Charter St. Louis: No Cbs

[dantheman77]

just opening the mail. have a letter from charter. cbs local wants to charge for there HD signal, charter dont want to pay. so now we have no cbs HD and we never had abc HD. i need to look into OTA. damn

 

[jhamps10]

wait a minute, they took off cbs analog????

Good grief, can't the FCC get it's heads out of it's butt and stop this crap! There goes News 4 as number 1 now.

 

[stevenl]

wait a minute, they took off cbs analog????

Good grief, can't the FCC get it's heads out of it's butt and stop this crap! There goes News 4 as number 1 now.

Exactly the FCC needs to jump on this CBS affiliate for wanting to CHARGE people for a FREE service..

 

[dantheman77]

opps!!!! me bad. i ment in HD sorry about that
and i also ment no abc in hd. sorry again, thought u could read my mind....me bad

 

[jhamps10]

well i knew about ABC 30HD's troubles w/charcrap. one word... SINCLAIR!!!

ok, you mean belo's gone to this junk too now, That's the dummest thing I've ever heard.

 

[stevenl]

I dont understand a station that makes MILLIONS on ad revenue would want to also charge its viewers to even watch the station..

 

[dantheman77]

well i knew about ABC 30HD's troubles w/charcrap. one word... SINCLAIR!!!

ok, you mean belo's gone to this junk too now, That's the dummest thing I've ever heard.

yes, it said BELO in the letter i got. what is BELO? never herd of them,

 

[jhamps10]

BELO owns KMOV channel 4, and it is not just a KMOV situation, they are doing this to ALL of their stations nationwide.

 

[dantheman77]

ok thanks, i dont like belo!! whats the super bowl on?? hope its fox

 

[stevenl]

ok thanks, i dont like belo!! whats the super bowl on?? hope its fox

CBS =\

 

[HDTVFanAtic]

Exactly the FCC needs to jump on this CBS affiliate for wanting to CHARGE people for a FREE service..

Perhaps if Charter will wire every home in their Service area and offer them free service of the free OTA stations, I would agree with you, otherwise, your argument holds no water.

I dont understand a station that makes MILLIONS on ad revenue would want to also charge its viewers to even watch the station..

I can't imagine why a cable company that makes MILLIONS on sub revenue would not want to pay to get subs the programming that is the most watched would risk that by not obtaining the programming that subs watch THE MOST.

 

[stevenl]

Perhaps if Charter will wire every home in their Service area and offer them free service of the free OTA stations, I would agree with you, otherwise, your argument holds no water.



I can't imagine why a cable company that makes MILLIONS on sub revenue would not want to pay to get subs the programming that is the most watched would risk that by not obtaining the programming that subs watch THE MOST.

Every House is already capable of getting those OTA channels.. Buy yourself some rabbit ears.. (The fee you pay charter is for them to provide you with that channel at a MUCH better quality.. Digital in some areas -with digital simulcast-) Gives you a better quality to those people who are to far from the Broadcast towers.. if not for cable many of these networks wouldnt be watchable by some consumers because of where the broadcast tower is.. Cable has done nothing but HELP the networks, compete with other cable channels..

I dont understand that last statement, Cable will allow CBS to be put on its network, it just doesnt want to pay for it. Why should the charter raise its prices because the local CBS affil wants to be greedy and cahrge for something people can get with an ANT free? If anything charter by putting CBS on its cable network HELPS cbs more then CBS helps charter... Imagine how many people are watching CBS now that they arent on charter.... I bet their ad revenue just went to hell because they lost however many THOUSANDS (possible hundreds-thousands) who no longer watch CBS because they dont want to use an ANT...

 

[dantheman77]

guys i need to point out again you can get cbs on charter, you cant get cbs

HD it the same fro abc. no HD im talking charter st louis. the timing of belo (owner of local cbs station) asking for fees suck. the super bowl in 4 wekks on cbs. i think thats why they are asking now! damn last years SB on abc, no HD and looks the same for this year!

 

[stevenl]

Ya that does seem like a likely reason for CBS to do that... They need to get back the BILLIONS invested in NFL some how..


CBS-HD is also a FREE channel Availible OTA...

 

[jhamps10]

stevenl it is not ALL CBS stations, it is just any station owned by this brodcasting company. And furthermore, not everyone does have access to the channel OTA. just ask anyone who lives in the mountains just southwest of st. louis, in fact just just southwest of town you can't even pick up fm radio.

 

[HDTVFanAtic]

Every House is already capable of getting those OTA channels.. Buy yourself some rabbit ears.. (The fee you pay charter is for them to provide you with that channel at a MUCH better quality.. Digital in some areas -with digital simulcast-) Gives you a better quality to those people who are to far from the Broadcast towers.. if not for cable many of these networks wouldnt be watchable by some consumers because of where the broadcast tower is.. Cable has done nothing but HELP the networks, compete with other cable channels..

