The National Association of Broadcasters is highlighting Time Warner Cable's 44% jump in net profit as an example of how retrans fees aren't hurting the cable operator quite as badly as claimed. 2011 saw broadcasters and cable operators annoy consumers endlessly with blackouts, PR feuds, and higher rates, with cable operators often claiming demanded rate hikes were borderline gluttonous. A NAB press statement however argues that retransmission consent fees accounted for just six-tenths of one percent of a pay-TV operator's revenues in 2010. Says NAB:With ESPN as expensive as it is, it's pretty "laughable" that NAB would suggest programming costs don't play a role, even if the cable industry likes to play up their impact to justify bi-annual rate hikes (even on DVR rentals). On Twitter, Ted Hearn of the American Cable Association tweets that comparing retrans fees to all revenues (including broadband, VoIP) is an apple to orange comparison, though it does appear NAB at least tries to compare the retrans impact to pay-TV revenues specifically.

At this point consumers don't really care, nor do they particularly like either side in these debates. In the end, most consumers know their cable bill will keep going up regardless of who "wins" these increasingly-ugly retrans disputes. Why? Because the cable and broadcast industry absolutely refuse to seriously compete on price, must get improved quarterly results however possible, and as a result would blame rate hikes on Uruguayan Ocelots if they could get away with it.