TW Wants to involve subscribers in fee negotiations with networks.

[Bebop]

http://hothardware.com/News/Time%2DWarner%2DBrings%2DCustomers%2DInto%2DFee%2DBattle/

So, either way, one can no longer blame TW.

[leprechaunshawn]

Whether or not TWC loses these channels or not, their rates WILL go up.

[bschlafer]

TWC rates will always go up.  Their business model is built around that.  

Hard to believe that just a few years ago $25-$30/month was all cable TV cost.  Now it's easy to spend several hundred.  The content isn't much better, but it sure costs more!


*Bill in Milwaukee

[ArgMeMatey]

This is BS.  If they were serious they could solve the problem with a la carte.  

This would just help them justify getting tough with outfits like Sinclair that are not part of their vertical monopoly.  Then they can pump more subscriber money up their own food chain instead.

[klwillis45]

A la carte isn't a solution to anything.

[ArgMeMatey]

A la carte isn't a solution to anything.

Can you support that?  If they offered a la carte they would have a very reliable indication of how important a particular channel is to their customers and therefore how much effort they should put into negotiating.  But ultimately if the consumer wanted to pay enough, and the system had the bandwidth, anybody who wanted it would just have to pay for it.  

On the other hand, cross-subsidy and bundling obscures the true cost and appeal of everything.  It is not utilitarian and benefits primarily the content providers and cable companies.  There is some benefit to niche demographics and interest groups, but I'd like to see an unbiased cost/benefit analysis of this.

[tencom]

The programmers would never allow  "la carte" and never agree to it because they know that few people would choose to take most networks The mistake that cable and satelitte  providers made is having to great of a channel capacity.  With less channel capacity the program providers would have to bid rate-wise to get a spot on the tv dial. The programmers escpecially the  big four OTA networks that control about half the cable networks and could threaten, to remove theire local  OTA affilates off of the cable if you don"t play by their rules and the cable operators would get all the blame by the general public. Programmers in the last few years have been the main culprit in rising prices that if not stopped soon will kill cable and probably is  what the local tv stations especilly sinclair owned stations, would love to see happen.

[ArgMeMatey]

The programmers would never allow  "la carte"
....
The mistake that cable and satelitte  providers made is having to great of a channel capacity.  
...
Programmers in the last few years have been the main culprit in rising prices

I agree on all of that, more or less.  

A la carte is bad for service providers and bad for content providers but good for consumers.  So, with the barriers to entry as high as they are in the business, I see only two ways it will come about:  with precipitous declines in subscribers or through regulation.  

Too great a channel capacity is a problem in this context, but not really a mistake.  The effect is the same:  Before, channels were a limited resource that were maxed out and in effect second-tier content providers could be thought of as bidding to get in, which gave the advantage to the service providers.  Now with digital the service providers have to try to fill all the extra channels to improve ROI, giving advantage to the content providers.

I agree that programmers (content providers) are probably driving costs right now, but nobody goes public with those costs, so Big Cable ought to "man up" or shut up with all the blame games.  If service providers want to blame somebody else, they better show me the numbers.  

For example, I'd much rather hold Rupert Murdoch responsible for charging a king's ransom for Fox News than blame my cable company.  The way I would do that is to tell my cable company "Drop Fox News and stop sending my money to Murdoch".  But Time Warner doesn't give me that option, so I don't feel too bad about bad-mouthing Time Warner and Rupert Murdoch every chance I get.  

The one thing AT&T and Time Warner definitely do not want to become is a dumb pipe.  If they were, I would just scream up that pipe to the people on the other end.  If they want to stand between us, they'll just have to deal with it.  

(I'd be looking at C and Ku Band if I had room for a dish!)

[gparris]

Soon I will be a position to have an alternate provider and if that one offers all my HD locals, I will vote with my money to another provider if TWC drops the FOX and CW locals...but only if.
I won't fight their fight, they should...I pay them for the service and their business.

[Jack 1000]

Soon I will be a position to have an alternate provider and if that one offers all my HD locals, I will vote with my money to another provider if TWC drops the FOX and CW locals...but only if.
I won't fight their fight, they should...I pay them for the service and their business.

What about an agreement with WITI TV 6?  I could not see TWC doing well if fans could not see Packer Games or American Idol if an agreement could not be reached.  The locals are critical.  We had about a $2.00 rate increase on our bill that I just got, but NO MENTION AT ALL OF ANY LEGAL OR RETRANSMISSION NOTICES.  Shouldn't these be on our statement?  Or did they come to an agreement with some stations already?

No one wants to wait until New Years Eve to find out what is going to happen here.  That was terrible with that Viacom fiasco and five minutes before midnight, like something out of a Cinderella story TWC/Viacom have a deal.  Let's not go through that again!

Jack

[WPXE ION]

I think that $2.00 increase was a fee of some variety. It was in the fine print.

[Bebop]

I only have RR and TW sent me this.

[ArgMeMatey]

I only have RR and TW sent me this.

They would get a more meaningful response if they replaced the "Get Tough" button with "Get tough on the channels I don't care about, but I'm outta here if you threaten the stuff I watch."

In other words, the way it is currently worded, the customer has two options:  

Roll Over:  I'll pay whatever you want because the thought of living without it is too much.

Get Tough:  You go ahead and decide what's important to me.  I trust you to act in my best interests despite the fact that your sole purpose is to make money for your managers and stockholders.

[ArgMeMatey]

Dudek had a few things to say about this.  

http://www.jsonline.com/entertainment/tvradio/78828542.html

[Jack 1000]

Dudek had a few things to say about this.  

http://www.jsonline.com/entertainment/tvradio/78828542.html

Agree,

The whole campaign is pointless.  It just says to customers what do you want?

A= Your channels to be taken away because the new prices that they are asking are too high OR

B= Your rates to go up to keep the channels you want to see?

Rates will go up regardless.  Ala Carte pricing in the coming years may be the ONLY sensible way to combat these issues.

Jack