We do. That is what our representatives are supposed to be there for. But these days our voices are a buzzing gnat compared to the rumbling sounds of the bulldozers (corporate lobbyists).
DISH Calls for Retransmission Reform as Raycom Treats Viewers as Negotiation Pawns
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 61
- Views 8K
I like sam_gordon's idea, but I have to add to it. The percentage of rates will have to be tweaked some, because what if Dish and Direct raise their programming rates next year by 5% only due to higher Disney costs (new agreement) and FS1 alone?
The real question is how much more above 5% will dish raise our rates
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem is that it is hard to argue the payment system when more people watch the locals than any single cable channel. If you are paying $5 per month for ESPN when CBS commands a much larger audience, how do you justify not wanting to pay $3 for CBS? The locals are essentially grabbing the money they think they should have considering their audience size.
Ultimately the consumer does have the choice... If the network gets dropped, deal with it for a while and don't go irate demanding to bring the channel back. So they lose the revenue from Dish.. Then the same network has the same thing happen with Direct.. So now the network has lost Dish AND Direct revenue... That's when you start to see the sweat on the network's forehead.
The problem is it's Dish vs. Networks. Direct vs. Networks. Cable Co X vs Networks. It needs to be Providers (backed by consumers) vs. Networks.
The problem is it's Dish vs. Networks. Direct vs. Networks. Cable Co X vs Networks. It needs to be Providers (backed by consumers) vs. Networks.
But who will set the retransmission fees? If there is a flat fee for all then you probably see content quality go away. Why would an ABC/Disney provider pat a ton for content if they were going to be paid the same as "Bob's Watching Paint Dry" channel. And I agree it should be a la carte and bundles. But the providers don't like that because it will show a true picture of what subscribers think of their content.
Last edited:
I can't be applied to "cable type" channels. Tretrans can only be for the "OTA type" of nets.
We don't know but it will have to be one in which there are a large number of people affected and it goes one for an extended time.
The same reason they always have. OTA Networks still draw more viewers than cable channels and hence the networks can charge more for advertising, which is where they get most of their income. They survived for decades on that model until they were allowed to start holding the consumers and video providers hostage with retransmission consent.
What needs to happen is to limit the number of stations that one company can own. We see one company owning so many stations that they hold the other channels hostage in an all or nothing deal. If there is a limit on how many stations that one company can own then they will not be able to do monopolistic practices. If it is required to be in a basic package then it should be required that one company shall own no more than a certain percentage of those stations. This would stop a lot of the nonsense with networks and cable stations.
There were limits. But, even so, look at the big networks, they tend to own NYC, LA, CHI, DFW, HOU, SFO, etc. They do not own many stations but they own all the big ones, so negotiations like with TWC/CBS still affects millions of viewers. Raycom is small potatoes compared to the networks.
Like Charlie said in the 90s, we should be able to watch any channel we want. If I want to watch LA, NY, Chicago, Atlanta, or some other town, why not?
I watched the direct network feeds on C-band in the 80s. Why not that as an alternative too?
If a station wants me to watch, give me a reason to do so. Local news an weather are big ones, but do I need 4 stations for that? Make me want your station and I'll watch it.
I watched the direct network feeds on C-band in the 80s. Why not that as an alternative too?
If a station wants me to watch, give me a reason to do so. Local news an weather are big ones, but do I need 4 stations for that? Make me want your station and I'll watch it.
Perhaps it's not them......but us......
Amen,
:I've been saying this ever since I found out 35 yrs ago how I had to watch commercials and pay exorbitant fees and franchise costs. Told the local cable co. to get lost (Comcast).
I always thought that the the broadcasters wanted higher viewer-ship to be able to charge sponsors more money. Isn't / wasn't
that their business plan, the more watchers the more money?
The only reason I have satellite is because of my inability receive the stupid digital signals.
As far as where we, watchers are concerned, our voice will no more be heard by the FCC than our voice is heard by our Senators and Congresspersons.
Since I just received my newest bill increase I will vote with my dollars and drop the subscription, sorta cutting off my nose to spite my face but I really do feel strongly about this. With the exception of a few shows, TV is just a lot of white noise.
Just one guys rant.:rant:
We could start an on line petition. There is such a site for expressing our opinions. Will look it up if interested.
rAy........
Amen,
:I've been saying this ever since I found out 35 yrs ago how I had to watch commercials and pay exorbitant fees and franchise costs. Told the local cable co. to get lost (Comcast).I always thought that the the broadcasters wanted higher viewer-ship to be able to charge sponsors more money. Isn't / wasn't
that their business plan, the more watchers the more money?
The only reason I have satellite is because of my inability receive the stupid digital signals.
As far as where we, watchers are concerned, our voice will no more be heard by the FCC than our voice is heard by our Senators and Congresspersons.
Since I just received my newest bill increase I will vote with my dollars and drop the subscription, sorta cutting off my nose to spite my face but I really do feel strongly about this. With the exception of a few shows, TV is just a lot of white noise.
Just one guys rant.:rant:
We could start an on line petition. There is such a site for expressing our opinions. Will look it up if interested.
rAy........
Amen,
I always thought that the the broadcasters wanted higher viewer-ship to be able to charge sponsors more money. Isn't / wasn't
that their business plan, the more watchers the more money?
The only reason I have satellite is because of my inability receive the stupid digital signals.
As far as where we, watchers are concerned, our voice will no more be heard by the FCC than our voice is heard by our Senators and Congresspersons.
Since I just received my newest bill increase I will vote with my dollars and drop the subscription, sorta cutting off my nose to spite my face but I really do feel strongly about this. With the exception of a few shows, TV is just a lot of white noise.
Just one guys rant.:rant:
We could start an on line petition. There is such a site for expressing our opinions. Will look it up if interested.
rAy........
If you drop dish and can't get OTA what are you going to do for a source? Are you going to someone else or just completely cutting everything except the net? Seems a bit extreme and a case of I PO so screw me.
