Yet there are other areas of Maryland (Cumberland or Oakland) and elsewhere that have few or none. What are they to do?Here in MD/ DC metro area i scan in about 52 OTA channels.
I disagree. The affiliates need the network programming. The nets do not nee the affiliates.OTA is not going anywhere all this BS is just the NAB trying to get more and more out of retrans. If OTA is going out the door, you need to let the folks at Sinclair, Media General, Gray, and Tribune know, they have spent billions on acquisitions and mergers in the past year.
The networks are not going away from the affiliate model either, they still need the local stations, folks are used to finding ABC on channel X, CBS on channel Y, etc... They won't just follow the shows to a strictly cable only CBS for instance, they will follow that channel. The local presence and content is what makes "network" TV special and still able to garner as much of an audience as it does. Not to mention the ad dollars they would loose. If CBS were just a "cable" network, it would just be another FX, USA, A&E, AMC, etc...
Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!
Both CBS and FOX had mentioned doing this type thing if the Aereo Lawsuit went against them. I am sure that they still might be thinking about doing this.I don't see OTA going away as the local affiliates will fight it, but I do see the Big 4 pulling their content and moving it online or to subscription only. Network programming is highly rated, but doesn't even account for 50% of what most local affiliates broadcast.
I disagree. The affiliates need the network programming. The nets do not nee the affiliates.
The nets can simply take their programming and put it on pay tv only. It is virtually that way now.
I believe all major sporting events seen on OTA networks will go pay per view.
The network/affiliate system is a dinosaur. So is the concept of a designated market area.
The networks are in an advantageous position that a regular cable network is not in. In a situation such as the analogy I presented rather than being pulled from 25 million homes at one time, CBS might be pulled from just 2 million of those[.]
I would argue that the ad revenue would be higher for CBS because right now the affiliates are only passing on a contractually required share of it. If CBS went national cable, they wouldn't have to share the revenue with all the affiliates, they could keep it all for themselves.Not to mention the revenue that the networks get from those affiliate stations.
I thought networks sold their own ads and collected their own money from them. Locals sold their ads and collected the money. Aside from affiliates paying the networks to be affiliates, I don't think locals pay anything to the nets. Granted, networks would then own 100% of the ad time instead of sharing the ad time with the locals. Is that what you're talking about?The opposite could be argued. Think of CBS' bargaining power if all of Comcast, DirectTV, or Dish's subs all lost CBS at once and reacted. If the reaction for Dish with AMC or Direct with Viacom were big, image everyone losing CBS. Basically a nightmare.
I would argue that the ad revenue would be higher for CBS because right now the affiliates are only passing on a contractually required share of it. If CBS went national cable, they wouldn't have to share the revenue with all the affiliates, they could keep it all for themselves.
On second though, don't pull the plug! You see all the **** you caused by doing that? ROFLMAOBetween the high prices, the lack of interesting programming and being switched to the Eastern Arc, where Dish Techs could not find a way to keep my signal going out every time it rained moderately, I called and cancelled my account today.
I just do not watch enough television to justify the cost and aggravation. Overall it has been an enjoyable 11 years DISH and even with retention specialists offer of $50 a month off my AT200 package, I stuck to my guns and had them pull the plug.