dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
26203
share rss forum feed


gcf1971

@verizon.net
reply to Mac973

Re: Verizon and AMC dispute

Actually not until summertime - I believe August. Wish it were January!



Anon223

@verizon.net
reply to Greg2600

Yep. And with Verizon's blazing fast internet speed, still can get the show without the advertizements.


ksalper

join:2002-11-15
West Orange, NJ
reply to ITALIAN926

said by ITALIAN926:

Everyone wants all the channels, with no ads, and no price increases. The providers dont win in these situations, and the customers lose as well.

Well, actually, I'd disagree with the first part of that. "Everyone" may want AMC (I do, at least, though I don't really care if it's gone while Walking Dead, Mad Men, and Breaking Bad all aren't airing new episodes), but a lot fewer people really want (or care about) Sundance, IFC, and We TV. What seems to happen a lot in these discussions is that the provider wants something in relation to their other channels -- placement on better tiers, HD carriage if only SD is being carried at the moment, maybe a fee increase -- and they use their one desired channel, AMC in this case, as the stick to hit the cable/satellite/fiber company with. The classic example of this, as I understand it, is ABC requiring systems to carry stuff like ESPN Classics if they want to be able to air their local ABC-owned network signal.

You're definitely right about everyone losing, though.


matcarl
Premium
join:2007-03-09
Franklin Square, NY

Story about it:

»www.multichannel.com/distributio···s/140400


nfotiu

join:2009-01-25
reply to jmcging

Time for a law that forces unbundling of any channel charging a carriage fee over 50 cents. I have no issues with the hbo pay model where you choose if you want the channel, but this new model of higher and higher carriage fee channels being included in basic plans needs to stop.

Eventually the greed of these networks will force government intervention, and this gravy train will come to a screeching halt.



28619103
Premium
join:2009-03-01
21435
reply to Greg2600

said by Greg2600:

Why is it EVERY time there is one of these disputes, it's AMC vs. a cable provider? AMC almost every time. Why is that? Honestly, I hope Verizon drops them, I'll just go to a torrent website I know the next day and watch the few shows I watch on there. IFC, We, and Sundance are horrible looking cropped trash.

AMC has company
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carriage_dispute


JH28

@bankofamerica.com
reply to matcarl

ok agreement is up Dec 31. This is typical negotiating ploy to make the other side the bad guy. AMC wants everyone to blame Fios if on Jan 1 we don't have those 4 channels

The telco issued its own statement on Monday morning: "There is no risk of FiOS TV customers losing AMC imminently, as AMC Networks has incorrectly claimed. This is nothing more than a desperate attempt by AMCN to scare our FiOS TV customers into thinking that they will lose their programming.

"Verizon has a history of working with top programmers to reach mutually beneficial agreements that enable our customers to continue enjoying the best programming on FiOS TV’s industry-leading service," the telco continued. "We continue to work hard on behalf of our customers, as we negotiate with AMC Networks to reach an agreement that is reasonable and in our customers’ best interest. It is unfortunate that AMCN has decided to unnecessarily publicize these discussions, but not surprising as they have a history of using their viewers as pawns in their negotiations with distributors."



Greg2600

join:2008-05-20
Belleville, NJ
reply to jmcging

Exactly, this is my point. AMC/Rainbow Media uses scare tactics in every dispute. Cablevision winds up in one of these spats with networks all the time. Connection? Chairman of the board Charles Dolan.



Anon223

@verizon.net
reply to nfotiu

Time for a law that forces unbundling..

There is a law, it's the law of free market. As a seller, get what you can get. As a consumer, buy what you need or can afford. GOV does not need to be meddling in such trivial matters, nor (IMO) does it need to be meddling in what can be digitally shared.

Quite playing with the latter and the former will work itself out.


Lodef

join:2011-02-14
Danvers, MA
reply to jmcging

Well if they do drop it, I certainly won't miss their horrible PQ. The worst channel for that in the Fios line-up!



Jackarino
YacCity
Premium
join:2006-12-28
Allendale, NJ
kudos:1
reply to jmcging

I better not miss the Walking Dead!
--
Romney - Ryan 2012
Christie 2016


Jnetty99

join:2005-12-30
Seaford, NY
reply to jmcging

What is the actual dispute? I can't find anything online about it.



loli
Premium
join:2002-08-26
South Richmond Hill, NY
reply to jmcging

Damn. So if the channel goes away it means I'll have to download the episode of the Walking dead about 30 minutes after it airs on torrent sites. Damn it all to hell.


fioseller

join:2007-08-31
Lindenhurst, NY
reply to Jnetty99

Its always about money.



Jackarino
YacCity
Premium
join:2006-12-28
Allendale, NJ
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Vonage
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Optimum Online
·ooma
·DIRECTV

said by fioseller:

Its always about money.

And it always will be
--
Romney - Ryan 2012
Christie 2016


TitusTroy

join:2009-06-18
New York, NY
reply to jmcging

AMC seems to always be in some sort of carriage dispute with someone...a few months back Dish Network was their target...I think they went 5 months without an agreement and they would run 4-5 commercials bashing Dish during every one of their prime time programs...now it's FiOS vs AMC...hope it doesn't last as long as the Dish dispute

I really do wish AMC would stop making a big production out of every cable provider dispute...hopefully things work out with FiOS soon...losing AMC would be a huge loss, especially with Walking Dead and Breaking Bad



Greg2600

join:2008-05-20
Belleville, NJ
reply to Jnetty99

said by Jnetty99:

What is the actual dispute? I can't find anything online about it.

