• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

KOMO 4's Fight with DISH Comes to Radio

R

ronrob

Since Thursday morning (Dec. 18), the DISH network satellite service is not carrying KOMO 4 (and 6 other Fisher stations). They claim Fisher is demanding an 82% increase in carriage fees, and suggest viewers e-mail the station's GM.

Meantime, the GM has recorded some radio spots (which are airing on KOMO 1000 and KVI 570, probably others) claiming Dish is failing to negotiate fairly, and suggesting alternatives like cable and DIRECT TV.

The Channel 4 website has a list of what each network gets paid by DISH, with the assertion that all they want to be paid is somewhat less.

http://www.komonews.com/about/36233819.html
 
I've had to negotiate local TV retrans with DISH before, and it's not fun.

It's great to see Ms. Brown stand up to DISH and hold them to an existing agreement. Unfortunately DISH would probably rather fight in the court of public opinion by sending all the complaints back to KOMO from their call center.
 
Does DISH pay less in retrans fees than DIRECT TV? While the KOMO website showed us the rates for most of the cable networks, it does not show the going rate paid for local stations.

If Dish draws the line lower than what other carriers pay, is that policy reflected in lower charges to the customer? Or is it just Charlie's general policy to be niggardly.

I note EchoStar usually has two or three running fights going over the same cost issue, always claiming they are putting their customers' interests first.
 
Indeed I'm not sure how violating an existing negotiated agreement has their customers interest at heart. Beside that, satellite charges their customers something in the neighborhood of $5.00 per month to receive local channels. Just because DISH is trying to screw the TV stations out of their dime or whatever per subscriber retransmission fee, I'm willing to bet that DISH wont be passing that savings along to their customers anyway.

As to your question about what a local station gets for retransmission, it depends. I do know that broadcasters generally get the short end of the stick per-subscriber as compared with cable programming providers such as Discovery Networks, Scripts, CNN, etc. Typically group-owned stations negotiate for fees based on the group and typically have more leverage than standalone stations. Obviously market size plays a large role in the negotiations, along with number of common network affiliates in the station group; that being several NBC's or ABC's within the group negotiating on behalf of several markets., (except for CW stations because no one cares).
 
Why is this even an issue anyway?  The FCC should just throw out all re-transmission consents anyways for local market stations and make them illegal, for both cable and satellite.  All this does is hurt the average Mr. John Q. Public, who is caught in the crossfire.  Why pay for something that's already free, in a different form?   And as it is, it contridicts FCC regulations, as these stations are "must carry".  So in essence, DISH is breaking the law by not having KOMO on their system but yet they have to pay KOMO to carry their signal (and KUNS's signal as well in the agreement), and the same if this happened to any cable company in the area.  Basically, these carriers are being forced to pay for something, that they have to carry by law anyway. It's like a catch-22 situation.

How long have these re-transmission consent agreements been going on anyways?  The first one i've ever seen was one back when I was in San Diego in the early 1990s, between the local ABC affiliate (KGTV) and one of the cable providers down there.

In the meantime, the good folks at Motorola have developed cable and satellite tuners, which have over-the-air digital tuners built in.   Perhaps this is a good time for Comcast, DISH, and other providers to start rolling those out.  Only problem with those is that it doesn't help people out in rural or "fringe" areas, whom can't get any of those local signals out in those areas.
 
Really it boils down to this.. As was illustrated in the letter on KOMOs website, cable programming suppliers not carried on traditional broadcast TV get X-cents per subscriber in a cable/satellite market. In years past, broadcasters weren't so concerned about also collecting retransmission fees because they received decent compensation fees from the big three networks. Fast forward to the last recession in 99-2002, and networks started discontinuing "network comp" to local affiliated stations.

With the loss of network compensation and more competition, broadcasters look around and say.."Hey, Whatever Cable/Satellite Company is, or will be charging their subscribers to watch our digital channels which include High Definition programming." "Why shouldn't we get some form of compensation just as the cable program suppliers get?" Local TV broadcasters also were facing major facility upgrades totaling millions of dollars per facility to provide government-mandated DTV and HD signals. To add even more complexity, the must carry rule did not, nor still does not include local DTV or HD channels.

Your point about must-carry is valid, insofar as the FCC originally being concerned that cable/satellite companies shouldn't be able to lock out local broadcasters from providing local news and information to those who choose to, or can only watch TV via cable. In the infancy of cable, broadcasters lobbied the FCC to institute the must carry rule because they were concerned, (rightfully so), that cable would take away their local audience.

With cable and satellite penetration approaching 90% in a market like Seattle, broadcasters have taken on the role similar to a cable programming supplier, so it seems only fair that local broadcasters should get at least equal compensation.

Sorry about the long explanation, but as in many battles such as the one it appears Fisher is involved with DISH, there are always two sides to the story.
 
TVradioguru said:
In years past, broadcasters weren't so concerned about also collecting retransmission fees because they received decent compensation fees from the big three networks. Fast forward to the last recession in 99-2002, and networks started discontinuing "network comp" to local affiliated stations.

With the loss of network compensation and more competition, broadcasters look around and say.."Hey, Whatever Cable/Satellite Company is, or will be charging their subscribers to watch our digital channels which include High Definition programming." "Why shouldn't we get some form of compensation just as the cable program suppliers get?" Local TV broadcasters also were facing major facility upgrades totaling millions of dollars per facility to provide government-mandated DTV and HD signals.
Click to expand...

I think the "HD" part is all on their own shoulders. They could have kept shooting everything in 4x3 standard def. and fed it over a digital transmitter forever, as far as I know.

