dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Google Again Accuses TWC of Withholding Sports Networks
Time Warner Cable: 'Who, Us?'
by Karl Bode 10:27AM Friday Jan 18 2013
Trying to get incumbent cable operators to share their sports channels with TV competitors has always been a thorny issue (ask AT&T and Verizon), and it appears to again be a problem for Google Fiber. In a September FCC filing, Google complained that the company was having a hard time getting access to Time Warner Cable's regional sports network, Metro Sports. Time Warner Cable issued a statement saying they're withholding a portion of Metro Sports content because they're the ones who invested in it locally:
quote:
Click for full size
"TWC has absolutely offered, and continues to offer, what the FCC describes as Metro Sports’ ‘must-have’ live regional sports programming -- men's and women's Division I basketball -- at fair and reasonable prices. As for the remaining programming on Metro Sports, we have long invested in local programming, and [Google is] welcome to do the same."
Three months later and Google is complaining to the FCC again, accusing Time Warner Cable of "leveraging its control over a local RSN to impede Google Fiber’s entry into the marketplace." Google tells the FCC that after last fall's complaint Time Warner Cable said they were ready to negotiate, but have since "backtracked from any willingness" to license the regional sports network. The search giant is pressuring the FCC to tighten up rules prohibiting this kind of anti-competitive behavior. Google's complaint comes as Time Warner Cable is accusing Netflix of withholding content.

Time Warner Cable has been trying to beat back Google Fiber in Kansas City, recently launching a 100 Mbps tier in the region that's not available elsewhere. Company executives have argued that they really don't think the demand is there for 1 Gbps service, but insists that if it were -- Time Warner Cable would offer those kinds of speeds. Despite Google offering symmetrical 1 Gbps for $70 and 5 Mbps for "free" (after a $300 install fee), Time Warner Cable has yet to really offer price discounts in the region.

view:
topics flat nest 
xenophon

join:2007-09-17

1 edit

TWC produces the content, so..

I don't see why TWC should be forced to offer what they produce to competitors. I don't think ATT Uverse, Charter, and Surewest have TWC MetroSports in KC. If they do, then Google has a case.

TWC hasn't offered a promo direct against Google yet in KC probably because Google is currently only in 2 fiberhoods in KCK. The rollout will pickup this Spring in both KCK and KCMO fiberhoods and will hit heavily in Summer. TWC doesn't need to make a move until most of rollout is going.

I was able to get a better deal with TWC last month or so after I called about an increase and ready to use SureWest as leverage. My hood doesn't get GFiber until Fall. TWC also bumped up my speed tier at lower rate, but that's apparently happening in a few other markets too.

KC metro is ISP/TV heaven right now in areas that have multiple options and GFiber hasn't really kicked into gear yet.
xenophon

join:2007-09-17

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

BTW, here is the GFiber rollout schedule in both KC's by fiberhood...

KCK...
»fiber.google.com/cities/kck/

KCMO...
»fiber.google.com/cities/kcmo/
ssavoy
Premium
join:2007-08-16
Dallas, PA

1 recommendation

I agree, if it's their station I don't see why they have to allow access to competitors.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

This issue has already been resolved by the FCC in other markets. TWC will be forced to make these stations available to other providers at reasonable terms.

FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

said by morbo:

This issue has already been resolved by the FCC in other markets. TWC will be forced to make these stations available to other providers at reasonable terms.

And what is REASONABLE terms? Reasonable to Google or to TWC? And when they can't agree, does the FCC or some court set a price?
--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury.

whiteshp

join:2002-03-05
Xenia, OH

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

100$ per hour watched would make TWC very happy I'm sure. So if setting their own inflated price is only fair then they could never "officially" cut anyone out of their network shows with high prices?
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
Didn't that "rule" expire last year and was never renewed by the FCC? If so then Google has nothing to stand on. I know of plenty of "local" channels that cable companies have that others can't get; even AT&T.

Rangersfan

@sbcglobal.net
said by xenophon:

I don't see why TWC should be forced to offer what they produce to competitors. I don't think ATT Uverse, Charter, and Surewest have TWC MetroSports in KC. If they do, then Google has a case.

TWC hasn't offered a promo direct against Google yet in KC probably because Google is currently only in 2 fiberhoods in KCK. The rollout will pickup this Spring in both KCK and KCMO fiberhoods and will hit heavily in Summer. TWC doesn't need to make a move until most of rollout is going.

I was able to get a better deal with TWC last month or so after I called about an increase and ready to use SureWest as leverage. My hood doesn't get GFiber until Fall. TWC also bumped up my speed tier at lower rate, but that's apparently happening in a few other markets too.

KC metro is ISP/TV heaven right now in areas that have multiple options and GFiber hasn't really kicked into gear yet.

I know that AT&T U-verse does not carry MetroSports.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
content creation should be broken off of distribution by the government. If you own the network and the content source of course you are not going to sell content to another MSO.

We forced the movie studios to sell off their theaters when the government basically broke up the studio system. But the FTC has no issues letting cable companies own content sources.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
Happydude32
Premium
join:2005-07-16
kudos:1

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

said by Kearnstd:

content creation should be broken off of distribution by the government. If you own the network and the content source of course you are not going to sell content to another MSO.

We forced the movie studios to sell off their theaters when the government basically broke up the studio system. But the FTC has no issues letting cable companies own content sources.

Why? Who are you and/or the government to say what a company can or cannot sell, or be involved in? Whatever happened to the idea of competition? If Google wants access to these NCAA teams so bad, perhaps they should start their own regional sports network and try to lure those schools away from Metro Sports and broadcast on them on their own RSN. If Metro Sports in KC is anything like the RSN Time Warner has here, it shouldnt be too hard. TWs RSN has very poor production values and seems like a very low budget operation. But I guess this is indicative of society and the slow process of the pussification of America. Why actually do something when the government is there for you to cry to and bandage every little boo-boo.

But the big example of this is Comcast Sports Net Philadelphia and the terrestrial loophole, that is now closed. I pray to God that channel never winds up on satellite or the government tries to stick its nose where it doesnt belong and tries to force Comcast into offering it to the competition. There is simply no reason to interfere with a business doing what they should do and maximize profit, so long as lives are not at stake. Too bad they caved to Verizon, but hopefully theyll never cave or be forced to cave to Dish or DirecTV.
--
iPhone: 4” 1136 X 640 Display, 1.30 GHz Dual Core Processor, 1 GB RAM
MyPhone: 5” 1920 X 1080 Display, 1.50 GHz Quad Core Processor, 2 GB RAM
So tell me, why is exactly is the iPhone so great?
Droid Does What Jobs Won’t Let You Do.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

You do realize it is the government that allows a business to be a business right? They can and do tell businesses what, when and in some cases, at what price they can sell something and to whom.

You believing anything else is just pure silliness on your part.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
So you think Vertical integration is a good thing for the customer?

The customer is all that matters remember that is the purpose of a business.

And breaking content creation away from distro would increase competition and better serve the customer.

Would you agree if the FTC let Walmart buy General Mills and then make all General Mills cereals exclusive to walmart?
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

WM is already trying that with some brands, along with Kroger.
TuxRaiderPen

join:2009-09-19

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

said by TBBroadband:
WM is already trying that with some brands, along with Kroger.
Brands and citation please..... for both WalMart and Krogers

said by Happydude32:
quote:
Would you agree if the FTC let Walmart buy General Mills and then make all General Mills cereals exclusive to walmart?
Sure, why not?


Really you have to ask why... I would let Kroger purchase General Mills before Walmart..hell I'll take a Krogers in my area any day any time... only need to come south about 500 miles...
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black....
Happydude32
Premium
join:2005-07-16
kudos:1

1 recommendation

quote:
So you think Vertical integration is a good thing for the customer?
I never for a second believed that vertical integration is a bad thing. If a business wants to expand what they offer and/or sell, that is their decision. If Comcast wants to own a sports venue, the teams that play in that venue and the channel those teams are broadcast on, that is certainly their right, and more power to them.

Besides I can’t really say I care about the consumer aspect, I’m for big business.

quote:
The customer is all that matters remember that is the purpose of a business.
Incorrect. The purpose of a business is to maximize profit.

quote:
And breaking content creation away from distro would increase competition and better serve the customer.
No, having another company go after the first company, and try to create a better product or service than Company 1, would be best for the consumer.

quote:
Would you agree if the FTC let Walmart buy General Mills and then make all General Mills cereals exclusive to walmart?
Sure, why not?
--
iPhone: 4” 1136 X 640 Display, 1.30 GHz Dual Core Processor, 1 GB RAM
MyPhone: 5” 1920 X 1080 Display, 1.50 GHz Quad Core Processor, 2 GB RAM
So tell me, why is exactly is the iPhone so great?
Droid Does What Jobs Won’t Let You Do.

skuv

@rr.com
But why? If I create content and want to distribute it on my own system, why should I be stopped or have to distribute it to others?

It's my content, it differentiates my service from others.

DirecTV signs exclusive NFL deals for Sunday Pass, they don't create that content, but they have an exclusive on it.

What makes that more fair to do than a cable company creating or owning their own content and keeping it exclusive?

They're a private business, they should have that choice.

The content is not a necessity in any way. So why should the government be involved?

