Time for the fun to begin anew, as Journal and Time Warner Cable have until June 30 to come to new terms (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/212825161.html) or TWC customers lose TMJ4, Storm Team 4 TV and the Live Well Network. WGBA (NBC), WACY (My) and WGBA's MeTV subbie in Green Bay are also affected, along with Journal's CBS station in Omaha and their NBC and MyNet stations in Palm Springs north of LA.
TWC says the rate they want is a "200% increase (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/212750631.html)". Going by Journal's FAQ (http://www.jbganswers.com/184043671.html), they want TWC to go from under 30¢ per month per subscriber per station, to under $1.20 per month ps/ps. Wouldn't that be 400%? Meaning that FAQ writer doesn't understand basic math?
Any way you slice it though, this doesn't seem as critical as WISN's dumping last year, which happened during ABC's usual dead season, but with a good news product and their syndicated schedule. NBC is just as dead not counting the Macy's fireworks and golf this time of year, and unlike 12, the loss of constant tabloid news 'repeats', Access Hollywood Live and Alliant Energy Powerhouse doesn't inspire much to spring up and tell Time Warner to agree to things until the Packers preseason comes in August, when something must be in place. It's also unusual for Journal to be so combative about TWC considering how heavy that station sponsors their news and has on-demand content, and how cozy those two are about exclusivity are while keeping Charter, U-verse and dish subscribers from getting their .2 or .3 signals in any way.
don't care for tmj4, only show I watch is Nightly News. Last night they had all kind of garbage on the screen for T-STROM WATCH, I had to change to ABC News on wisn12. They don't even worth 1% increase.
I can't help but laugh at noobs still paying into this scam that is cable television. As far as I'm concerned if you're still paying for cable TV then you deserve every wallet molestation that you get.
The greedy chuckle****s over at WTMJ want to extract $1.20 from your pockets every month for a degraded quality copy of what they're sending out over the air for free. WTMJ is one of the most powerful and easy to receive affiliates in this market as well so there's really no excuse for paying for cable to receive it. You could probably throw up an antenna in your basement, point it at the ceiling and still receive WTMJ just fine. I remember when I lived in an apartment I could just point an antenna at the wall and WTMJ would still blast through it at high signal quality.
All these affiliates are parasites. NBC/CBS/Fox etc would be better off if they just went national and cut the affiliates out of the picture. Let's see how many of them could survive on their own without NBC's programming to leech off of.
I agree that this station does not deserve an increase like that, they are asking for too much and that many or most of us can get the signal without much bother, but if you are already a cable subscriber, you probably will be inconvenienced a bit if you actually WATCH NBC, which I don't exception being The Tonight Show. We can pick up NBC channel 5 in Chicago, a much better station without all the on screen stickers and get better journalism from a bigger town and not worry about WTMJ and its BS.
As it is, NBC keeps on throwing us duds for shows, IMO, so the local station rarely interests our family anymore, so if WTMJ and its sister stations here think they are so darn important, they aren't.
What I don't agree on is that cable is a scam, my family enjoys the good service and equipment provided from TWC without any hassle and we get the most recent cable shows from Syfy, USA, TNT, A&E, among others, that DO NOT come off air that come out in the summer months that do we enjoy. Cable (or sat service) is a CHOICE, not a scam, your opinion, PONIES.
Cable is an ever-inflating money sink. The overall quality of the programming gradually goes down over time as the cost of the packages, amount of advertising, and screen clutter continues to rise exponentially. This isn't the commercial free, high quality service that was originally promised when cable television started out all those years ago.
Networks that would otherwise be available for free and supported by advertising instead succumb to the greed of the cable monopoly so they can extract a few pennies from every viewer in addition to blasting extreme amounts of advertising at them.
It's the definition of a scam.
From the JBG FAQ. I put the FAQ quotations in italics. My comments are not in italics.
13. How much of my Time Warner Cable bill is actually paid to broadcasters in the local market?
Time Warner does not disclose how much it pays each broadcaster and we cannot provide specific details of our agreement with Time Warner because of contractual restrictions.
Put simply and clearly, neither Time Warner nor Journal Broadcast Group benefits by publicizing the facts of the case. It's more productive for them to use certain language to exploit their customers' (TW) and viewers' (JBG) pre-existing biases as a means to serve their respective ends.
Let's put it simply and clearly.
Oh, so you're going to put it simply and clearly without giving specifics. Nice try. There is nothing clear or simple about what you say below:
Less than one (1) penny per day of your current bill to Time Warner goes to pay for each Journal station's license fee.
OK, so first, what is the "average" customer's bill? Second, does that mean one penny per station per day, i.e. if I get three channels (4-1, 4-2, 4-3), TW pays JBG $0.03 per day? Or $0.01 per day for all three?
If Time Warner accepts our current proposal, that rate would be less than four (4) pennies per day at the end of our proposed agreement.
Using my previous example, does that mean $0.04 per day or or $0.12 per day?
Quoting daily fees and using words like "less than" and "pennies" are meant to make the amounts sound small. But the existing amount could be $3.65 per year or $10.95 per year now, and the future amounts could be $14.60 per year or $43.80 per year.
$3.65 per year for, let's say, a million customers is $3,650,000. Divide that by 365 days and we see it's $10,000 per day. Now we're talking about real money, aren't we?
WTMJ TV 4 might just as well change it's name to Local News and Weather. That's all they are anymore. Shocking to believe that back from the 70's-90's NBC was great television. Those eras are long gone.
Jack
Quote from: Jack 1000;59411WTMJ TV 4 might just as well change it's name to Local News and Weather. That's all they are anymore.
True, I think they have local news from 5am to 7am, Noon to 1pm, and 3pm to 5:30pm. At 5:30 it's the NBC National news. Then more local news from 6pm to 6:30pm, the show at 6:30pm is basically news. Then it's the 10pm news and that's rebroadcast sometime in the middle of the night , maybe 2am.
I don't know if the Today show counts as news, the Early Today show at 4:30am is all news and I think the first hour or two of the regular Today show is news.
That's nuts
IMHO
As I probably posted last time something like this came up. We should be paying TWC for the transport of the content. Advertisers should be paying WTMJ (or whatever) for content itself.
Making a deal with TWC is in the best interest of a commercial content provider without regard to any carriage fee. If WTMJ decides it does not want TWC to carry their programming, then they get nothing. If they allow TWC to carry their signal for free, they still get wider distribution, and ostensibly more viewers, so they can charge advertisers more. If TWC wants to pay them a small fee, that's just a bonus.
For WMJT to withhold their signal would be just *stupid*.
They have extended negotiations till July 10th:
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/213591991.html
Jack
Quote from: ddeerrff;59413IMHO
As I probably posted last time something like this came up. We should be paying TWC for the transport of the content. Advertisers should be paying WTMJ (or whatever) for content itself.
Making a deal with TWC is in the best interest of a commercial content provider without regard to any carriage fee. If WTMJ decides it does not want TWC to carry their programming, then they get nothing. If they allow TWC to carry their signal for free, they still get wider distribution, and ostensibly more viewers, so they can charge advertisers more. If TWC wants to pay them a small fee, that's just a bonus.
For WMJT to withhold their signal would be just *stupid*.
There is a law that says each station has a right to negotiate a rate for retransmission. If I can profit from something of yours buy selling it. Basically you deserve a piece of the action. How much that is worth is were we are now. I agree with you through. If the stations need more money, raise the advertising fee's, which they most likely have anyway. Kinda of a double dip if you ask me. It's like they work for the State. ;)
BUDDA: It's like they work for the State.
why do you have to make that comment, when state employees took 12% pay cut for last 2 years and had no pay increase for last 5 years.
Because it's funny.:rolleyes:
Quote from: budda;59417because it's funny.:rolleyes:
not funny at all!!!