This helps explain why the "big 3" of Canadian broadcasters were so concerned when the CRTC recently ruled they cannot receive these kinds of compensation from cable and satellite providers. It would have helped CBC tremendously I'm sure, and helped Global/Canwest and CTV feel more competitive since they are probably losing those 'compensation dollars' from American networks, too.
 
Dudes I thought this was a "radio" board. Why not take this to a TV board ??? TV is about to face some of the big ole challenges radio has already muddled through. Did the FCC protect local stations from Satellite radio with must carry agreements: NO :mad: Cable and Satellite present a bigger challenge to local TV and the cowboys at the FCC might want to look at what is happening cause it is DISH, Comcast and Direct TV that now rule the world not local and the freakin conversion to digital will make life even worse :p

There we done put enough lipstick on this pig. Let TV deal with TV on a TV Board we got our own problems in radio dudes 8)
 
TakeItFromMe said:
Dudes I thought this was a "radio" board. Why not take this to a TV board ???
Click to expand...

Comcast carries local radio stations on digital channels 964-986. There. Now it's a radio thread.
 
Whatever happened with this dispute, did it get figured out?

I'm not sure who is in the right here, I can see both sides pretty sympathetically, however I do know that over the 4 years that I had service with DISH, they would often get in these contract disputes with companies and play these hardball tactics.  It was often very frustrating as a DISH customer when service would be interrupted.. Somehow Directv doesn't have these issues or interruptions and I'm not really paying that much more now with them than I was with Echostar.

hmm....

and oh - I really like the FM stations on Comcast, its a nice feature that I wish was offered on the satellite networks (although I completely understand why it would never happen). Out here in the sticks FM reception isn't always the best on the home stereo - but I guess if I didn't live in the sticks I could subscribe to Comcast!
 
From what I hear, KOMO-TV is still off Dish. The funny thing is the spot that DirecTV is running on KOMO radio, which invites Dish subscribers to come over to DirecTV who honors their agreements with the local TV stations and has the local ABC programming.
 
Fisher and DISH are still fighting. This means that people with DISH are not seeing KOMO, KATU, or KBCI in their larger markets. My parents weren't bothered by losing KIDK. *scratches head*
 
My brief take -

After hearing the arguments from both sides, I see Dish winning the upperhand.

"Free" TV signals don't mean much to me. I don't want to mess with an antenna, interference and all that and I'm willing to pay a bit for it.

Every day KOMO is off Dish is another day the spots lose out on a huge Dish audience. I watched KOMO more than KIRO and KING put together. But I can catch most network shows online but any local spots on news isn't reaching us. Their loss more than mine ...
 
I see a similar big fight developing between Viacom and Los Angeles-based Time Warner Cable. Twenty cable channels like Comedy Central and MTV could go dark tomorrow if a new carriage deal isn't ironed out. Viacom is asking increases of between 22 and 36%, a little less than the 82% Dish says has been demanded by Fisher.
 
The LA PR war-of-words has escalated to the next level as Viacom trots out Spongebob Bob and Dora the Explorer to explain they're asking Time Warner Cable for less than 25 cents per viewer .. But of course that's for each of the 20 channels in dispute.
 
ronrob said:
I see a similar big fight developing between Viacom and Los Angeles-based Time Warner Cable. Twenty cable channels like Comedy Central and MTV could go dark tomorrow if a new carriage deal isn't ironed out. Viacom is asking increases of between 22 and 36%, a little less than the 82% Dish says has been demanded by Fisher.
Click to expand...

Yes this is going to be an interesting showdown.. I've heard the same battle between Echostar and Fisher stations is occurring on the East Coast involving DirecTV. As is claimed by Fisher, apparently some stations with existing retransmission agreements from 2007-2008 haven't received a dime in already-contracted fees from the satellite folks. The stations are no longer going to be carried on DirecTV as of Jan 1.

It will be interesting to see if a groundswell of other station groups will also opt out of their local AD providers rather than battle it out. If you consider that either DISH or DirecTV account for 20-30% of ADI in a market, the loss could be significant. Of course all this is on the cusp of the big turn-off of analog TV in February, which may cost local markets over-the-air viewership as well.

Stations need to buy billboards and radio time in coop with their local cable company telling viewers to switch to cable, (assuming it isn't Time Warner of course).

As for Echostar's "boo-hoo" claim of 80% increases in retransmission fee increases, they were the ones who agreed and signed the deal too. Just because the economy is sliding, not too mention their recent satellite launch failed and was destroyed before reaching orbit; DISH should still pay. I'm sure if the agreement went the other way, Charlie Ergen would be going after the TV stations aggressively.
 
TVradioguru said:
The funny thing is the spot that DirecTV is running on KOMO radio, which invites Dish subscribers to come over to DirecTV who honors their agreements with the local TV stations and has the local ABC programming.
Click to expand...

Nothing "funny" about that at all. First of all, the spot doesn't directly mention KOMO so most listeners wouldn't even notice. Secondly, it's promoting a competitor to Dish - not Dish itself. Finally - with the economy and spot sales the way they are - why turn down the revenue? Heck, at one time terrestrial stations have run spots for XM and Sirius - talk about promoting your competition!
 
Fisher has just announced a new carriage agreement with Comcast cable, which I imagine serves the vast majority of it's non-off-the-air audience.
 
Fisher today announced a new carriage agreement with Charter Communications, which apparently has cable systems in Seattle, Portland, Yakima and Eugene.
Obviously they are trying to paint Dish Network as the odd guy out.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom