Another thing what about antenna tv its the owners is Tribune they carry cubs games also.
Dan Rose
Dan Rose
Tribune stations gone?
- Thread starter cts33fan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 141
- Views 13K
- Status
What if it is the other way around, the stations WANT a super station package on DirecTV like Dish has so they can make even MORE money in subscription fees and advertising dollars.
I am still dreaming in HD
I am not sure that the stations make all that much off superstation carriage. Most of the ads are local and the added viewers are outside the market area and don't mean much to advertisers.
back in the day (when they carried baseball and other sports)) they made a ton of money on the ads but now a days you are very much correct..not to mention stations such as WPIX and WOR were very popular in places such as upstate New York because there were very few independent stations around
some people people hear have Canada dishs and get WGN 9 that has more sports then WGN AM.
I am still using an HR20 so my DVR has a built in OTA tuner. I sill have my indoor antenna hooked up to it and I can receive every local and local sub channel. If they do drop it and I want to watch KTLA, I can still do so with an OTA antenna.
I wonder if such tactics backfire.
Maybe D* could offer a free set top antenna to those that want it, and come out ahead. Yes, I know that won't work for some.
Maybe D* could offer a free set top antenna to those that want it, and come out ahead. Yes, I know that won't work for some.
Around here that is a fairly standard tactic. Whenever there is a programming dispute the Washington Post (which is not owned by any of the parties) has ads run by Comcast and/or Cox castigating the provider that is going through the dispute. We also see ads paid for by the individual stations. We hada particularly nasty disoute around Jan 1 2000 when Fox and Cox got intoa dispute.
If WGN gets pulled I wont care until the 5th when its Cubs Opening Day. Always fun to see Opening day from the various parks
It is technically Tribune withdrawing consent for DirecTv to carry their stations. I have never understood the idea that a broadcaster would allow their coverage area to be reduced for any reason. The broadcaster's primary income has always been and continues to be advertising. The cost of the advertising to the advertiser is in direct relationship to the number of eyes and ears that are exposed to that advertising. I am in complete agreement that the TV distributor, DirecTv in this case, stand their ground and allow the broadcaster's consent to be withdrawn as it will ultimately be the broadcaster that will suffer the most financial damage. Tribune, which just recently emerged from bankruptcy as well, is just plain stupid for allowing things to get to this point. The corporate IQ drops even more if they withdraw their consent to DirecTv to carry their stations come Sunday Morning.
Just another argument for ala carte programming. If they offered the tribune stations as a package, I wonder how much anyone would be willing to pay for them? I know my bid would be 0. In fact, I would demand payment for watching the CW.
I read that they owe $13 billion to creditors. They also have spent $233 million dollars on lawyers and advisers since filing for bankruptcy protection back in Dec 2008.
I bet Hartenstein wants to work out a deal. I mean he started DirecTV and was the chairman for 10 years. It is Nils Larsen and Sam Zell that don't.
I saw this in an article
"During his tenure, Hartenstein also led the regulatory push to change U.S. law to allow local broadcast stations to be rebroadcast into their markets over direct broadcast satellite and, through DirecTV"
Thought that was kind of funny. Here is the guy who is the reason local channels are on satellite and now he is the CEO of a company threatening to pull their channels if they don't get a certain amount.
BTW I get effected by this the most I will be losing two channels.
I bet Hartenstein wants to work out a deal. I mean he started DirecTV and was the chairman for 10 years. It is Nils Larsen and Sam Zell that don't.
I saw this in an article
"During his tenure, Hartenstein also led the regulatory push to change U.S. law to allow local broadcast stations to be rebroadcast into their markets over direct broadcast satellite and, through DirecTV"
Thought that was kind of funny. Here is the guy who is the reason local channels are on satellite and now he is the CEO of a company threatening to pull their channels if they don't get a certain amount.
BTW I get effected by this the most I will be losing two channels.
Last edited:
- Status
