dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
FCC Says They're Working to End CBS, Time Warner Feud
by Karl Bode 08:44AM Tuesday Aug 27 2013
The FCC hinted earlier this month that the agency would take "appropriate action" if CBS and Time Warner Cable can't resolve their differences and stop blocking users from accessing online and TV content. Several weeks later with the NFL season looming and the content blockade remains in place with users, though the FCC issued a statement this week saying they're "engaged at the highest levels with the respective parties and working to bring the impasse to an end for consumers and viewers in the affected markets." The FCC failed to offer specifics on how exactly they're accomplishing this, but insisted previously their authority to act was limited, which surely strikes fear into the hearts of both CBS and Time Warner Cable.

view:
topics flat nest 

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

1 edit

Antennas for all!

I hope Time Warner Cable sticks to its guns. Handing out antennas is a sign this won't end soon.

Hey Aereo! Launch faster!

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Antennas for all!

... and both sides are losing money which will probably never be made up when an agreement is finally made. TW is already losing video subs as it is, this is only accelerating it. Im sure CBS is, or will be losing advertising dollars, and loss of carriage fees at the current rates.

FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

1 recommendation

Re: Antennas for all!

So let the market determine who gives in 1st.
en103

join:2011-05-02

1 recommendation

Re: Antennas for all!

I agree. There are alternatives to TWC. FCC / government doesn't need to interfere with private business squabbles.
Cobra11M

join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX

Re: Antennas for all!

I agree, FCC wont stay out where its suppose to and wont do what it needs to... sound like a broken branch to me! lol

Swindle
Shattered Dreams

join:2006-07-24
Tampa, FL
Reviews:
·Bright House
I've got BHN and am in the same situation. I hope Pay Television prociders stick to their guns also. If my Cable Bill goes up after a Retrans Agreement goes through, I'll be cutting the chord.
--
B-Movie DVDs

Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
said by IPPlanMan:

I hope Time Warner Cable sticks to its guns. Handing out antennas is a sign this won't end soon.

Hey Aereo! Launch faster!

The antennas are useless when you have analog tv like we do it maybe a HDTV but it only has analog turner on it .
--
Live Free or Die Hard...
josephf

join:2009-04-26

1 recommendation

FCC is a Toothless Paper Tiger

The only thing the FCC is good at is taxing Americans on their communications bills.

FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Re: FCC is a Toothless Paper Tiger

said by josephf:

The only thing the FCC is good at is taxing Americans on their communications bills.

And transferring taxpayer dollars to the pol's buddies who push these pgms to buy unneeded computers sitting in closets at school systems that don't need them.
--
"If you want to anger a conservative lie to him.
If you want to anger a liberal tell him the truth."

The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2

Re: FCC is a Toothless Paper Tiger

Sources or just general rambling?
zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw

Why is the FCC interfering?

Right now you've got CBS wanting more money to carry the channel and Time Warner not willing to pay it. It's one of the first standoff's I can recall in regards to the escalating carriage fee's that TV channels are charging (and one of the biggest proponents of large cable increases).

What's the FCC going to do. They're either going to tell cbs to lower their fee, force time warner to accept it, or something in the middle.

I dunno. Do you really need FCC interference on something non-essential like a tv channel. This could set precedent for future carriage fee negotiations (and not in a good way). Perhaps the FCC should let it sit and see what the natural outcome is.

hello123454
Premium
join:2002-02-02
Wilmington, DE
kudos:1

Re: Why is the FCC interfering?

said by zod5000:

Right now you've got CBS wanting more money to carry the channel and Time Warner not willing to pay it. It's one of the first standoff's I can recall in regards to the escalating carriage fee's that TV channels are charging (and one of the biggest proponents of large cable increases).

What's the FCC going to do. They're either going to tell cbs to lower their fee, force time warner to accept it, or something in the middle.

I dunno. Do you really need FCC interference on something non-essential like a tv channel. This could set precedent for future carriage fee negotiations (and not in a good way). Perhaps the FCC should let it sit and see what the natural outcome is.

I agree with you and will take it a step further to ask do we need any government involvement with most things?

One thing I've never been able to understand is how CBS, ESPN, etc. have been able to force the carriers to pay them more.

What if every carrier (wishful thinking) refused to carry these networks? Wouldn't the networks have to lower their fees in this case?
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

1 recommendation

Re: Why is the FCC interfering?

Sure if every carrier at the same time refused. But when carriers have competition in Sat vs Cable vs TelcoTV then one refusing doesnt do any good because A.) Content owners are careful to not allow carriers contract to end at the same time B.) User change services thus putting more pressure on the carriers than the content providers.

