DIRECTV Applauds Time Warner Cable For Fighting Back In Dispute with CBS

[zim2dive]

You think that that's not intentional? I have a bridge.....

Indeed.. divide and conquer.

 

[Teehar]

IMO, "Support" would be that DTV would take their own negotiations to the point of channels going off the air. And that doesn't happen often. This is hollow words until DTV is willing to put its channel lineup where it's mouth is. I can dig up numerous quotes from the members here about how DTV rarely let's it get that far.

Don't you recall the dropping of sponge bob last year?Think they have had enough of the extortion as well.

 

[zim2dive]

Don't you recall the dropping of sponge bob last year?Think they have had enough of the extortion as well.

You can fight it out with Jimbo http://www.satelliteguys.us/threads...asting-(North-Carolina)?p=3028850#post3028850

D* doesn't say they never have disputes, they say they generally get resolved before they get taken off the air .... BIG DIFFERENCE.

 

[Jimbo]

IMO, "Support" would be that DTV would take their own negotiations to the point of channels going off the air. And that doesn't happen often. This is hollow words until DTV is willing to put its channel lineup where it's mouth is. I can dig up numerous quotes from the members here about how DTV rarely let's it get that far.

The object is to negotiate WITHOUT losing channels.
D* has been pretty good at that.

 

[Teehar]

The object is to negotiate WITHOUT losing channels.
D* has been pretty good at that.

I however notice a trend with DTV,the viacom dispute last year,no pac 12,no deal with Fox sports 1.Add to that,they are applauding TWC pulling CBS.The line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere.

 

[TheTechGuru]

I personally don't think there should be fees to rebroadcast OTA signals as long as the signal is not altered in any way (no inserted commercials).

 

[Hall]

I personally don't think there should be fees to rebroadcast OTA signals as long as the signal is not altered in any way (no inserted commercials).

For many people, they won't do the setup to receive OTA channels. In that case, Dish, DirecTV, cablecos are providing a service and can be compensated for that. A lot - the vast majority, in fact, considering OTA viewing rates are estimated to be between 10 and 15% - have no interest in setting up an antenna and wiring their TV(s) (in some cases, multiple TVs).

 

[TheTechGuru]

For many people, they won't do the setup to receive OTA channels. In that case, Dish, DirecTV, cablecos are providing a service and can be compensated for that. A lot - the vast majority, in fact, considering OTA viewing rates are estimated to be between 10 and 15% - have no interest in setting up an antenna and wiring their TV(s) (in some cases, multiple TVs).

I never said they should not charge for them, but why should the channel get a cut of it? The channel don't get a cut when a contractor installs a OTA setup for someone.

 

[wabbleknee]

I personally don't think there should be fees to rebroadcast OTA signals as long as the signal is not altered in any way (no inserted commercials).

Not only that, the OTA stations should share with the cable company the fee they receive for commercials. How many cable customers buy what they see on the commercials?? Cable is increasing their exposure. (same for Sat companies of course) M2cents

 

[Hall]

I never said they should not charge for them, but why should the channel get a cut of it? The channel don't get a cut when a contractor installs a OTA setup for someone.

I am referring to the argument that the stations always use of "why does Dish get to charge customers for stations that they receive for free?". That's not entirely accurate.... Dish had to build facilities that receive these signals and transmit them to their systems for re-transmission to subscribers.

 

[zim2dive]

The object is to negotiate WITHOUT losing channels.
D* has been pretty good at that.

Good at negotiating.. or good at not losing channels? Those are not the same thing.