I'm so confused right now.
Post got hijacked and side tracked. I am sorry for confusion. Something to do with feelings? I feel like watching. "The Notebook"
Quote from: Jack 1000;59414They have extended negotiations till July 10th:
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/213591991.html
Jack
In case anyone's still interested, Channel 4 news WTMJ just reported that as of midnight tonight Time Warner Cable is pulling channel 4 and 1004 and their weather channel 999 (on my Racine system).
They said if you can get them OTA, please do so.
Looks like channel 5 for me in Chicago for now.
Quote from: gparris;59435In case anyone's still interested, Channel 4 news WTMJ just reported that as of midnight tonight Time Warner Cable is pulling channel 4 and 1004 and their weather channel 999 (on my Racine system).
They said if you can get them OTA, please do so.
Looks like channel 5 for me in Chicago for now.
Actually it's been revised; the main channel 4 will stay on through the end of sweeps on July 24 (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/214982561.html) (some kind of nonsense loophole for a sweeps period nobody cares about), but...oh no, Time Warner customers will lose access to Storm Team 4 TV and the Live Well Network because that isn't protected by the loophole.:bang:
Journal has managed to come off as slow and cloying during this entire period of negotiation. They took off the annoying ticker and their FAQ making it seem like it's OK, but now they're making it seem like they'll just go to the end with Time Warner before they have to lose their access. It's laughable to scare viewers with the loss of robo-weather duplicated by 10.4 and now on 58.4, and shows that are easily outclassed by Create on 36.4; all they're doing is bringing themselves parity to other customers in the market, who have never had access to 4.2 or 4.3 because of TWC exclusivity.
Seems like an odd coincidence, but suddenly I'm not seeing WTMJ 4.1 here on Charter in Sheboygan. Hopefully it's just a Charter hiccup, and not Journal cutting off their .2 and .3 signals to TWC and forgetting that Charter gets their signals from TWC's headend and also turning off .1 (I think, going by the problems with Hearst last year with TWC).
ETA - Yup, Journal's tech team or TWC pulled a dumb move last night. Oostburg in TWC territory and some of the Waukesha County Charter communities, along with Beaver Dam are also without 4.1 this morning going by Facebook and Twitter. What a mess.
Quote from: mrschimpf;59438Seems like an odd coincidence, but suddenly I'm not seeing WTMJ 4.1 here on Charter in Sheboygan. Hopefully it's just a Charter hiccup, and not Journal cutting off their .2 and .3 signals to TWC and forgetting that Charter gets their signals from TWC's headend and also turning off .1 (I think, going by the problems with Hearst last year with TWC).
ETA - Yup, Journal's tech team or TWC pulled a dumb move last night. Oostburg in TWC territory and some of the Waukesha County Charter communities, along with Beaver Dam are also without 4.1 this morning going by Facebook and Twitter. What a mess.
My guess is that was intentional by TWC. They probably pulled WTMJ from areas that aren't officially in the WTMJ broadcast area, but where TWC carried it anyway. TWC is only obligated to carry WTMJ in the normal broadcast area, and in fact, is probably *prohibited* from carrying it outside that area. TWC likely didn't have a choice in the matter.
I had two recordings going last night, one was Late Night with Jimmy Fallon (on TMJ4). The movie I recorded is fine, it went from 11pm to 1am but Jimmy Fallon only recorded for 23 minutes, until 11:58pm.
Quote from: LoadStar;59439My guess is that was intentional by TWC. They probably pulled WTMJ from areas that aren't officially in the WTMJ broadcast area, but where TWC carried it anyway. TWC is only obligated to carry WTMJ in the normal broadcast area, and in fact, is probably *prohibited* from carrying it outside that area. TWC likely didn't have a choice in the matter.
They did come back, but like I said many of these homes were Charter homes with nothing to do with the Time Warner conflicts, and don't receive TMJ's subchannels. Beaver Dam is in the Milwaukee market, along with the Lake Country, and all are with Charter. 4.1 should not have had a thing done at all.
Quote from: mrschimpf;59437Actually it's been revised; the main channel 4 will stay on through the end of sweeps on July 24 (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/214982561.html) (some kind of nonsense loophole for a sweeps period nobody cares about), but...oh no, Time Warner customers will lose access to Storm Team 4 TV and the Live Well Network because that isn't protected by the loophole.:bang:
Journal has managed to come off as slow and cloying during this entire period of negotiation. They took off the annoying ticker and their FAQ making it seem like it's OK, but now they're making it seem like they'll just go to the end with Time Warner before they have to lose their access. It's laughable to scare viewers with the loss of robo-weather duplicated by 10.4 and now on 58.4, and shows that are easily outclassed by Create on 36.4; all they're doing is bringing themselves parity to other customers in the market, who have never had access to 4.2 or 4.3 because of TWC exclusivity.
They started their annoying ticker again and give us "updates" along with their VP doing some announcement, too, even more annoying.
This was posted last night regarding each side of the dispute. It's always the customers that have to be pawns in these retransmission wars:
http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/blog/2013/07/wexler-time-warner-twists-the.html?page=all
Jack
Quote from: gparris;59459They started their annoying ticker again and give us "updates" along with their VP doing some announcement, too, even more annoying.
I love how they presented it as a "Today's TMJ4 Editorial", as if it was on par with one of Bill Taylor's Positively Milwaukee commentaries, and that poor Wexler couldn't even deliver it from the set, but had to stand behind a greenscreen picture of it.
Compared to Hearst's organized and not-annoying campaign that made TWC look like the bad guys last year, Journal makes themselves look silly. WGBA's ticker is worse though, taking four minutes to scroll through the JBG boilerplate.
There are 3 other stations that I can get my "news" and weather from. I watch all my NBC programming on Hulu on my own terms. No loss here. Go outside and enjoy the short summer.
There's NBC programming worth watching??
Quote from: murdoc;59481No loss here. Go outside and enjoy the short summer.
Amen. Who at JBG negotiated a July contract expiration? They need to bargain for n years plus three or six months to get some leverage.
With digital boxes, TW can probably get a pretty good idea how many of their customers are
not watching 4.1, let alone 4.2 and 4.3.
Quote from: ddeerrff;59482There's NBC programming worth watching??
America's Got Talent and Community.
Quote from: ArgMeMatey;59483Amen. Who at JBG negotiated a July contract expiration? They need to bargain for n years plus three or six months to get some leverage.
With digital boxes, TW can probably get a pretty good idea how many of their customers are not watching 4.1, let alone 4.2 and 4.3.
Probably timed to the fiscal year (beginning in July) rather than any other sane equivalent, same as Hearst and a couple years back LIN with WLUK. Other groups like Fox and NBC go by the chronological year. At least here though nobody will care really until the Packers preseason games come on in August. At worst, September when the new TV season starts, and if Journal is just plain insane, October 27, when the Packers have their first SNF game of the season. In that case though, the Packers would have to seriously think about whether having all their eggs in the Journal basket in Milwaukee and Green Bay is worth it, so Journal would not go too far and have to come to some agreement.
I like that jbganswers site - not. It tells you how you can send a comment to TWC, but nowhere does it allow you to leave a comment to JBG. I'd really like to tell JBG how much I think TWC should be paying them.
If they pull the station, do you think we'll still have access to NBC shows On Demand?
NBC On Demand comes directly from NBC. Affiliates are not involved with it.
So, if i could get programing from NBC on demand, why would I care , about TMJ4 , because all they have is: NEWS, WEATHER,NEWS, WEATHER, NEWS, WEATHER...............
Well, today's rhetoric from Journal has gotten very nasty, worse than anything involving last year's Hearst/TWC situation. Now they're saying on the glacial ticker 'Don't be fooled by the exaggerated claims of your cable provider; TWC threatens to take TMJ4 off the air on July 24. For a half-penny more they could wrap up this negotiation and keep the channel on the air for you.' Then a phone number drop to annoy Time Warner; the boilerplate is the same on WGBA.
So...now it's only a half-penny. Of what? Per day, per week? And how much extra does this 'half-penny' add to your fee? I wish we knew the answer, but Journal isn't telling us. And now they're bringing in the completely unrelated CBS-TWC dispute (http://www.jbganswers.com/216254141.html) in, which at least has the threat of Showtime and Smithsonian getting pulled and is a little more involved. Here, it's Journal lying that Time Warner will take the station away on the 24th, when it's Journal who pulls the signal without an agreement.
As far as I've known from these disputes, the station groups who get greedy about disputes usually don't end up getting too much and get pulled for longer periods of time. This looks like one of them.
Quote from: REVM1M;59490So, if i could get programing from NBC on demand, why would I care , about TMJ4 , because all they have is: NEWS, WEATHER,NEWS, WEATHER, NEWS, WEATHER...............
Or Weather, Weather, News, News, Infomercial. Infomercial, Weather, Weather, News, News. The Tonight Show, occasional weekend sports that are good TV. I think may account for about 25% of their shows. 75% is a big weather, news, infomercial station. Where do they get this "Half a penny more, vs. TWC's claims of a 200 or 250% increase?" Who is right in these figures? Can anyone show how "a half a penny more equates to a 200% increase, (some sites have said 250%.) I suck at Math, but still say that is a HUGE disparity on each side.
Jack
Quote from: mrschimpf;59491Well, today's rhetoric from Journal has gotten very nasty, worse than anything involving last year's Hearst/TWC situation. Now they're saying on the glacial ticker 'Don't be fooled by the exaggerated claims of your cable provider; TWC threatens to take TMJ4 off the air on July 24. For a half-penny more they could wrap up this negotiation and keep the channel on the air for you.' Then a phone number drop to annoy Time Warner; the boilerplate is the same on WGBA.
Time Warner taking TMJ4 "off the air" ? What air? Does Time Warner Cable control WTMJ's broadcast antennas now?
I was under the impression that the entire point of a cable provider was
not to use "the air" as their transmission medium.
Time Warner is taking WTMJ "off the wire." There'll be plenty of their crappy channel remaining "on the air."
Looked like TWC as a whole is playing hardball with retransmission fees.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/21/4540100/aereo-could-win-big-in-fee-dispute-between-cbs-and-time-warner-cable
Live chat with Wexler going on right now.
http://www.jbganswers.com/184042591.html
You can tell the truth by how he answered the first question, and by the 2 questions they chose NOT to allow to be posted and refused to answer:
https://twitter.com/MilwaukeeHDTV
Q: 1 So if there's no agreement by midnight who really physically takes the TMJ4 signal off the lineup, JBG or TWC?
A: At midnight, without an agreement, they have the option to drop the station from their lineup.
Following two questions were submitted but not allowed to be posted, nor were they answered:
Q: Sure they have the option. But you know they won't take you off if you're still feeding them the signal at midnight. If 4 is not available, won't it be because you stopped feeding it to them?
Q: If my math is correct, your "pennies per subscriber" extends out to a demand that TWC pay JBG hundreds of thousands of dollars more per year than what they have been paying. Is that close?
I hope TWC doesn't give in and pay those greedy TMJ4 people.
I thought Time Warner received TMJ's signal via antennas just like we do?
Or do they have a fiber hookup to them?
Quote from: Tom Snyder;59499You can tell the truth by how he answered the first question, and by the 2 questions they chose NOT to allow to be posted and refused to answer:
https://twitter.com/MilwaukeeHDTV
Q: 1 So if there's no agreement by midnight who really physically takes the TMJ4 signal off the lineup, JBG or TWC?
A: At midnight, without an agreement, they have the option to drop the station from their lineup.
Following two questions were submitted but not allowed to be posted, nor were they answered:
Q: Sure they have the option. But you know they won't take you off if you're still feeding them the signal at midnight. If 4 is not available, won't it be because you stopped feeding it to them?
Q: If my math is correct, your "pennies per subscriber" extends out to a demand that TWC pay JBG hundreds of thousands of dollars more per year than what they have been paying. Is that close?
I could see things a slightly different way than you. Like you, I note his specific phrasing "they have the option to drop the station." My followup question to him would have been "If TWC continued to carry the signal following the deadline as you suggest, would that put them at risk of legal or financial repercussions from Journal Communications?"
In other words, sure TWC "has the option" to carry TMJ without a contract. And Journal "has the option" to seek penalties from TWC if they choose to do so.
Journal isn't going to just allow TWC to carry WTMJ without a contract. That's part of the whole upshot behind the Aereo dispute, that Aereo hasn't entered a re-transmission consent agreement with the broadcasters. For Journal to imply that TWC could continue on rebroadcasting WTMJ after the contract is disingenuous at best. Even if WTMJ leaves their fiber feed to TWC up and running, which I fully think they might do, TWC would be daft if they continued to use it without a contract.
Quote from: PONIES;59501I thought Time Warner received TMJ's signal via antennas just like we do?
Or do they have a fiber hookup to them?
I think for the full-power stations in Milwaukee, they have a fiber link. They also have an antenna farm in Brookfield (Town) at the dead-end of Janacek Ct. that is primary for those they don't have a fiber link to, and backup for those they do. It also is at least one of their satellite downlink facilities.
I posted the following at TWC's Untangled Blog regarding the fee dispute between TWC and Journal Broadcasting and the fee dispute between CBS channels in some markets, (not ours) as well as Showtime and their sister channels, which because they are owned by CBS could be dropped in all markets:
I posted this at TWC's Untangled Blog:
Greetings,
I support TWC in the fight to keep the costs of cable reasonable. I understand and appreciate that both businesses have to be compensated for their programing due to inflation and rising costs, but at an increase of 600%? That’s INSANE! The 200% demanded by Journal Broadcasting for its stations is bad enough.
CBS and Journal Broadcasting need to realize that their enemy is NOT TWC. It is the fact that station credibility is lost when businesses hold customers hostile in these negotiations, where good people who pay potentially hundreds of dollars a month are being treated like pawns with each side going to war. It is frustrating. Remember that ALL Cable, Dish, Telephone, and mobile companies are bound by Retransmission Contract disputes, so if customers switch providers, they could face the same blackout consequences when CBS comes up for renewal on Direct TV, or Dish Network, or ANY third-party TV provider.
In some respects, Ala Carte programing may help for small one to two-person households who are in agreement with what they like to watch. The problem is with larger families who rely in TV for entertainment, news, and educational services. How many people can actually agree on what services they would want to watch in an Ala-Carte channel model? How many channels are loved by some people, and hated by others even in the same household? In larger households, interests in what channels represent value may be too diverse where one may have to question how much money would be saved, over the conveyance of TWC Triple Play bundles. In my experience, I like the Triple Play better than Ala Carte. However, I use Internet, Cable TV, and Phone every day. For people that don’t, smaller packages might help.
Regardless of service levels, customers want a fair and reasonable price to pay for cable that they can afford. CBS SHOULD LOOK AT THE LOSS OF REVENUE FOR THEM FROM TWC IF THEY CHOOSE TO DROP SHOWTIME FROM ALL TWC SYSTEMS! IN FACT, CBS LOSES MORE REVENUE AND RESPECT FROM THE PUBLIC TRUST BY THREATENING TO REMOVE THEIR PROGRAMING, THAN CHOOSING TO NEGOTIATE A FAIR AND REASONABLE DEAL THAT REPRESENTS THE BEST INTEREST OF CABLE CUSTOMERS IN TRYING ECONOMIC TIMES.
Regards,
Jack
http://www.twcableuntangled.com/2013/07/cbs-is-demanding-600-percent-more/
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.
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.
QuoteJournal 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.
Quote from: Tom Snyder;59507From 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 (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/216787251.html), 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.
QuoteMidnight 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.
Wait... TMJ4 is/was on TWC?
Learn something new everyday!
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:
Quote from: LoadStar;59508According to Duane Dudek (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/216787251.html), 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.
Quote from: jjallou;59511Since 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:
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.
Quote from: jfelbab;59515I 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
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.
I've watched WTMJ exactly as much after the blackout as I had before it, which is to say, not at all.
Quote from: gparris;59517Well, 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
No rebate.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/217407921.html
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:
Quote from: Jack 1000;59519Sup 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.
Jack
EDIT:
An extension to 4pm CDT on Friday, 8/2 is now in the news today, 7/30, about CBS and TWC, it includes information about the negotiations that also includes the cable-only channels that all TWC subs wouldn't get, IF they subscribed to them, Showtime, The Movie Channel, Flix and Smithsonian channels, not just the CBS locals in the specific locales.
Quote from: Jack 1000;59519maybe the laws governing the Cable Retransmission Act of 1992 had to change
Need to go back to basic "Must Carry" with no fees. Advertising is supposed to pay for content. If the viewer needs to pay for content, then dump the commercials.
Quote from: ddeerrff;59523Need to go back to basic "Must Carry" with no fees. Advertising is supposed to pay for content. If the viewer needs to pay for content, then dump the commercials.
No cable customer or cable company is going to disagree with that. But no OTA station owner would agree.
A better argument would be one that no rational person could disagree with. I haven't heard that one yet.
Quote from: ArgMeMatey;59526No cable customer or cable company is going to disagree with that. But no OTA station owner would agree.
A better argument would be one that no rational person could disagree with. I haven't heard that one yet.
Same holds true for most cable channels, way too many commercials, and they get paid per subscriber. Really not worth it...
If a broadcaster elects retransmission consent, there is no obligation for the cable system to carry the signal.[2] This option allows broadcasters who own popular stations, such as CBS, NBC and ABC or Fox to request cash or other compensation from cable or satellite providers for signals. These networks have usually attempted to gain further distribution of cable services and/or co-owned low power television stations in which they also hold an equity position rather than direct cash compensation, which cable systems have almost universally balked at paying. In some cases, these channels have been temporarily removed from distribution by systems who felt broadcasters were asking too steep a price for their signal. Examples include the removal of all CBS-owned local stations plus MTV, VH1 and Nickelodeon from DISH Network for two days in 2004, the removal of ABC-owned stations from Time Warner Cable for a little under a day in 2000, and the removal of all Hearst Television local stations from Time Warner for more than a week in 2012.
In the U.S. retransmission consent has often been chosen over must-carry by the major commercial television networks. Under the present rules, a new agreement is negotiated every three years, and stations must choose must-carry or retransmission consent for each cable system they wish their signal to be carried on. Non-commercial stations (such as local PBS stations) may not seek retransmission consent and may only invoke must-carry status.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Must-carry
"The game telecast had a rating of 16.5 on Channel 4 between 7 and 10 p.m., which means almost 149,000 households on average in this market tuned to some portion of the game. A total of 31% of the sets on at the time were tuned to the game on Channel 4.
By comparison, the Packers' first preseason game last year, at San Diego, had a combined rating of 25.6 on Channel 12 and ESPN, which means more than 232,000 households on average watched some part of the game."
-Bob Wolfley
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/219292151.html (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/219292151.html)
This whole Journal Broadcast Group battle with Time Warner Cable reached a new low last night when I tried watching The Tonight Show and now channel 5 from Chicago's programming feed from NBC on TWC is now banned, too.
Look, TWC, get it together with JBG and be done with it, it was only a rerun, yes, but I am sure the few other shows other subs watch are seeing that notice, too and we're tired of it. TWC, if we wanted to use antennas, why do we need you for a provider, anymore?:huh?:
JBG: Do you really think you're going to win on this completely your way? Really?
I don't think so, you and TWC both stink.:Smash:
Why would WMAQ be removed? It is NBC O&O.
Quote from: gparris;59596last night when I tried watching The Tonight Show ... channel 5 from Chicago's programming feed from NBC on TWC is now banned, too.
Are you saying that WMAQ "blocks" their feed to Milwaukee-area IPs, or that TWC is blocking the WMAQ feed? What indication did you get of either action, or the responsible party?
According to the Racine Journal Times, blame TMJ on this one (http://journaltimes.com/news/local/chicago-nbc-affiliate-to-be-added-to-blackout/article_474f2c14-0193-11e3-a0ea-001a4bcf887a.html); they're "exercising its rights" to NBC programming in the area, so WMAQ gets blacked out in Racine and Kenosha.
I think they're fast exercising their rights to us getting "NBC 24" one of these days; how can NBC continue to tolerate them having their affiliation these days (besides no station taking NBC without some cajoiling otherwise)? They pre-empt programming at will without any reairs (The Do No Harm block in February due to the snowstorm), don't even acknowledge they're an NBC station unless they have to, and they treat NBC's Access Hollywood like a hassle, bumping it back to 1:35am so we can have a newscast with a "Mugshot of the Day" segment. Raycom/Dish's dispute got resolved within days and that was a whole lot more complicated than this, and TWC out-foxed them thanks to the Telemundo Packers simulcast.
This is doing much more damage to WTMJ than TWC at this point, though with CBS and Fox Sports 1 (which TWC isn't carrying yet), they're not completely innocent either.
Quote from: mrschimpf;59602According to the Racine Journal Times, blame TMJ on this one (http://journaltimes.com/news/local/chicago-nbc-affiliate-to-be-added-to-blackout/article_474f2c14-0193-11e3-a0ea-001a4bcf887a.html); they're "exercising its rights" to NBC programming in the area, so WMAQ gets blacked out in Racine and Kenosha.
Sorry, thanks, I was erroneously thinking he was referring to WMAQ's internet feed, not the OTA feed picked up for the Racine/Kenosha area.
Even after this fiasco is over, I will never watch TMJ programming. They have no feelings for its viewers. Having WMAQ out of Chicago banned is the last straw. WTMJ you should be ashamed of your self. :bang:
My family decided to rid itself of everything Journal Broadcast Group, so we cancelled our paper, deleted their radio settings on the vehicles and left programming reminders to record only the Chicago station (not WTMJ) when it's available again for the very few NBC shows we actually watch.
No more Journal Broadcast Group forever!
Hah, WTMJ is ****.
Glad I've got satellite antennas, over-the-air antennas, and Internet access.
Good luck blocking all those other sources of NBC programming, WTMJ! I never watched your **** channel before and I will never watch it after this is all over. :wave:
I dunno if WTMJ is the only one deserving of the blame. I'd say TWC is equally, or nearly equally to blame. These two companies make millions of dollars of profits, wanting to protect their profit margins....Thats all they really care about. They are doing the same thing with CBS now, we went through this last year with WISN, [and we'll probably go through this again when their contract with {Insert Channel Name Here} ends. It's really all about the $$$$
The affiliates are always to blame.
They want to have their cake and eat it too.
They make more money from advertising than any cable channel because their networks have the largest audiences which is a result of them having the widest distribution because they are also available over-the-air.
The affiliates want their expanded advertising revenue and high carriage fees that cable-only networks get to boot. Cable networks have to have carriage fees because their audiences are not as large as the 'free' networks. They cannot make a sufficient income from advertising alone.
It's greed, plain and simple.
Plus, I completely despise the affiliate model anyway. They are leeches, nothing more. Their only purpose is to distract and annoy by constantly inserting themselves in-between me and NBC, CBS, etc. national programming.
I do not give two ****s about local "breaking news," "it's really cold today! Here's an annoying temperature gauge we're going to spam over NBC's programming for you! Because apparently cell phones aren't A Thing™ and you don't always have a mobile thermometer in your pocket at all times!" or "hey, check out our cool local channel bug! Let's just plaster that right next to the ABC logo on all ABC programming for you. Isn't that nice? Aren't you glad we're your source for ABC's programs instead of just getting it from ABC themselves?," or "well, there's obviously been a bad storm last night. Let's assume you're too stupid to have a quick look on the Internet to check if where you're wanting to go today is open. Instead we'll just annoy you with a squished picture and an endless scrolling list of places you don't care about that have closed today! Wheee!"
I want to watch network programming and I do not want to be spammed by this trash from a useless middleman.
You raise some valid points... I think you're a little overly harsh on affiliates because of those things you mentioned bother you so much. I don't let those little things bother me personally. But, those are just personal preferences. Delving too much further into the whole network/affiliate model will dive us into off-topic posts, so I'll stop here. As I'm out of state (born and raised in WI though) I have no stake in this, other than seeing what is happening in my home town
Quote from: PONIES;59611The affiliates are always to blame.
They want to have their cake and eat it too.
They make more money from advertising than any cable channel because their networks have the largest audiences which is a result of them having the widest distribution because they are also available over-the-air.
The affiliates want their expanded advertising revenue and high carriage fees that cable-only networks get to boot. Cable networks have to have carriage fees because their audiences are not as large as the 'free' networks. They cannot make a sufficient income from advertising alone.
It's greed, plain and simple.
Plus, I completely despise the affiliate model anyway. They are leeches, nothing more. Their only purpose is to distract and annoy by constantly inserting themselves in-between me and NBC, CBS, etc. national programming.
I do not give two ****s about local "breaking news," "it's really cold today! Here's an annoying temperature gauge we're going to spam over NBC's programming for you! Because apparently cell phones aren't A Thing™ and you don't always have a mobile thermometer in your pocket at all times!" or "hey, check out our cool local channel bug! Let's just plaster that right next to the ABC logo on all ABC programming for you. Isn't that nice? Aren't you glad we're your source for ABC's programs instead of just getting it from ABC themselves?," or "well, there's obviously been a bad storm last night. Let's assume you're too stupid to have a quick look on the Internet to check if where you're wanting to go today is open. Instead we'll just annoy you with a squished picture and an endless scrolling list of places you don't care about that have closed today! Wheee!"
I want to watch network programming and I do not want to be spammed by this trash from a useless middleman.
I agree Ponies!
There weather this and weather that is such overkill! They do school and business closings, keeping their crawlers up twenty four hours after the fact. Do we really care that the "We Care Tiny Tot Day Care" Center is closed and get that announcement for the next twelve hours on the crawler? With weather graphics, and bugs that over-ride the once in a blue moon decent programing on WTMJ?
The other problem is that so many of the stories are so vain and shallow, and some of the reporters are so vain and shallow. I think both are negatives. However, even Walter Cronkite could not create the mastery of news professionalism for the local stories today. "Today Mrs. Jones' third grade class celebrated Groundhog Day by drawing their own groundhogs!" They learned about the history of groundhog day and had a lot of fun." Camera cut to some smiling or giggling newscaster who says, "Those pictures are really cute aren't they?" Than the typical main anchor comment. "Well, we hope you have a happy and safe groundhog day, wherever you may be." This is the kind of content that warrants according to the Journal a 200% rate increase?
If this was the NBC of the 60's, 70's and 80's with game shows, movies, series specials that once defined the great era of TV, I think Journal would have more ammunition to support a rate hike. Not 200%. I will never forget NBC's classic slogans like
"Proud as a Peacock" or "
Our Pride is Showing." The made for TV series at that time were stunning and amazing.
Now the peaock is crying and hiding it head in shame. Pride is no longer a part of the network. When the economy tanked about 5-10 years ago, some say the peacock not only cried, it died. The overstaturation of news and weather with infomercials is estimated to make up I would say 75% of the network. NBC occasionally does marginal with the other 25% with the Tonight Show, even though I heard Jay Leno is going to be leaving. They will show golf and NasCar on the weekends. However, they have no variety in their weekday line-up to justify the rates they are seeking. WYMJ should be bought out by another network with more variety. Are the other NBC affiliates the same way with their programing?
Jack
Update:
Journal Broadcast asks State Legislatures to issue credits to customers affected by the blackout.
Meanwhile. TWC plans to substitute the blacked out Journal Broadcast station channel 4 with Game Show Network (GSN) and Starz Kids and Family a premium movie station on it's digital sub channels. (994) and (999) Note that customers without Showtime are currently getting all of the Starz Package minus On Demand. (Showtime is owned by CBS.)
Other TWC markets, having the same dispute with the national blackout of CBS are getting Starz Kids and Family, until this dispute is resolved. (Our CBS being locally owned is not effected.)
GSN is traditionally a part of TWC's Digital Variety Package:
http://onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/journaltimewarner.html?34842
Jack
The problem is... neither side is willing to give an inch. Now they are just bad mouthing each other in the press/social media and pointing fingers. No matter who's right and who's wrong. Get your asses back to the table and work out a deal
Quote from: techboywi;59618The problem is... neither side is willing to give an inch. Now they are just bad mouthing each other in the press/social media and pointing fingers. No matter who's right and who's wrong. Get your asses back to the table and work out a deal
At least with the WISN dispute everyone was collegial and worked out their issues with pretty neutral statements. Now you have Steve Wexler sending Twitter blasts to every message the poor social media person behind the @TWC_Wisconsin handle puts out. His terrible comedy act regarding the GSN replacement tonight seems like something that you'd never see out of any other GM in any city. Seriously...these were two of his messages tonight;
Quote@wextmj TWC replacing @TODAYSTMJ4 with game shows? Why would they put their customers in "Jeopardy"?
Quote@wextmj TWC replacing @TODAYSTMJ4 with game shows? They're acting like a "Monopoly".
:bang: Is it too late for WMTV in Madison to launch a 100-mile wide translator station so we don't have to deal with Journal anymore?
Now it appear that TWC have completely removed the channel 4 and 1004 channel. Channel 04 is now GSN or something like that. This can't be good.
The more time that slips by, the worse WTMJ's position is. More and more people start forgetting they ever watched Channel 4 in the first place.
Another month goes by .. WTMJ is critically wounded, with half+ of their audience gone, and almost no one calling TWC every day to complain, so TWC has no need for the channel, no need to negotiate.
.. One wonders, there have been dozens of stand-offs like this .. what's the longest? And who "won" the stand-off by getting the better deal?
Quote from: duncantuna;59622The more time that slips by, the worse WTMJ's position is. More and more people start forgetting they ever watched Channel 4 in the first place.
Another month goes by .. WTMJ is critically wounded, with half+ of their audience gone, and almost no one calling TWC every day to complain, so TWC has no need for the channel, no need to negotiate.
.. One wonders, there have been dozens of stand-offs like this .. what's the longest? And who "won" the stand-off by getting the better deal?
KRIS-TV, the NBC affiliate in Corpus Christi, Texas went to the mat for
five months with Time Warner from December 2011 to May 2012 (http://www.fiercecable.com/special-reports/nbc-affiliate-kris-tv-vs-time-warner-cable-worst-programming-disputes-all-t), taking them out during February and May sweeps, along with the Super Bowl. It seems like the deal was finally made out of desperation to get back on cable, and KRIS was the #1 station in their market before the dispute. However I can't find current ratings thanks to Kris Jenner's talk show screwing up the search for me.