Bugger

@rr.com

Re: TWC produces the content, so..

Yeah! I demand that Apple releases an Android version of their Maps app or that my copy of Microsoft Office runs natively in Linux!
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
said by Kearnstd:

We forced the movie studios to sell off their theaters when the government basically broke up the studio system. But the FTC has no issues letting cable companies own content sources.

That was in the past. National Amusements is the majority owner of Viacom including Paramount Pictures. I do agree that allowing the same company to own both content and distribution (vertical integration) does tend to harm consumers.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Pot. Kettle. Google.

If Google was truly serious about competing with TWC, they would offer their TV product for less than $120 a month.
xenophon

join:2007-09-17

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

$120/month not too bad since it includes 1Gbit. But they should include voice service. Maybe something like include an Oooma box, which has option to directly setup with Google Voice service.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

$120 a month for Pay-TV is ridiculous, when the local cable company offers it for $30-50/month.

whiteshp

join:2002-03-05
Xenia, OH

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

The tv service is $50 on top of the $70 internet. Voice service is a joke. Honestly there are so many VOIP services out there to choose from. You could get ultra cheap to a more expensive reliable service depending on what you wanted.
elray

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

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

said by whiteshp:

The tv service is $50 on top of the $70 internet. Voice service is a joke. Honestly there are so many VOIP services out there to choose from. You could get ultra cheap to a more expensive reliable service depending on what you wanted.

No, the TV service is $120/month.
You can't buy it for a penny less.
xenophon

join:2007-09-17

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

^Wrong. TV and 1GBit Internet combined is $120. So TV is additional $50..

»fiber.google.com/about/
elray

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

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

said by xenophon:

^Wrong. TV and 1GBit Internet combined is $120. So TV is additional $50..

»fiber.google.com/about/

Wrong.
You have to pay $120.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

said by elray:

Wrong.
You have to pay $120.

1 gbit internet + beautiful non fuzzy ultra compressed TV for 120 dollars.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

Google internet is "free", according to most cheerleaders here, even though it costs $300.

If you want TV, you'll pay $120 a month.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 edit

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

said by elray:

If you want TV, you'll pay $120 a month.

That evil google is trying to push super cheap uncapped 1 gbit/s fiber to everyone.

DAMN THEM!!!
elray

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

1 recommendation

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

said by DataRiker:

said by elray:

If you want TV, you'll pay $120 a month.

That evil google is trying to push super cheap uncapped 1 gbit/s fiber to everyone.

DAMN THEM!!!

It ain't free either.

So forced bundling is only "evil" when Verizon does it?

Whateverdood

@start.ca
said by elray:

said by xenophon:

^Wrong. TV and 1GBit Internet combined is $120. So TV is additional $50..

»fiber.google.com/about/

Wrong.
You have to pay $120.

Right... but it includes free 1 GB internet.
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

nothing is free with Google.
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
No, if GOOG really wanted to compete you wouldn't need their internet product for their TV service. the STB would be Internet based an you could use any ISP with it.

Guy

@sbcglobal.net

Re: Pot. Kettle. Google.

They do, its called GoogleTV

»www.google.com/tv/
ShowMeISP

join:2001-03-15
Kansas City, MO
$120 includes 1gig internet PLUS an 8 stream DVR and channels that would only be available on higher TW packages, even ignoring speed, time warner can't touch this price-wise, and they are no where near offering an 8 stream dvr.

Fiber lover

@paxio.net

Google not symmetric?

I understood google fiber used GPON. If so, their offering couldn't be symmetric.

•••
majortom1029

join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
kudos:1

?

Why is it that when cablevision tried this they got forced to let Verizon pay for it yet time warner does this and they can do what they want?
WhatNow
Premium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

Sports content

I am not a big sports watching fan so if I was in KC I would not notice if they carried the programing or not. That said any other content beside sports programming should be the producer and the buyers. The reason I make an exception sports is it is simi public. In most cases the local government has provided funding of some type to most teams. High Schools and state colleges public taxes. Our NFL team just asked for $125 mil to upgrade the private stadium. The NBA team plays in the city arena but the team has complete management rights.

I would also agree to the idea the poster suggesting Google should compete for the content.

The best arrangement would be a monopoly dumb pipe from a central POP site to the side of your house like the power company does to the meter. The power provider may be the best choice to provide the dumb pipe fiber system. That way if they provide a power connection they would have to provide a fiber connection in the rural areas. Then any content provider connects at the POP and takes care of all the inside work.

carpetshark3
Premium
join:2004-02-12
Idledale, CO

Re: Sports content

Doesn't have to be TV. How about allowing others besides Verizon and Apple the same apps on Android cell phones and tablets?

I'd pay for the app, but I am not switching to Verizon.