Time Warner/TM4 carriage dispute

[ddeerrff]

There were *lots* of questions that didn't get by the censors.  At least four from me.  

"Pennies a day"  How many content streams does TWC carry?  At a very minimum, 250.  What if each of these asked for "Just one more penny per subscriber"?  Well, that would be a $75.00 per month increase in cost to TWC which they would have to pass on to the customer.  

And WTMJ wants 'pennies' (plural).  !#!@#@ em.  Take them off the air.  

There is nothing on NBC or Channel 4 that is worth watching anyway.

[mrschimpf]

This opening segment of Live at 10 is comedy gold. They just had the new girl that does the weekend have to do a clumsy analogy where she compared the rate TMJ4 gets to something involving 48 foam coffee cups (I think the $48 most people pay for basic?), but that Journal only gets 1/4 of one of those cups? I didn't get it at all.

All this is going to do is give some new news homes to other stations, and it could be a death blow up in Green Bay to WGBA/WACY, which are barely relevant in that market on even a Packers NBC game night. (And I just watched WGBA's GM stumble through Wexler's boilerplate at the end of the newscast...eugggh, that guy should stay behind the scenes)

I'm also scared that Charter's going to end up screwed over like I mentioned two weeks ago when TWC's cut-off of .2 and .3 took us offline for the night too.

[Tom Snyder]

Journal isn't going to just allow TWC to carry WTMJ without a contract.

From the comments Wexler posted, it appears that contract technically doesn't end till July 31st and the Journal can sue them after August 1st if they don't come to an agreement.

Midnight tonight was a line in the sand because it's the end of a ratings period. More proof that TMJ4 is the one pulling the plug tonight.

[LoadStar]

From the comments Wexler posted, it appears that contract technically doesn't end till July 31st and the Journal can sue them after August 1st if they don't come to an agreement.

According to Duane Dudek, the contract actually expired June 30. TWC and JBG agreed to extend the contract through July 24. Therefore, yes, Journal could sue immediately if TWC continued to carry WTMJ after midnight tonight without a contract.

Midnight tonight was a line in the sand because it's the end of a ratings period. More proof that TMJ4 is the one pulling the plug tonight.

That's not definitive either way. There apparently is an FCC regulation, one I was not aware of until recently, that prohibits a broadcast station from being taken off a pay TV lineup during a sweeps period. Midnight tonight was the first opportunity that allowed for WTMJ to be removed.

[Talos4]

Wait... TMJ4 is/was on TWC?

Learn something new everyday!

[jjallou]

Since all three WTMJ channels have been dropped on TWC, now would be a good time to call TWC and re-negotiate your monthly bill. Why pay for something you're not getting....... Oh wait I crack myself up! ROTFLOL! Like they would ever "Lower" your bill. :rof:

[gparris]

According to Duane Dudek, the contract actually expired June 30. TWC and JBG agreed to extend the contract through July 24. Therefore, yes, Journal could sue immediately if TWC continued to carry WTMJ after midnight tonight without a contract.


That's not definitive either way. There apparently is an FCC regulation, one I was not aware of until recently, that prohibits a broadcast station from being taken off a pay TV lineup during a sweeps period. Midnight tonight was the first opportunity that allowed for WTMJ to be removed.

I stayed up last night to watch Jimmy Fallon and exactly at 11:59:59 Time Warner Cable came on, cutting off the programming, with notice how to get them OTA, but it seemed from the scrolling that it was TWC taking the station off, not WTMJ due to contract disputes.

[gparris]

Since all three WTMJ channels have been dropped on TWC, now would be a good time to call TWC and re-negotiate your monthly bill. Why pay for something you're not getting....... Oh wait I crack myself up! ROTFLOL! Like they would ever "Lower" your bill. :rof:

Good idea, especially if CBS and TWC do not reach an agreement by the new contract negotiation date of 7/29, then no matter where you're located, their Showtime and TMC channels will be pulled off and then, because we at our house get these, too, TWC will be owing me even more in refund adjustments.:OnAir:

[jfelbab]

I think everyone should call TWC and ask for a rebate on their bill until such time as they provide the stations we contracted for.  A little pressure on both sides wouldn't hurt.  No matter who wins this dispute we lose.  If anyone really believes TWC is just looking out for our interests out of the goodness of their hearts is misguided.  They are both in it to take our money, preferably lots of our money.  This is just a game of who blinks first.

If TWC was interested in keeping our bills low, they would provide Ala-carte plans where we could buy what we want and not be forced to buy what we don't want.

If WTMJ was interested in keeping our bills low, they would recognize that their programming is delivered OTA for free to anyone who wants it and therefore the cable distribution fee should not be all that expensive.

IMO, neither company is concerned about us, only for our money.

[Jack 1000]

I think everyone should call TWC and ask for a rebate on their bill until such time as they provide the stations we contracted for.  A little pressure on both sides wouldn't hurt.  No matter who wins this dispute we lose.  If anyone really believes TWC is just looking out for our interests out of the goodness of their hearts is misguided.  They are both in it to take our money, preferably lots of our money.  This is just a game of who blinks first.

If TWC was interested in keeping our bills low, they would provide Ala-carte plans where we could buy what we want and not be forced to buy what we don't want.

If WTMJ was interested in keeping our bills low, they would recognize that their programming is delivered OTA for free to anyone who wants it and therefore the cable distribution fee should not be all that expensive.

IMO, neither company is concerned about us, only for our money.

I don't think TWJ-4 really has programing that is worth paying for.  They are a big news, weather, and infomercial station.  I can't speak for how the national NBC affiliate is run.  However, locally, in Milwaukee very little news is news worthy, and that's the bulk of their programing.  It's news, weather, and late-night infomercials. Pre-Season Packer games are their ONLY merit at this time.