Making the Best of the Journal Broadcast Group Blackout | Time Warner Cable
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJpc83dqlLg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJpc83dqlLg)
Quote from: RLJSlick;59624Making the Best of the Journal Broadcast Group Blackout | Time Warner Cable
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJpc83dqlLg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJpc83dqlLg)
Really, TWC? Antennas when I pay for you to do your job?
I don't think so, ever, getting an antenna, but taking my channel 5 Chicago feed will never be forgiven by either The Journal Broadcast Group or TWC's lack of persuasion and poor negotiating, either.
TWC: Where is my refund for my channel 4 and 5, 1004 and the sub channels?
TWC: While we're at it, where is my refund for Showtime, The Movie Channel and The Smithsonian Channel (from the HD package)?
Huh? Where is it? I don't see it on my bill or any notation to the effect?:bang:
Keep your **** antenna!
Quote from: gparris;59630Really, TWC? Antennas when I pay for you to do your job?
I don't think so, ever, getting an antenna, but taking my channel 5 Chicago feed will never be forgiven by either The Journal Broadcast Group or TWC's lack of persuasion and poor negotiating, either.
TWC: Where is my refund for my channel 4 and 5, 1004 and the sub channels?
TWC: While we're at it, where is my refund for Showtime, The Movie Channel and The Smithsonian Channel (from the HD package)?
Huh? Where is it? I don't see it on my bill or any notation to the effect?:bang:
Keep your **** antenna!
I agree GP,
Why are millions of customers in nationally owned CBS Markets, all TWC markets with Showtime/TMC forced into this "Time Out" take away the channels BS just because two multi-billionare companies can't work out a deal?
I also think that TWC replacing WTMJ-4 with GSN was underhanded. I like GSN, but not leaving TMJ-4 available in the middle of negotiations is not a good business strategy. I don't miss Channel 4, but I sympathize with friends who do not have the station because of the disputes.
I found out if a deal is reached with WTMJ, that it is likely the station will be assigned to a NEW channel number. Credits WILL be issued nationwide for Showtime/TMC from the first day of the blackout, after a deal is made. TWC says they can't assign credits to just CBS or Journal Broadcast markets (for the loss of Channel 4,), because channels such as those are not sold individually. You would have to have ALL of a channel tier blocked out to get a credit, or a channel rented optionally, (Like Showtime/TWC) to get credit.
I predict a CBS deal will be struck before September 9th. The start of the NFL season. There is too much revenue that would be lost on both sides if a deal is not made by that time. Journal Broadcasting's future with TWC is much less optimistic.
Jack
Quote from: Jack 1000;59633I also think that TWC replacing WTMJ-4 with GSN was underhanded.
I'm not getting GSN where WTMJ-4 used to be, it's just a black screen.
Quote from: grenier;59634I'm not getting GSN where WTMJ-4 used to be, it's just a black screen.
Maybe something's happening. What does it say on your guide for channel 4? Not HD 1004, which is gone from the guide, just SD channel 4?
Jack
Quote from: Jack 1000;59635Maybe something's happening. What does it say on your guide for channel 4? Not HD 1004, which is gone from the guide, just SD channel 4?
There's nothing on the guide.
Quote from: Jack 1000;59635Maybe something's happening. What does it say on your guide for channel 4? Not HD 1004, which is gone from the guide, just SD channel 4?
Jack
I got GSN in the 4 spot.
Lately, as I drive home from Illinois on major non-freeway routes due to construction, I have seen an uptick in ATT UVerse trucks and lately, more Directv trucks, but no TWC trucks anywhere, maybe it's my imagination?
Could some folks be tired of TWC and changing their TV providers?:huh?:
It's been said that the next round of battles will be with other providers, I am guessing some subs don't think of that or just don't care, or maybe, they're thinking that their new provider will work faster to achieve some sort of success and get the channels back on sooner.
Quote from: gparris;59646I got GSN in the 4 spot.
Lately, as I drive home from Illinois on major non-freeway routes due to construction, I have seen an uptick in ATT UVerse trucks and lately, more Directv trucks, but no TWC trucks anywhere, maybe it's my imagination?
Could some folks be tired of TWC and changing their TV providers?:huh?:
It's been said that the next round of battles will be with other providers, I am guessing some subs don't think of that or just don't care, or maybe, they're thinking that their new provider will work faster to achieve some sort of success and get the channels back on sooner.
Yea,
And all's well and good until Direct TV, Dish Network or U-Verse has their next go-around with CBS or Journal-Broadcast Company over rates? Will the irate subs of the competition go back to TWC if this happens?
It's the broken and fragmented Cable Act of 1992 that needs updating, and the competition's investments in Internet and Mobile Technologies that are the biggest threats to retransmission disputes. People seem to not understand that the battle with the next station owner and broadcaster could still result in blackouts.
Here is an excellent article on the history of TV and Retransmission Consent:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/currency/2013/08/cbs-time-warner-cable-and-the-disruption-of-tv.html
Jack
Quote from: grenier;59634I'm not getting GSN where WTMJ-4 used to be, it's just a black screen.
Hi guys - was here a looooooooong time ago and have just been lurking. The black screen resuts if you go to analog 4 or 4.1 without using a converter or DTA. If you are using your TV quam, then you get the black channel. They must be doing a map on that change, keeping 4 there. But 4.2 and 4.3 quam are actually feeding starz. Mike
Jack 1000, the point was TWC is taking its time negotiating, or maybe it's not negotiating at all! Other providers will have to deal with negotiations just like TWC supposedly is, but at faster rate, possibly keeping all channels on -no blackouts.
Witness Verizon Fios, which swiftly did a 3-year contract with CBS for the same type of contract, including on-demand - no problem for the Fios customers in the same cities TWC has been out of service, with even more subscribers than TWC!
I believe all other providers will get on the ball and get the job done quickly so those switching are NOT doing themselves a disservice at all.
IS really TWC caring about its subscribers? I believe it really doesn't care, not with the most recent contract CBS and Fios.:bang:
Quote from: gparris;59649Jack 1000, the point was TWC is taking its time negotiating, or maybe it's not negotiating at all! Other providers will have to deal with negotiations just like TWC supposedly is, but at faster rate, possibly keeping all channels on -no blackouts.
Witness Verizon Fios, which swiftly did a 3-year contract with CBS for the same type of contract, including on-demand - no problem for the Fios customers in the same cities TWC has been out of service, with even more subscribers than TWC!
I believe all other providers will get on the ball and get the job done quickly so those switching are NOT doing themselves a disservice at all.
IS really TWC caring about its subscribers? I believe it really doesn't care, not with the most recent contract CBS and Fios.:bang:
What I have read from some people when TWC has similar spats with other companies is that often TWC wants deals on top of deals. Other providers may just pay what is asked, perhaps to keep a good rapport with the host company.
Not sure with Journal Broadcasting, but I read that CBS wants about $2.00 more per month per sub, which is ridiculous! Before the blackout, they paid TWC about 88 cents. CBS feels because other channels like ESPN/Disney (which cable subs get as part of a package at Disney's insistence) get over $4.00 a month. (Disney ownes ESPN.) I think there is ABC ownership in there too if I am not mistaken, CBS believes that 2.00 a month for CBS/Showrtime/Movie Channel/Flix/Smithsonian is not unreasonable.
TWC thinks that CBS should not get that much more money just because CBS claims it is so popular. TWC will probably make concessions and negotiate a deal close to 95 cents to $.100 more per month. They may agree to take CBS Sports off of Sports Pass and move it to Digital Variety for a more broad based distribution along with more Internet and mobile content when a deal is finalized.
