• Welcome to Milwaukee HDTV User Group. Please login or sign up.
 
Sunday Aug 09, 2020, 04:31:17 am

News:

If your having any issues logging in, please email admin@milwaukeehdtv.org with your user name, and we'll get you fixed up!


Time Warner/TM4 carriage dispute

Started by mrschimpf, Monday Jun 24, 2013, 10:58:56 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

mrschimpf

Monday Jun 24, 2013, 10:58:56 pm Last Edit: Monday Jun 24, 2013, 11:21:06 pm by mrschimpf
Time for the fun to begin anew, as Journal and Time Warner Cable have until June 30 to come to new terms 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". Going by Journal's FAQ, they want TWC to go from under 30ยข 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.

REVM1M

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.

PONIES

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.

gparris

Wednesday Jun 26, 2013, 08:00:13 am #3 Last Edit: Wednesday Jun 26, 2013, 08:02:54 am by gparris
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.

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.

ArgMeMatey

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?

Jack 1000

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
Cisco 9865 DVR with Navigator Guide

grenier

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
Cisco 8640HDC

ddeerrff

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*.

Jack 1000

Cisco 9865 DVR with Navigator Guide

budda

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. ;)

REVM1M

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.

budda

Because it's funny.:rolleyes:

REVM1M

Quote from: budda;59417because it's funny.:rolleyes:

not funny at all!!!

PONIES