Fox v. Cablevision: STAGGERING increases!

[beachrider]

Some interesting possiblities:
- Isn't the price for basic-cable limited? Will CV have to lose-money on basic-cable under Fox-proposed costs?
- Can CV offer programming without high-cost channels? I know that basic-cable is a way of diluting costly-contracts over the entire user-community.
- Please understand that, in CT, CV continues to feature New Haven - 8 and New Haven -59 with all of the Fox-5 and Fox-9 programming

[beachrider]

One little correction, I should have said Hartford-61 and New Haven 59. CV added New Haven 8 a year ago when ABC went through a similar issue and was ready to pull ESPN and NYC 7.

[Scott Greczkowski]

Cablevision and FOX have reached a deal.

[Willh699]

and the funny thing is, Fox and Cablevision made a deal a day after Dish and Fox agreed to a new deal, something tells me Fox was hurting more by the two disputes alone.

[meStevo]

and the funny thing is, Fox and Cablevision made a deal a day after Dish and Fox agreed to a new deal, something tells me Fox was hurting more by the two disputes alone.

Except that Cabelvision paid what Fox was asking, per their PR after it was official. That points the assumptions the other way for objective folk... It's likely Dish caved too but isn't going to throw a fit in their press release to save some face and try and get this bad press behind them.

Sent from my Moto Droid using Tapatalk

[navychop]

If Dish caved and paid such outrageous fees, we will see REALLY big increases next time around, as other providers follow suit. How many of us might get priced out of pay TV, paying large increases caused by programming we don't even watch?

[beachrider]

I am in CT, where Hartford 61 and New Haven 59 can displace FOX-5 and FOX-9. Hopefully, they didn't make us pay for the new OTA costs.