But the sticking point is that CBS wants to have the right to charge more for it's on-line offerings. TWC says, no. That should remain available with a high speed Internet subscription. CBS had a tantrum, and blocked ALL of its on-line content from TWC Internet s]subscribers, even those that don't have TWC as a cable TV provider! Insiders say it is the Internet and streaming video content where they are now having the negotiating difficulty. However, expect a deal before the start of the NFL season. Both sides have too much revenue to not gain, and sponsors to lose, if a deal is not done by this time. You also have the Tennis US Open Tournament, which is also going to be a very important part of the negotiations.
Fortunately, although Showtime and its sister stations remain blacked out, our CBS is locally owned and is not effected by this dispute. However, Journal Broadcasting is affected for similar reasons as the TWC/CBS debacle in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, and some other markets.
For Channel 4 Journal Broadcasting, I think TWC wants it to be more than a news and weather station in order for Journal Broadcasting to get more money. Local management I suspect can't offer more because of budgetary reasons and I think that is the reason for the impasse. While ALL Journal Broadcast owned stations are being blacked out by TWC in all states, I don't know if the content of those other stations is the mostly news and weather programing that WTMJ has become.
Jack
Jack 1000,
-TWC exists to make money for its investors, it tells its subscribers it's trying to hold down costs that gets passed on, but in reality, it's the investors, not the subscribers, TWC is concerned about. Its all BS, nothing more.
It's been a long time with these battles of Journal Broadcast Group and CBS with TWC, who is dragging it on and on and as its subscribers, we do not care, unless we, too are one of those investors, which most of us are probably not.
Putting the customer in the battle is annoying and aggravating, the subs just want to turn their sets on and watch the usual programming that they pay cable for, we could actually care less because in the end, the costs, due to investor demands, will go up anyway.
If other providers can work things out faster, so be it. If Verizon FIOS was available in my area, I would have it by now, my family and friends in other states that have it, love it, they got the job done with CBS and TWC has not, plain and simple. But where I live all we have is TWC or satellite, no ATT or FIOS, so a monopoly exists.
TWC drags this on and on and the new fall shows are coming on, maybe that will push them, besides the falling subscriber numbers (maybe).
Quote from: gparris;59651Jack 1000,
-TWC exists to make money for its investors, it tells its subscribers it's trying to hold down costs that gets passed on, but in reality, it's the investors, not the subscribers, TWC is concerned about. Its all BS, nothing more.
It's been a long time with these battles of Journal Broadcast Group and CBS with TWC, who is dragging it on and on and as its subscribers, we do not care, unless we, too are one of those investors, which most of us are probably not.
Putting the customer in the battle is annoying and aggravating, the subs just want to turn their sets on and watch the usual programming that they pay cable for, we could actually care less because in the end, the costs, due to investor demands, will go up anyway.
If other providers can work things out faster, so be it. If Verizon FIOS was available in my area, I would have it by now, my family and friends in other states that have it, love it, they got the job done with CBS and TWC has not, plain and simple. But where I live all we have is TWC or satellite, no ATT or FIOS, so a monopoly exists.
TWC drags this on and on and the new fall shows are coming on, maybe that will push them, besides the falling subscriber numbers (maybe).
Good points,
Only critique is that if you had a TRUE Monopoly, you would have TWC and nothing else available. You do have Satellite options, so that would not be a monopoly. If you have a rented apartment or own a condo where TWC is an exclusive service for your unit or building, than you would have a monopoly. I have been told so many landlords don't allow satellite. Not sure about U-Verse in the apartment/condo situation.
I wonder how often stockholders look at the falling rates of the video service associated with TWC? If the video services for cable. whether it be TWC, Charter, or Comcast continue to lose money on the video part of cable TV, investors will eventually take their business elsewhere. I think if TWC had direct competition from another cable company in the same area, customer service relationships and services would be forced to improve. Our cable service has been good across the board, but most people hate cable TV and I think investors may start to realize that sooner, rather than later.
Jack
Free antenna for TW customer. It's probably cheaper for them to install antenna than to deal with local stations every few years.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/220668901.html
Good articulate video from TWC going into more details of the CBS Blackout, which also relates to Journal Broadcasting's issues:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mogDW3bfwEs
Jack
Good video, there seems to be a lot going on in the backround that CBS isn't telling us.
The part about CBS wanting subs to register their sets and end DVR-ing in the future (or something to that effect) she mentioned in the negotiations with CBS was very disturbing.
Right now, all I am really aggravated about is that, here in the Racine area, we lost Chicago channel 5 (NBC altogether) due to Journal Broadcast Group arrogance. My old neighbors in Kenosha still get it as an alternative to rabbit ears. That stinks for me, I refuse to do antennas with MY cable bill. :bang:
Quote from: Bebop;59653Free antenna for TW customer. It's probably cheaper for them to install antenna than to deal with local stations every few years.
It used to be that Dish or DirecTV, maybe both, had an input on their STBs for a local antenna so they could switch seamlessly between satellite and terrestrial. No idea whether they still do.
Does TW offer any boxes with this provision? If they did, for many subscribers, it would be effortless to use the local antenna input. Of course then TW would be faced with customers wanting local channels unbundled. But, if they wanted to stick it to JBG and the rest, it might be worth it.
Quote from: ArgMeMatey;59656It used to be that Dish or DirecTV, maybe both, had an input on their STBs for a local antenna so they could switch seamlessly between satellite and terrestrial. No idea whether they still do.
Older TiVo's (TiVo S3 and TiVo HD, for example) do as well.
QuoteDoes TW offer any boxes with this provision? If they did, for many subscribers, it would be effortless to use the local antenna input. Of course then TW would be faced with customers wanting local channels unbundled. But, if they wanted to stick it to JBG and the rest, it might be worth it.
Don't think so, but I agree, they should.
Dish still does have the inputs. Some times it is a extra cost when it is setup. On the VIP722K or the Hopper, it is a tuner that can be added. The rest of them it is part of the receiver. I like it because it adds as many as two OTA tuners to the DVR. :)
Another article on the blackout, with optional audio commentary:
http://www.wuwm.com/post/time-warner-and-journal-broadcast-group-dispute-drags
Jack
Is it known how much revenue WTMJ is losing every day by not being on TWC?
Jack
Quote from: Jack 1000;59676Is it known how much revenue WTMJ is losing every day by not being on TWC?
Jack
JBG will do whatever it takes to make it look like TWC's fault, never admit that it is losing ad revenue based on lost viewers and continue its rhetoric until either one caves in. CBS claims it hasn't lost much of anything, even with over 3 million TWC subs not watching, unless they went the antenna route, which I doubt many have, IMO.
What I believe is that both have lost much ad revenue, they are hurting badly, but they will never show those "cards" on the negotiating table.
Engadget HD has shown the announcement about CBS and TWC ending their dispute, but no details were given, but I wonder what they were? Did TWC cave much?
I am waiting for my Showtime and The Movie Channel credits to appear on my next billing cycle, Smithsonian Channel to reappear, too, no credit due because it is part of the HD package, sad to say.
Will Journal Broadcast Group or " JBG"(for NBC channels 4 and 1004 and in my case, Chicago channel 5 for NBC) come back anytime soon, also? You never know until it happens.:huh?:
Quote from: Jack 1000;59676Is it known how much revenue WTMJ is losing every day by not being on TWC?
Jack
For now I suspect it's not much; we haven't been back to the lowest point in 2009 where Hydroxtone advertised half the day on TMJ. Once they get into the fall network season (not even going to try to look at their low syndication revenue, which will plunge once
OK!TV, which is stuck in graveyard slots elsewhere, begins), that's when we'll know for sure. But with both the CBS dispute and Packers pre-season legs of the stool gone, Journal is looking worse every day this goes on, and WISN is probably reaping most of the rewards (switching out Anderson with Bethenny in their lowest profile slot is very low risk).