I dont understand that last statement, Cable will allow CBS to be put on its network, it just doesnt want to pay for it. Why should the charter raise its prices because the local CBS affil wants to be greedy and cahrge for something people can get with an ANT free? If anything charter by putting CBS on its cable network HELPS cbs more then CBS helps charter... Imagine how many people are watching CBS now that they arent on charter.... I bet their ad revenue just went to hell because they lost however many THOUSANDS (possible hundreds-thousands) who no longer watch CBS because they dont want to use an ANT...

Yes, people can put up rabbit ears and get the signal for free.

So, cable says they do not charge for those channels - yet they will charge you for them in basic service - so the answer is BS - it added profit for the cableco.

Thus, if the cable company wants to make money on it, they need to pay for the copyrighted programming they are making money on - and that belongs to the local stations - so its pay the piper or don't carry it.

Cable also uses public right of ways to deliever its system. Do I get money because a cable system has cable under my yard? Maybe I should just keep cutting that line as its on my property?

Again, if cable wants to get OTA for Free, they should give OTA to everyone in their market for free whether they sub or not - as a condition for using the public right of way with their lines.

Otherwise, all the other arguements don't hold water on an apples to apples comparison.

(And if you think there ad revenue went to hell you need to read the Sinclair thread on AVS as its is spelled out that it doesn't work that way at all.)

 

[stevenl]

stevenl it is not ALL CBS stations, it is just any station owned by this brodcasting company. And furthermore, not everyone does have access to the channel OTA. just ask anyone who lives in the mountains just southwest of st. louis, in fact just just southwest of town you can't even pick up fm radio.

Thats my point. Why would that CBS affiliate want to charge for access to their station when the cable company HELPS it reach many more customers then it ever would reach on its on.. If anything CBS benefits more from the deal then charter..

 

[stevenl]

Yes, people can put up rabbit ears and get the signal for free.

So, cable says they do not charge for those channels - yet they will charge you for them in basic service - so the answer is BS - it added profit for the cableco.

Thus, if the cable company wants to make money on it, they need to pay for the copyrighted programming they are making money on - and that belongs to the local stations - so its pay the piper or don't carry it.

Cable also uses public right of ways to deliever its system. Do I get money because a cable system has cable under my yard? Maybe I should just keep cutting that line as its on my property?

Again, if cable wants to get OTA for Free, they should give OTA to everyone in their market for free whether they sub or not - as a condition for using the public right of way with their lines.

Otherwise, all the other arguements don't hold water on an apples to apples comparison.

(And if you think there ad revenue went to hell you need to read the Sinclair thread on AVS as its is spelled out that it doesn't work that way at all.)

Cable doesnt charge you in their "most basic ANT type service" for the channels. They charge you for the following items:
1. Running the cables to your house, maintianing the cables to your house.
2. Operating the network, all the equipment it takes to process the OTA signal and modulate it so you can see it.
3. To setup your account and maintain your billing, pay for the call center incase you have problems, pay for the tech incase you have problems.

at what avg 15-20/month they charge for a 10-20 channel lineup depending on the cable company that seems very reasonable..

Cable does use public right of ways.. They also pay a nice amount of money for that right. You ever look at your cable bill? ad see all those extra taxes you get charged? All that money goes to uncle sam.. The local goverments YOUR local goverments get a nice amount of money from the cable company..

and the cables arent in your yard.. Their in the goverments property.. You may own it but you dont own it.. if that makes sense..

and umm you might want to check those facts again, their is also a thread here on satguys, about another company doing the same thing, and the fox station cut its ad rates by 30-40% when mediacom stopped carrying them and the CW.. and the analysts were saying that wasnt even low enough..

 

[dantheman77]

Thats my point. Why would that CBS affiliate want to charge for access to their station when the cable company HELPS it reach many more customers then it ever would reach on its on.. If anything CBS benefits more from the deal then charter..

WELL THATS WHAT THEY ARE DOING, CBS AND ABC IN ST LOUIS WILL NOT ALLOW CHARTER TO BROADCAST ITS SIGNAL IN HD. WHY DO YOU THINK THEY ARE DOING THIS?

 

[stevenl]

WELL THATS WHAT THEY ARE DOING, CBS AND ABC IN ST LOUIS WILL NOT ALLOW CHARTER TO BROADCAST ITS SIGNAL IN HD. WHY DO YOU THINK THEY ARE DOING THIS?

chill pill... Thats what we have been talking about, and as i said its because THEY want more money. They are greedy.. They want GURATEED income.. they dont want to relay on the ol "lets make good tv shows so we can get advertisers" they just want easy money