What would resolve this is for the regulators to require the content owners to disclose every year or 2 (or whatever time frame is acceptable) on 10/1 what their desired per subscriber price per channel is and it takes effect 1/1 of the following year IF the carriers agree to it. If they don't agree, they negotiate as a group for that suitable price. If they don't come to an agreement as of 1/1 ALL carriers lose the content until it is resolved.

Being the economies of scale and market area have absolutely no effect on the content owners cost or pricing there is no reason to allow them to negotiate individually with carriers.

Some perks of this:
1.) Small providers would get the same price as the big providers (as they should)
2.) Channel line ups can be determined by the carriers per their subscriber base without worrying about overall cost as each subscriber supports the carriers channel expense and provides whatever built in profit they have set.
3.) At the carriers choice they can allow for consumers to pick and choose their line ups as subscriber numbers dictate everything (as they should).
4.) Carriers would compete based on the actual services they provide and cost to consumers.

ArgMeMatey

join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI
kudos:2
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·AT&T Midwest
·Time Warner Cable
said by hello123454:

One thing I've never been able to understand is how CBS, ESPN, etc. have been able to force the carriers to pay them more.

What if every carrier (wishful thinking) refused to carry these networks? Wouldn't the networks have to lower their fees in this case?

Market power
Oligopoly
High barriers to entry
--
USNG:
16TDN2870
Find your USNG coordinates:
USNGWeb
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
said by zod5000:

Right now you've got CBS wanting more money to carry the channel and Time Warner not willing to pay it. It's one of the first standoff's I can recall in regards to the escalating carriage fee's that TV channels are charging (and one of the biggest proponents of large cable increases).

What's the FCC going to do. They're either going to tell cbs to lower their fee, force time warner to accept it, or something in the middle.

I dunno. Do you really need FCC interference on something non-essential like a tv channel. This could set precedent for future carriage fee negotiations (and not in a good way). Perhaps the FCC should let it sit and see what the natural outcome is.

The FCC is comprised of industry hacks, lobbyists and lawyers - the revolving door that every administration promises to end.

They will advise both sides that if the feud runs too long, the public might actually make enough noise to support federal legislation, which both companies would perceive as a negative.

(While Congress never delivers anything meaningful, the threat of interference will be sufficient to get the two sides to compromise.)

linicx
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2002-12-03
United State

FCC?

Ya gotta be kidding. The FCC is a puppet without authority. They talk, not act. Congress is the puppeteer.
--
Mac: No windows, No Gates, Apple inside

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

The FCC??

What is so vital about CBS? Put a coat hanger out the window and get it in FiOS like HD.

djrobx
Premium
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VOIPO

Re: The FCC??

said by batterup:

What is so vital about CBS?

Look at Nielsen ratings. You'll find that CBS runs a lot of the top-rated shows. You (and many of us BBR geeks) may not agree with America's idea of quality programming, but looking channels from a purely statistical perspective, CBS is significant.

Put a coat hanger out the window and get it in FiOS like HD.

Doesn't work for everyone. We have pesky mountains in the way. And even if you can receive the signals, it's not going to work with a TWC-rented DVR. People are paying pretty steep monthly premiums for hassle-free entertainment services. If you're going to go through all the effort to get an OTA antenna rigged up and a compatible TiVo DVR, why not just cut the cord altogether?

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

Re: The FCC??

said by djrobx:

Look at Nielsen ratings. You'll find that CBS runs a lot of the top-rated shows.

No I mean truly "vital" like 911, or transit workers; they can't strike even between contracts.

I know how people feel; Cablevision and Fox did this during the baseball playoffs. Was I miffed? Yes, I too live behind a mountain so no OTA.

Looking back it doesn't appear I suffered any lingering effects from having to watch low res streaming from China.
frank124c

join:2003-12-04
Brooklyn, NY

Drop Dead Time Warner

We don't need your stinking cable! I have found a great substitute for cable television--filmon.tv. With filmon you get to watch your favorite tv shows and not have to pay a penny just like in the good old days before cable and hd hijacked our tv reception. And filmon is even better than aereo because aereo only allows you to watch a half hour at a time and then you have to close your browser and re-open it. And aereo charges 8 bucks a month. With filmon you watch as much as you want and it is entirely free! Here is a case where the free service is even better than the service that charges you buck$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$! All I pay for is 50 bucks for verizon dsl, i get the business tier, which is cheaper than cable and not only do I get tv reception but I also get Youtube, hulu and the whole internet.