Uplink Activity 12/11/08 7:00 PM ET 19 changes Young GONE

[mperdue]

...Personally, I would be more concerned about ALL SUBSCRIBERS having to shell-out $2-$3 for the the ESPN channels, even those who do not watch sports. Does this make any sense?

It makes no sense whatsoever. I'm an advocate of ala carte pricing so I can decide what I'm going to pay for. The content providers don't want it because it will kill their cash cow.

Mario

 

[TNGTony]

Looks like Time-Warner and WKRC (CBS) 12 are having a row in Cincinnati. TWC has warned us that WKRC will be removed on New Year's Eve exactly when the ball drops on times square if a deal isn't reached.

Except the costs associated with producing some of the most populars shows on television, along with local news, sports, etc.

Yadda, yadda, yadda!

This would be a great argument if the station werent providing the exact same program to anyone in the area with a rabbit ear antenna FOR FREE

I know the argument is that the cable and satellite companies are making money off the backs of the stations, but without the cable and satellite companies the station's potential audience would be smaller too. The question now becomes what is fair compensation. IMHO, any station that wishes to charge a single penny to anyone for ANY rebroadcasting of their signal WITHIN their DMA should have their license immediately yanked! You don't want to provide your signal to unserved viewers, you don't get to broadcast PERIOD!

See ya
Tony

 

[Charise]

I know the argument is that the cable and satellite companies are making money off the backs of the stations, but without the cable and satellite companies the station's potential audience would be smaller too. The question now becomes what is fair compensation. IMHO, any station that wishes to charge a single penny to anyone for ANY rebroadcasting of their signal WITHIN their DMA should have their license immediately yanked! You don't want to provide your signal to unserved viewers, you don't get to broadcast PERIOD!

Exactly! If no one else is allowed to broadcast a particular network signal (say NBC for example) into that DMA, then the NBC station there had better do everything it can to get its signal to people stuck in that DMA, including allowing retransmission via satellite and cable.

If the stations don't want to make their broadcasts available, then distant networks must be allowed. Of course, that's logical, so no government agency would agree.

 

[Jason Kragt]

I say give em the 30 cents per subscriber.

Another thing to keep in mind is that 30 cents can buy more than seven shares of Young broadcasting stock! Young is not a healthy company. Now is not a good time for them to be picking fights.

Michigan Radio & TV Buzzboard :: View topic - Young Broadcasting in Danger of Being Delisted by NASDAQ

 

[kstuart]

Except the costs associated with producing some of the most populars shows on television, along with local news, sports, etc.

Some have poked holes in this argument by mentioning that the channels are available for Free via OTA. They also forgot to mention that the OTA bandwidth is provided to them for free by the government. So, these are licensed public utilitieis, not free-market competitors.

But, more importantly, these channels use their license as a club to prevent viewers from seeing any other affiliate of that network. Some local affiliates are only going to be forced to go stereo for the first time in February by the mandated digital transition. But they still won't allow viewers to watch HD 6 channel broadcasts of another channel showing the same program.

Because of that prohibition, national TV providers must provide 200 different affiliates showing the same programming.

In contrast, the "cable" channels that you are disparaging, only require one uplink for everyone in the country. That's a massive savings for the national TV providers (Dish and DirecTV), so it is all the more outrageous that the local channels want to charge us for using their federally-licensed club against us.

 

[tomcrown1]

KRON IS GONE HURRARY!! I hope Young goes bye bye real soon.

 

[dishcomm]

Great, can we get Voom back with all the free space? I hope you Voom haters lost your locals........doesn't feel so great does it?

So did someone break your crayons?
Voom haters...Jeez. No satellite proivider is handling "Voom"....It's a dead issue. Move on, please...

 

[dishcomm]

The only thing more pathetic than the people still obsessed with Voom are the people who are obsessed with the people who are still obsessed with Voom.

sounds like the credits at the end of Holy Grail....Those who are responsible have been sacked. Those responsible for sacking those who have been sacked have also been sacked.
Anyway. V##m issue is done.

 

[dishcomm]

Looks like Time-Warner and WKRC (CBS) 12 are having a row in Cincinnati. TWC has warned us that WKRC will be removed on New Year's Eve exactly when the ball drops on times square if a deal isn't reached.



Yadda, yadda, yadda!

This would be a great argument if the station werent providing the exact same program to anyone in the area with a rabbit ear antenna FOR FREE

I know the argument is that the cable and satellite companies are making money off the backs of the stations, but without the cable and satellite companies the station's potential audience would be smaller too. The question now becomes what is fair compensation. IMHO, any station that wishes to charge a single penny to anyone for ANY rebroadcasting of their signal WITHIN their DMA should have their license immediately yanked! You don't want to provide your signal to unserved viewers, you don't get to broadcast PERIOD!

See ya
Tony

Could not have said it better..I'll further this.. If I am willing to pay for say a distant local, I should be able to view it. I can read a newspaper on the web from anywhere in the world. I can listen to thousands of radio stations on the web....But tv....oh no you don't, mr......In the not too distant future we'll be seeing all content, tv and radio on the internet.
I think that this ridiculous notion of bundling is what is restricting the expansion of DBS. And cable for that matter. The general consensus is that people do nopt like haviong to buy channels they do not nor will they ever watch. People want ot pick the servioces they wasnt to watch and pay only for those.
From my own view, I am unsympathetic to those who work for these rinky dink niche channels such as QVC.

 

[long_time_DNC]

Ala carte would be great, but it'll never happen with Dish, Directv or cable. They wouldn't make enough money to survive.

However, under present conditions, the internet doesn't have the bandwidth to handle millions of people streaming tv, movies (all in HD of course) and radio. Eventually, it'll get there, but I see that being at least 3-5 years off...

 

[Stargazer]

I bet this won't help Young stock but I can imagine that Dish Network is also going to have an even larger net subscriber loss than what they have been as a result of this.

Yep, IPTV is the waive of the future, while those out in the boonies are back to basics, satellite.

 

[dodge]

That's it entirely. More viewers = more ad revenue.

In any given local TV broadcast market you'll have a pretty significant number of people who can't receive a particular local TV channel very well at all over the air, or they just can't receive the signal at all period. Viewers often have to resort to cable or satellite in order to get the local TV station with a clear signal or any signal at all. If they don't get the channels that way they just won't be watching those channels at all. Lower viewer ratings.

I'd like to know how Young Broadcasting is computing that "1¢ per day" rate. Is that 1¢ for every Dish Network customer nationwide, or just 1¢ per day from E* subscribers in a local TV station's viewing market? I have a nasty feeling it's the former rather than the latter.

I'd really be interested into how many people in a DMA cannot receive their local stations ota. I had people complain about their analog signal on their antenna and they switched to cable or a sat provider. I ve gone over to theri house and checked out the analog and it was fine. Everywhere I have traveled I always take a portable tv and always get the big 4 networks. I do understand most people no longer have a rooftop antenna because they were ignorant and removed it from their house.

 

[dishcomm]

Ala carte would be great, but it'll never happen with Dish, Directv or cable. They wouldn't make enough money to survive.

However, under present conditions, the internet doesn't have the bandwidth to handle millions of people streaming tv, movies (all in HD of course) and radio. Eventually, it'll get there, but I see that being at least 3-5 years off...

Fiber Optic Cable is the future.....Yes within the next ten years as Fiber networks expand, IPTV will become a force in the marketplace. Eventually satellite and cable tv will take a seat at the back of the bus.

 

[Fitzie]

Most people removed the antenna from their home because it was unsatisfactory to get 2, 3, or 4 channels OTA when they could get 30 or 40 via cable for a few dollars per month, including their locals, with generally (almost always) better signal quality.

The prohibition against imported locals was a serious setback for consumers, though understandable from the standpoint of the local TV stations who were getting their clock cleaned by better programming from local TV stations in nearby cities. The problems that ensued are the usual ones that emanate from a government mandated monopoly: the monopolists can treat their captive customers like dirt, and frequently do.

Regards,
Fitzie

 

[long_time_DNC]

In my particular case, I only watch the locals for news and sports and maybe a show here and there. So, when IPTV comes into it's own, that's likely where I'll be spending most of my time...depending on cost...

 

[dangue]

I do understand most people no longer have a rooftop antenna because they were ignorant and removed it from their house.

Or maybe their new house just didn't come with it? Assuming things and calling people names is not productive.

The house I live in never had an antenna on it's roof. It was built in the 1980s and was wired for cable. I can attest to first hand experience with rabbit ears and an older TV here and it's a miserable experience. Lots of snow in the picture and having to move the antenna around to get a marginal picture each time you change the station is no picnic.

I will say that digital OTA is another matter. It works great most of the time with an indoor antenna. Sometimes to get the local NBC affiliate the indoor antenna has to be adjusted; but nothing bad enough to push me toward buying an outdoor antenna and installing it.

 

[Fitzie]

Fiber Optic Cable is the future.....Yes within the next ten years as Fiber networks expand, IPTV will become a force in the marketplace. Eventually satellite and cable tv will take a seat at the back of the bus.

This could be true, but maybe not. Running fiber optic cable to all major cities will happen soon, but expanding to all locations will take several years, and during that time the satellite and cable providers will be improving their product also. Ultimately, it will probably be possible to have a small, self contained antenna (dish) built into all new homes that will be able to pick up all satellites in the sky and differentiate the signals automatically by subscription status.

The satellite will probably look like a small, multi-faceted 12 inch diameter globe with 2 to 3 inch concentrator panels for pickup. If the satellite companies are smart, they will standardize their signals so that "one globe fits all" will lead to easy multi-sat, multi-provider subscription with some of it a la carte. The connections from such a globe/antenna could be contained in a 1000 line fiber optic cable from the globe to the receiver(s) used by the customer or even to the electrical system of the house. By simply plugging your receiver into your wall socket, you could have immediate access to essentially all channels available in your sky.

The business model would be the major constraint to operationalizing this concept, with companies like Young wanting 30c per subscriber per month for retransmission of their government subsidized monopoly.

Regards,
Fitzie

 

[kb7oeb]

Its not as if the government has gifted a monopoly to a random station to screw with you. Its simple copyright, stations pay the networks for exclusive rights to the network or syndicated programing for their area. No one is forcing content creators to license or sell their content to the broadcast networks. No one is forcing the networks to continue with the affiliate model.

Station have to negotiate a new contract with their networks every couple years, if a station is unreasonable with service providers they will have a hard time getting renewed if they are missing from systems. Usually there is an independent that would jump at the chance for a network affiliation. Back in the 90s one of the big 3 threatened to turn into a cable network when they couldn't get the deal they wanted from the big station groups.

 

[cloudy]

Well if this means Dish will be saving money on one less contract with a company, does that mean that we can expect a price drop in February?? HAAAAA. Sarcasm of course. I don't care how many contracts Dish decides not to re-sign I'm betting on at least a $10 bump this year. Probably $15-20 for HD.

 

[long_time_DNC]

A $15-$20 bump in HD and I'll quite likely drop a premium package to compensate. I already dropped the Superstations package last month...