| reply to Mac973
Re: Verizon and AMC dispute Actually not until summertime - I believe August. Wish it were January! |
|
| 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. |
|
 matcarlPremium
join:2007-03-09
Franklin Square, NY | Story about it:
»www.multichannel.com/distributio···s/140400 |
|
|
|
| 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. |
|
| 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." |
|
| 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. |
|
| 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! |
|
 JackarinoPremium
join:2006-12-28
Allendale, NJ
kudos:1 | reply to jmcging
I better not miss the Walking Dead!
--
Romney - Ryan 2012
Christie 2016 |
|
| reply to jmcging
What is the actual dispute? I can't find anything online about it. |
|
 loliPremium
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. |
|
| reply to Jnetty99
Its always about money. |
|
JackarinoPremium
join:2006-12-28
Allendale, NJ
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·ooma
 ·DIRECTV
 ·Optimum Online
·Vonage
·Comcast
·Cablevision
 ·Verizon FiOS
·AT&T U-Verse
| And it always will be
--
Romney - Ryan 2012
Christie 2016 |
|
| 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 |
|
| 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. |
|
 NezmoThe 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. |
|
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? |
|