Quote from: mrschimpf;59684For now I suspect it's not much; we haven't been back to the lowest point in 2009 where Hydroxtone advertised half the day on TMJ. Once they get into the fall network season (not even going to try to look at their low syndication revenue, which will plunge once OK!TV[/i], which is stuck in graveyard slots elsewhere, begins), that's when we'll know for sure. But with both the CBS dispute and Packers pre-season legs of the stool gone, Journal is looking worse every day this goes on, and WISN is probably reaping most of the rewards (switching out Anderson with Bethenny in their lowest profile slot is very low risk).
Where is OK!TV going on TMJ4? It's not on Zap2it.com yet. It's just a show right?? Not a channel???
Quote from: jrh1985;59687Where is OK!TV going on TMJ4? It's not on Zap2it.com yet. It's just a show right?? Not a channel???
Thankfully not a channel (though it's airing on Reelz also). I suspect in the 2pm slot where AHL is now on September 9, but I really am not sure because of course, OK!TV is the runt of this year's syndication litter and doesn't even have a website so I can't confirm until TMJ actually puts it in their listings.
TWC stopped the free Starz preview.
Quote from: grenier;59694TWC stopped the free Starz preview.
It was only allowed for a month from what I read; sadly the Hallmark Movie Channel (more like the Murder She Wrote Network) is pretty much the go-to by Time Warner for filling in a disputed channel; the few days WISN was off TWC, that's what also was carried. Expect Great American Country to also get a go-around too if this goes longer.
Oh, and
OK!TV is the 2:30pm show this year. At 2pm,
Let's Ask America, which was Scripps's way to ditch
Wheel and
Jeopardy on their stations for cheap, is airing in that slot this year. I pretty much expect
Katie and the Fox 6 court block to again win those timeslots through the year.
Quote from: grenier;59694TWC stopped the free Starz preview.
TWC's contract ran out for the free preview. I think Starz expected an agreement to be reached by now. Hallmark Movie Channel replaces the Starz free preview. It seems that the only concern is the loss of Football. The problem is most of WTMJ's content is local news and weather. You can get that from other stations. It is not needed to have WTMJ to find out local news and weather.
WTMJ-4's, local community programing still does not warrant the rate increase they are seeking. Another sticking point is TWC's decision to move the longtime channel 4 location and give it to Game Show Network. (GSN) TWC says if a deal is reached, WTMJ will likely NOT come back to channel 4(SD)/1004(HD). Journal Broadcasting believes it was not a good business practice to "sell" channel 4's spot on TWC.
Jack
Journal's Stock in Massive Trouble Since TWC Channel 4 Blackout:
Story here:
http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/blog/2013/09/time-warner-dispute-socks-journal-stock.html?page=all
Jack
While both are hurt a little by the dispute in how much money each gets to keep. TW is in a way better position. JMO Almost nobody reads the paper. AM radio has a small market and profit margin. And more then half of there TV audience doesn't get there shows/content.:bang:
Quote from: Jack 1000;59696It seems that the only concern is the loss of Football.
That's the only thing that I'm irritated about.
What loss of football?
PQ was substantially better against what I'm usually offered.
Personally, Sunday night's between September and February are the only time I need that channel.
I keep my rabbit ears behind the TV and it works just fine. (you mileage may vary)
Are the two sides even talking at this point?
This article from about five days ago, says that there have been new active developments in negotiations and both sides are talking. As of today, September 11, 2013, it is the latest that I have found:
http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20130906/APC03/309060386/NBC-blackout-talks-take-new-tone
Jack
PS. It's for the Up North areas of Wisconsin, their "Channel 4" is Channel 26, but the negotiation updates apply to Milwaukee WTMJ-4 as well.
Has anyone else noticed an awful lot of game shows popping up on NBC lately?
America's Got Talent? Million Dollar Quiz? Hollywood Game Night?
I think Time Warner was trying to tell us something by replacing NBC with the Gameshow Network.
As you've probably already heard, JBG and TWC have come to an agreement. And by the looks of things, JBG got their rear handed to them.
On TWC, the analog feed of TMJ4 moves to channel 2 -- apparently, TWC went and sold the channel 4 position to Game Show Network. The HD feed remains on 1004. This is just all sorts of messed up, especially once they go to the new lineup (eventually) that combines the SD and HD lineups.
Quote from: LoadStar;59706On TWC, the analog feed of TMJ4 moves to channel 2.
Except for those of us who have WBBM Chicago, resulting in SD WTMJ getting exiled to the netherlands of channel 83, where CSPAN and shopping channels lurk.
For the not-small contingent of HDTV owners who still use the SD channel numbers out of habit, that does have to smart for WTMJ, since as you mention, the forthcoming AutoHD-type setup won't help there.
Quote from: LoadStar;59706As you've probably already heard, JBG and TWC have come to an agreement. And by the looks of things, JBG got their rear handed to them.
I don't think we're going to be seeing the tipline being sponsored by TWC in the near future :rof:. I don't think I ever saw a carriage deal go so badly for the station side, and although nobody's going to care about TMJ being on analog 2 by 2016, TWC sure did stick it to them. In Green Bay, WACY/MyNetwork gets the 83 slot everywhere (1013 in HD when 2014 starts), while in Palm Springs Journal has a whole bunch of fun rebranding since their NBC station advertised on cable 6 is now on cable 13, and MyNet on 13 is down to 2. And in Omaha...stick a fork in them, they're 99 on the few homes they have on TWC in that market.
Also according to the TWC site the subchannels were cut out completely as they don't deliver "the most value to our customers". TMJ has effectively killed itself out of the subchannel market with that move as no cable provider carries them; WISN's parent (and the other stations) doesn't do Live Well and Local Accuweather is losing coverage as more stations grab Antenna, Cozi or Me-TV.
If the channel re-alignment gets to Central and Southern Wisconsin,
Some redesign might be needed because TWC actually expanded Game Show Network's station to standard cable. (SD channel 4.) The plan for the new line up will be that all stations would tune to the HD equivalent when selected. (For HD boxes. SD boxes still in the field would tune to the SD channel.)
A lot of customers are not happy with the Auto HD and want TWC to provide an option to turn it off. This is because some divisions, Wisconsin included will only give out those old SA boxes with a paltry 160GB of storage, unless you upgrade to Signature Home or Whole House DVR to get the boxes with more storage. Whole Home customers have 500GB boxes. External Drives also only seem to work on the non-C legacy DVR's with Western Digital being the brand of choice.
Potentially, if Wisconsin goes to this line-up subs with SD boxes would get the SD channel of what was selected and subs with HD would get the HD channel of what is selected. Currently channel 4 in SD is now on TWC channel 2. (Milwaukee and Metro areas.) The HD counterpart for channel 4 goes back to 1004. GSN-SD remains on channel 4 for Standard Service. Channel 219 is also GSN for Digital Variety Package subs with it's HD equivalent at 1219.)
Under a new line up all theme based. I could see Chanel 4 SD coming back and GSN swapping slots with it in Central Wisconsin, moving to channel 2. TWC I think wants to keep GSN on a lower service tier. How do you see this playing out?
Jack
Honestly, though there isn't much NBC I watch anymore, there are some new shows I find tempting for now, so if TWC goes to some oddball channel instead of 4 for channel 4, it will missed down the listing lineup with the other local channels when the realignment occurs with Auto HD. I can remember 1004, but the new channel number assignment is awful if used without 1004.
EDIT: I just found analogue channel WTMJ: It's in never-ever land channel 83!:bang:
With the new alignment, that just won't do as it is way past the other local network channels, so if TWC keeps it that way with Auto HD, no one is going to find it, or at least NOT as easily and this will be even more damaging to WTMJ TV for viewers, what a mess.
TWC: you are not doing the subscriber any favors!