kxan, kbvo, knva

[captex]

yesterday, i was watching one of these channels, when i saw a notice about all 3 channels might not be on time warner cable-austin after 4pm.may31.

 

[fredcantu]

It's contract renewal time between the LIN stations and Time Warner Cable.

 

[mmnassour]

Yea, and the last time it took a bloody month of them being off TWC. Maybe this time they'll have grownups negotiating.

FWIW, TWC is claiming LIN wants a 50% increase.

 

[kinphoenix2]

Yes- and I used to work for TWC, and our call center people would be inundated with customer calls asking the poor phone agents what it's all about- of which they were oblivious (and should be, they weren't at the negotiating table)

these network stations should be sued for costing call centers across the country thousands upon thousands of dollars by causing clueless housewives to phone the centers on the cable providers dime. It doesn't make a dimes difference if the customer is "warned" to "Contact your Cable Provider Now!" In fact, the CATV providers should add the extra cost of manning the phone lines at the table and what the networks cost them in man hours wasted for having to field those nuisance calls all day.

 

[mmnassour]

Nothing personal, you understand, but here we go....

The call center people should be properly prepped with scripts explaining TWC's issue with LIN's demands and TWC's position. If a company is suddenly going to be dropping a product, it needs to be prepared for public reaction, whether you're selling soap...or the Evening News. The times I've had to talk to TWC call center ops during such an episode, they actually seemed grateful that I wasn't calling in about a carriage issue!

If TWC doesn't want adverse public reaction, then it can take LIN's first offer. No? Not likely to happen? Of course. TWC would be crazy to do that and the demands of the TV groups are escalating all the time. But that's the law...TWC has to pay for what it distributes.

I've also noticed that KXAN (and, I assume, all other LIN stations affected) have begun reading a statement saying that TWC cannot carry their signal without a contract "by law", as if LIN had no choice in the matter. Bullshit.

In fact, DirecTV recently announced that it was exploring using existing technology to reinstate OTA tuners in its receivers so it could DROP payments to TV stations entirely, or at least, in part. It wouldn't work for all subs, but would make a difference to DirecTV's bottom line.

I think we're all agreed that the TV market has become so screwed up in regard to local programming that it's pathetic. The providers, such as TWC and Direct, are no long reliable for local programming. But it will be tough to change, as the NAB has friends in very, very high places.

 

[fredcantu]

I'm a fan of antenna TV. It's free and it delivers a great HD picture.
I have Directv but prefer to watch my local stations off the air.

 

[newsmark]

There's plenty of blame to go around, that's for sure. It's time for cable companies to recognize in negotiations that local TV stations (some of them, at least) bring a lot of value and a good chunk of revenue to TV stations. To pretend that my local Big 4 station that also does news, public service programming, etc., is worth nothing, while ESPN is worth $5/month/subscriber or more just doesn't ring true.

On the other hand, SOME ownership groups try to tie carriage of a broadcast station with various cable networks. That's also not fair to the cable company and especially not fair to viewers.

 

[formeraa]

There's plenty of blame to go around, that's for sure. It's time for cable companies to recognize in negotiations that local TV stations (some of them, at least) bring a lot of value and a good chunk of revenue to TV stations. To pretend that my local Big 4 station that also does news, public service programming, etc., is worth nothing, while ESPN is worth $5/month/subscriber or more just doesn't ring true.

Agreed, but then we can't complain when our cable bills go up. Because they still have to pay the $5 to ESPN as well as the money to the local stations. There is no pot of gold here, folks! Most cable companies are operating on relatively thin margins these days.

 

[newsmark]

Sure we can complain! It just won't do much good. Those of us who don't watch a lot of sports can all complain about the $5 for ESPN and fees for all the sports channels that we never watch. Big sports fans probably don't mind so much.

 

[JHBrandt]

... DirecTV recently announced that it was exploring using existing technology to reinstate OTA tuners in its receivers so it could DROP payments to TV stations entirely, or at least, in part. It wouldn't work for all subs, but would make a difference to DirecTV's bottom line.

I assume by "subs" you mean subscribers, not subchannels

But seriously, that's good news. DirecTV's AM21 OTA tuners may be the best thing they offer: a truly integrated OTA tuner that lets the user tune either OTA or satellite channels with equal ease, and see both OTA and satellite schedules on the same guide. And anyone using an AM21 gets their local channels in the best available quality and regardless of carriage issues. It sounds like DirecTV may expand the AM21 concept to all their receivers.

I hope cable operators consider similar technology, although there's a stumbling block. Cable is sometimes the only practical option when someone has a recalcitrant landlord or HOA that doesn't want any "unsightly" outdoor antennas erected. The FCC has a rule to protect people's right to erect their own antennas, but there are still some situations not covered by the FCC's rule, and even when it applies, not everyone wants to start a fight just to put up a TV antenna. So cable will have more non-antenna subscribers than satellite.

Still, I think if they became commonplace, integrated OTA tuners would strengthen the bargaining position of cable and satellite operators in these carriage negotiations.

On the other hand, SOME ownership groups try to tie carriage of a broadcast station with various cable networks. That's also not fair to the cable company and especially not fair to viewers.

Agreed - that's an abuse of carriage negotiations and should be outlawed.

Sure we can complain! It just won't do much good. Thoseof us who don't watch a lot of sportscan all complain about the $5 for ESPN and fees for all the sports channels that we never watch. Big sports fans probably don't mind so much.

Senator John McCain has introduced a bill he calls the "Television Consumer Freedom Act" that would help. It wouldn't outlaw this "bundling," but it would provide incentives for cable companies to "unbundle" their cable packages and offer an "a la carte" option so subscribers could pay only for the channels they want.

 

[mmnassour]

... DirecTV recently announced that it was exploring using existing technology to reinstate OTA tuners in its receivers so it could DROP payments to TV stations entirely, or at least, in part. It wouldn't work for all subs, but would make a difference to DirecTV's bottom line.

I assume by "subs" you mean subscribers, not subchannels

But seriously, that's good news. DirecTV's AM21 OTA tuners may be the best thing they offer: a truly integrated OTA tuner that lets the user tune either OTA or satellite channels with equal ease, and see both OTA and satellite schedules on the same guide. And anyone using an AM21 gets their local channels in the best available quality and regardless of carriage issues. It sounds like DirecTV may expand the AM21 concept to all their receivers.

Ummm....yea...sorry 'bout that. Subs=subSCRIBERS!

Anyway, the DirecTV solution is only a stopgap as its tuner that integrates does NOT scan, it has to be programmed by DirecTV itself. And...wait for it...word on the DirecTV boards is that the guide is already overburdened and they're having trouble squeezing additional locals into it. Dish does have a tuner that scans, but you don't get program info for subchannels!

If either of these wants to cut loose from the local stations, they need to get their OTA act together.....now.