There is none, this is the way that the Dolan's negotiate. They advertize and try to rile up angst with Verizon customers.


Nezmo
The name's Bond. James Bond.
Premium,MVM
join:2004-11-10
Coppell, TX
kudos:1
reply to jmcging

Just quit watching the channel. There's a few others to choose from.

Expand your moderator at work

crgauth

join:2004-05-18
Glen Burnie, MD
reply to jmcging

Re: Verizon and AMC dispute

My $.02 worth
When it comes to a la carte services, I don't think most of us can afford what it would really cost to just get the channels we want.
For this example:
AMC reportedly charges around $.23/subscriber. So given an estimate I found on the Internet of approx 81M households having cable. I believe AMC is typically included to most users. That means that they get $18.6M/month. Last week Walking dead got 9M viewers. And assuming every one of those people would want to keep the channel, their cost would jump to over $2/month.
And AMC has about an average carriage fee. So if you like the cheap channels and not the expensive ones, you could possibly save money.
And for those that say I will just drop the channel and find the programs I want online, if that happens too much, the channels won't be able to afford the quality programming and it will disappear.

All of this being said, it appears to be a never ending cycle. Channels want more money, eventually our costs go up.
But this is no different than sports teams, movies and most other forms of entertainment.

Ok, next person want to use the soapbox?



TitusTroy

join:2009-06-18
New York, NY

3 edits
reply to jmcging

AMC is riling up Verizon customers now because they know that once the agreement expires on 12/31 with no new contract in place Verizon will take the channel off the air...so at that point there would be no point running those Verizon bashing ads because no Verizon customers would be able to see them (unless they go to a friend or family members house who has another cable provider)

when Dish took the channel off during their 4-5 month contract dispute I would still see dozens of Dish network bashing commercials during AMC programming which really made no sense as the target demographic is not seeing it



Zero

join:2009-07-01
Collegeville, PA

2 recommendations

reply to jmcging

To VZ: If AMC wants to charge more per subscriber they need to increase the HD PQ of their networks to a level worthy of being on FiOS TV.



More Fiber
Premium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:29

+1



Pattz3

@verizon.net
reply to jmcging

Keep AMC!!!!!!


Baff

join:2007-12-05
Murrieta, CA
reply to crgauth

said by crgauth:

My $.02 worth
When it comes to a la carte services, I don't think most of us can afford what it would really cost to just get the channels we want.

I watch 18 channels. At your estimated average of $2 each, that would be $36/month, which is a small fraction of what I pay now.


amarryat
Verizon FiOS

join:2005-05-02
Marshfield, MA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

said by Baff:

said by crgauth:

My $.02 worth
When it comes to a la carte services, I don't think most of us can afford what it would really cost to just get the channels we want.

I watch 18 channels. At your estimated average of $2 each, that would be $36/month, which is a small fraction of what I pay now.

What about providing the service, the cable boxes etc. You left that out.

JAH_PGH

join:2009-09-28
Pittsburgh, PA

My rants:
1. I'm with Zero - while the AMC picture quality has gotten better, it still isn't where an HD picture should be. If I'm to pay extra, make the broadcast better.
2. I don't care, Verizon - go ahead and lose the channel. There's already too many things on TV for me to watch anyway. I'll miss the Walking Dead, Hell On Wheels and Mad Men, but I will survive.
3. I'm not going to jump to ComCrap, Dish or DTV all because of 1 (or 3) channel. I am pleased with the service Vz provides and the number of HD movie channels offered is the main reason (and still is) why I went to FiOS in the first place. I've had Comcast and DTV in the past and still place Vz at the top.
4. While quirky, I still love my DVR and STB combo and think it's worthwhile to keep. I'd love to go to TiVo, but there are way too many additional costs involved. I'm not paying for a TiVo box, a secondary box, two cable cards and service fees...
5. I haven't watched IFC since the last season of Whitest Kids U Know. While IFC used to be one of my go-to channels 10 years ago, it has become boring and commercial-filled.
6. Sundance - same with IFC and the Picutre Quality is worse than AMC.
7. We channel? C'mon - I don't even have that channel saved to my Favorites
8. Relax - it's not the end of the world (or is it?!). I'm sure they'll come to some agreement in the next month. Look at what the NHL did?! Oh wait...
9. If you do jump ship, who's to say that in a years time, your new provider will have a fight with AMC?

The bottom line is that I'm sticking with Verizon.
JAH



somebodeez
Premium,MVM
join:2001-09-24
here
reply to jmcging

AMC isn't what it use to be. I remember the days when they didn't cut and interrupt movies with commercials. We *rarely* watch that channel now.
C'mon, Fios and bring on TCM in HD !



amarryat
Verizon FiOS

join:2005-05-02
Marshfield, MA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to JAH_PGH

said by JAH_PGH:

2. I don't care, Verizon - go ahead and lose the channel. There's already too many things on TV for me to watch anyway. I'll miss the Walking Dead, Hell On Wheels and Mad Men, but I will survive.

Mad Men is nothing like what it used to be. Walking Dead is about to go on hiatus for a while, Breaking Bad won't be back for months. If Verizon drops it, it won't affect me for months.

Unfortunately for us, AMC's contracts with the various providers don't all end at the same time, otherwise AMC wouldn't be able to run their scare scrolls.


nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:16
reply to somebodeez

They went downhill after Rainbow Media got control, and turned these channels into a supposed cash cow....