I don't see how Ala Carte is going to be the saving utopia.  However, I would support smaller packages for people who can't afford Triple Play services.  Ala Carte choices could hurt households with diverse TV interests.  One person's great channel is another person's crap channel in the same household.  What happens if you got one family member who loves news?  Another who hates news, and loves Premium Movie Channels, another who loves shopping stations?  Yet another who loves Sports?   By the time subs started Cafeteria Picking their selections, when finished you would wind up with a bill almost as high, if not as high as what you are paying now.  

When major conglomerates start realizing that not enough people are taking their channels ala-Carte, they will cry to Congress about needed to be "Must Carry."  Congress will pass some bill to accommodate the conglomerates, and customers will be right back where they are now.

Even if cable bills go down, I think they would just raise the cost of Internet and Phone to compensate.  I do think Smaller Packages might help though, just not necessarily at a total Ala Carte level.

Jack

[gparris]

Well, it is now 7/29 and TWC and CBS have not come to an agreement as of now, maybe later today, but if they don't the movie channels they support including maybe the Smithsonian Channel and CBS Sports will come off, no matter if you have a local CBS owned channel in your city. This tug of war has to stop, the consumer gets the bill in the end no matter what either side says and I feel CBS is being greedy just like WTMJ is.
As far as ala-Carte goes, those that ask for it I wonder if they get ESPN and its many variant channels, including the NFL Network channel (a different affiliate channel) all of us subscribers currently pay for whether we watch these or not, we have no choice in the standard lineup. From what I have read awhile ago, these channels added to our cable bills are of significant amount, but I don't hear any sports fan complaining about that. I don't ask anyone to pay for our family's Premium Movie channels, which, by the way, are extra, unlike ESPN and its variants and the NFL channel. There is an additional Sports Package to get even more sports, that is true, but the initial offerings without it I am sure add up to a significant amount added to everyone's cable bill each month. I am not asking for these sports channels to be made ala-Carte, I am just wondering if those who ask for it ala-Carte are the ones who actually watch these sports channels with or without the Sports Package. Do they realize the impact on the standard cable bill to all of us who do not watch them while complaining about their cable bill each month?
CBS and WTMJ are greedy, IMO,  but Disney (ESPN) and the other media companies are no angels, either, when is enough, enough?
Any provider, be it Satellite or Cable or Telco, will add some markup to make it a go after the negotiations, that is because they are in the business to make money, as any business is, so I don't blame them for passing the costs on to the subscriber. They aren't in this business to give it away free because they don't have to, it's not a charity, but the amount tacked on to our bills for the profit margin has its limits before subscribers will say enough, I'm sure.

[LoadStar]

I've watched WTMJ exactly as much after the blackout as I had before it, which is to say, not at all.

[Jack 1000]

Well, it is now 7/29 and TWC and CBS have not come to an agreement as of now, maybe later today, but if they don't the movie channels they support including maybe the Smithsonian Channel and CBS Sports will come off, no matter if you have a local CBS owned channel in your city. This tug of war has to stop, the consumer gets the bill in the end no matter what either side says and I feel CBS is being greedy just like WTMJ is.
As far as ala-Carte goes, those that ask for it I wonder if they get ESPN and its many variant channels, including the NFL Network channel (a different affiliate channel) all of us subscribers currently pay for whether we watch these or not, we have no choice in the standard lineup. From what I have read awhile ago, these channels added to our cable bills are of significant amount, but I don't hear any sports fan complaining about that. I don't ask anyone to pay for our family's Premium Movie channels, which, by the way, are extra, unlike ESPN and its variants and the NFL channel. There is an additional Sports Package to get even more sports, that is true, but the initial offerings without it I am sure add up to a significant amount added to everyone's cable bill each month. I am not asking for these sports channels to be made ala-Carte, I am just wondering if those who ask for it ala-Carte are the ones who actually watch these sports channels with or without the Sports Package. Do they realize the impact on the standard cable bill to all of us who do not watch them while complaining about their cable bill each month?
CBS and WTMJ are greedy, IMO,  but Disney (ESPN) and the other media companies are no angels, either, when is enough, enough?
Any provider, be it Satellite or Cable or Telco, will add some markup to make it a go after the negotiations, that is because they are in the business to make money, as any business is, so I don't blame them for passing the costs on to the subscriber. They aren't in this business to give it away free because they don't have to, it's not a charity, but the amount tacked on to our bills for the profit margin has its limits before subscribers will say enough, I'm sure.

Sup GP?

I just Google Searched and saw nothing new.  I read yesterday that CBS and TWC extended their "Market Share" Holdings, but it did not say whether or not this was related to a deal.  I think "No news is good news" and a new CBS/TWC contract will be struck.  As for TWC/Journal Broadcasting, I think they are going to drag that out, reaching a compromise before the Packers Pre-Game, but not until than.

This is just my theory.  These companies REALLY need to get arbitration involved when they can't come to an agreement.  You know, as much as I am not a fan of big government involvement, maybe the laws governing the Cable Retransmission Act of 1992 had to change to reflect modern viewing trends and technology, so that customers don't have to be caught up in these "5th grade, who threw the first snowball at the playground" fights over fees.

Maybe arbitration is needed as a last resort where he/she would come in to moderate and go 50/50 on fees.  However, customers in the middle of this crap needs to stop.

Jack

[Bebop]

No rebate.


http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/217407921.html

[gparris]

Thanks for the info, Bebop, I guess TWC plays hardball with everyone, you pay for it, but if you don't get it(channels due to contract disputes you have no control over), too bad for you, subscriber, you pay anyway!:bang: