Dish gets into more retrans kerfuffles, this time with stations in Arizona, Colorado (1 Viewer)

bluegras

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 18, 2008
3,300
1,078
Continuing to push back on what it says are unreasonable price increases for broadcast retransmission licensing, Dish Network has entered into two more impasses with small station owners.

In Fort Collins, Colorado, Montclair Communications, operator of ABC affiliate WZVN-TV, has informed Dish viewers of its channel that it's operating on the satellite TV service on a temporary contract extension through Feb. 7, and that it will go dark on Dish after that if a new deal isn’t made.

Dish gets into more retrans kerfuffles, this time with stations in Arizona, Colorado | FierceCable
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncted

KaptainRandom

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 6, 2013
525
311
mesa az
I appreciate that Dish put together a video explaning that BROADCAST channels are paid advertising revenue based on # of viewers. Dish/Directv/cable increases the BROADCAST channels # of viewers and directly increases the BROASCAST channels advertising income.
If anything, the BROADCAST channels should be cutting a slice of advertising dollars to retransmitters (Dish/Directv/cable).
 

ChadT41

THE BEST THERE HAS EVER BEEN
Pub Member / Supporter
Apr 20, 2014
10,975
4,382
Mesa, Az
To answer the last question on that link... if they are a part of the NaB, then all of them are causing this.
 

comfortably_numb

Dogs have owners, cats have staff
Pub Member / Supporter
Nov 30, 2011
11,555
12,310
Missouri/Kansas
To quote the article:

“Montclair Communications is a small, family business and ABC7 is its only operation,” Montclair said in a statement pitting David against Goliath. “Dish is a media conglomerate headquartered in Colorado with over $15 billion in annual revenue and $1.4 billion in net income, yet it has for years paid Montclair rates that are substantially below market value. We cannot allow Dish to use its size to force Montclair into an unfair deal.”

How I translate that: “Oh boo hoo! That big bad wolf of a company better pay it’s fair share to support our family buisiness! (even though we make plenty of money on ad revenue and Dish already pays us)”
 

ChadT41

THE BEST THERE HAS EVER BEEN
Pub Member / Supporter
Apr 20, 2014
10,975
4,382
Mesa, Az
I haven’t looked at the financials for 2017 at all last year, but let me ask; are the net profits incorrect? Seems too high.
 

comfortably_numb

Dogs have owners, cats have staff
Pub Member / Supporter
Nov 30, 2011
11,555
12,310
Missouri/Kansas
Dish needs to keep driving people towards OTA. Making locals optional with line-item pricing was also a very smart move.

Wish they could tell these stations “Sure, we’ll pay you more, but we’re going to pass those costs right on to the customer, and they are now free to drop your station at-will.”
 

Tampa8

Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,974
7,423
Tampa/Eastern Ct
I do feel a little differently for a small or single channel owner than the bigger ones. DISH can't negotiate based on that though.
 

ChadT41

THE BEST THERE HAS EVER BEEN
Pub Member / Supporter
Apr 20, 2014
10,975
4,382
Mesa, Az
Dish needs to keep driving people towards OTA. Making locals optional with line-item pricing was also a very smart move.

Wish they could tell these stations “Sure, we’ll pay you more, but we’re going to pass those costs right on to the customer, and they are now free to drop your station at-will.”
The only problem there is that they sort of do that(pushing for a more individual line item would likely correct this) but they just raised the rates to $12, and customers in almost every market are complaining about it. So it is not just the showing what is being charged, customers will still feel entitled to get it free.

My best solution has always been, leave the locals grouped like they are now, but show each charge(plus Dish’s cut) so that customers know where the blame truly lies. Take Dish’s formula for profit on locAls, and apply it to all. Something like 20% on top of whatever the cost of each channel actually is(I’m making the number up). That would shake up the entire industry.
 

comfortably_numb

Dogs have owners, cats have staff
Pub Member / Supporter
Nov 30, 2011
11,555
12,310
Missouri/Kansas
The only problem there is that they sort of do that(pushing for a more individual line item would likely correct this) but they just raised the rates to $12, and customers in almost every market are complaining about it. So it is not just the showing what is being charged, customers will still feel entitled to get it free.

My best solution has always been, leave the locals grouped like they are now, but show each charge(plus Dish’s cut) so that customers know where the blame truly lies. Take Dish’s formula for profit on locAls, and apply it to all. Something like 20% on top of whatever the cost of each channel actually is(I’m making the number up). That would shake up the entire industry.

I’d like to see market-based pricing instead of a flat $12... if it costs $8 to carry St Louis, then charge $8 there.. if it costs $15 to carry LA, then charge $15 there, and so on..
 
  • Like
Reactions: crodrules

ChadT41

THE BEST THERE HAS EVER BEEN
Pub Member / Supporter
Apr 20, 2014
10,975
4,382
Mesa, Az
But by exposing the broadcasters, customers will finally truly be able to see the cost. That’s what I meant by shake up the industry. It would put a la carte one step closer(and I am not even a fan of a la carte.) Force people to see what they are actually being charged. Will disrupt the broadcasters blackout ploy, since the guvmint sits on their hands after creating the issue. Capitalism for the biggest win.
 

comfortably_numb

Dogs have owners, cats have staff
Pub Member / Supporter
Nov 30, 2011
11,555
12,310
Missouri/Kansas
But by exposing the broadcasters, customers will finally truly be able to see the cost. That’s what I meant by shake up the industry. It would put a la carte one step closer(and I am not even a fan of a la carte.) Force people to see what they are actually being charged. Will disrupt the broadcasters blackout ploy, since the guvmint sits on their hands after creating the issue. Capitalism for the biggest win.

Amen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeD-C05

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,207
1,002
Lexington, ky
I'd still like someone to explain why there isn't a set charge per network no matter where in the country you are. Why should New York City (for example) get more money per subscriber than Boise, Idaho. Yes, the station in NYC has more viewers, but that shouldn't change the cost/subscriber.

That being said, Dish has negotiated a ton of these. They know what the going rate is for one of the "Big 4". Anyone who thinks Dish isn't spinning the story to fit their message is naive. And yes, the stations are spinning their facts too.

And the networks are charging the affiliates a portion of the retrans fees. I'm not sure if it's a percentage or a fixed amount. No big deal, that's the price of doing business, right? Well, the price of Dish doing business with locals is paying retrans fees.

Last but not least, all cable/sat cos need the Big 4. If an MVPD permanently dropped a Big 4, you'd see a larger exodus than what you have now.

No, I don't think the amount MVPDs pay locals should be transparent... unless you also make transparent how much gas stations pay for gas, supermarkets pay for a gallon of milk, bars pay for beer, etc.

I do think there are steps that can be done to prevent blackouts (3rd party binding arbitration, fixed cost based on ratings, etc). I think both sides are to blame.
 

ChadT41

THE BEST THERE HAS EVER BEEN
Pub Member / Supporter
Apr 20, 2014
10,975
4,382
Mesa, Az
This is an argument that is older than this site, and I don’t think will ever be settled. The difference in all of those situations is the sheer volume of competition. Right now, we have a dual monopolistic competition. It’s currently a crappy system that is built on government regulations and no one to be able to stand up to.
 

ncted

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,177
3,480
Durham, NC
Last but not least, all cable/sat cos need the Big 4. If an MVPD permanently dropped a Big 4, you'd see a larger exodus than what you have now.


I do think there are steps that can be done to prevent blackouts (3rd party binding arbitration, fixed cost based on ratings, etc). I think both sides are to blame.

I also agree that there is blame on both sides, but I still think it is about 90% the fault of the station owners in many cases. The greed on their part is ridiculous. That said, it isn't always what is going on. When U-verse lost NBC and FOX for an extended period in 2017 in my market, the exodus to DirecTV, etc. was enormous. Of course, this played right into AT&T's hands, since that is what they wanted anyway.

The same NBC and FOX stations that U-verse lost for a time renewed their contract with Dish without a public fight.
 

ChadT41

THE BEST THERE HAS EVER BEEN
Pub Member / Supporter
Apr 20, 2014
10,975
4,382
Mesa, Az
Even though Northwest admitted to a deadline of Saturday, weaponizing customers and the super bowl? I fail to see his point.
 

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,207
1,002
Lexington, ky
I also agree that there is blame on both sides, but I still think it is about 90% the fault of the station owners in many cases. The greed on their part is ridiculous.
As I mentioned before, it's not all greed from the station owners.

But, we don't know how much "greed" is in play here. It would be interesting to know how much greed is on Dish's part (charging $12/month for 5(?) channels). I still say Dish is making a profit from the locals charge. But I have no idea how much.
 

NYDutch

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Dec 28, 2013
3,743
5,174
Where our wheels go
As I mentioned before, it's not all greed from the station owners.

But, we don't know how much "greed" is in play here. It would be interesting to know how much greed is on Dish's part (charging $12/month for 5(?) channels). I still say Dish is making a profit from the locals charge. But I have no idea how much.

The infrastructure costs in addition to the retrans fees for the locals are likely much higher than any other programming Dish offers. I certainly hope they're making a profit from the locals charge, just as they should be from all of their programming packages. They are a for profit company after all...
 
  • Like
Reactions: comfortably_numb

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,207
1,002
Lexington, ky
The infrastructure costs in addition to the retrans fees for the locals are likely much higher than any other programming Dish offers. I certainly hope they're making a profit from the locals charge, just as they should be from all of their programming packages. They are a for profit company after all...
As are the locals.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top