an RSN), and the FCC will force TWC to negotiate with Google, and if Verizon's dealing with CV is any indication, it will happen very, very quickly. In the case with Verizon, the FCC gave CV I think 4 weeks to come to terms with Verizon over the channel.

Not sure what TWC thinks they can gain out of this - they're going to lose this fight. All they've done is delay it a tiny bit. And it puts the lie to their statement that they aren't worried about the impact of Google Fiber in this market. Clearly they are. And they should be.


michieru
Premium
join:2009-07-25
Miami, FL
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
reply to KrK
He or she is a Google hater because he states a marketing ploy being made by Google for giving you TV services but only if you purchase internet as well which is also known as tying for the industry.

Also if company A, spent the resources to make and create these local channels and they want Google to pay for them to broadcast these services for their customers then they should pay. If Google does not like the price then move along or increase cost and don't bundle TV with internet.

Makes me wonder if they bundle so they can inflate the numbers of actual internet and tv subscribers...

Oh and once again, kissing any companies ass won't get you anywhere so to shun him or her for stating a marketing ploy does not make him a hater and makes you look like the "fanboi".


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Uh huh.

Sure, whatever you say. Not the rantings or anything.


Thespis
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Premium
join:2004-08-03
Keller, TX
reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc:

And being in Tulsa- this does NOT benefit you.

Being in Cleveland, this does NOT harm you.
What's your point?
--
Fast. Cheap. Safe.
Pick two...


Xioden
Premium
join:2008-06-10
Monticello, NY
kudos:1
reply to hottboiinnc
Yea, and all those companies likely to be laying fiber down in Chicago soon should have to pay for that too. I mean, why should the city allow a company to do something that benefits the city without making them pay an arm and a leg too?