• 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

Viacom stations to go dark on Time Warner Cable and Brighthouse

R

robmadden1

Bad news, Time Warner Cable subscribers. The cable carrier notorious for resisting HD expansion until a competitor rolls into town is getting ready to pull all 19 MTV Networks channels (MTV, Nickelodeon, VH1 and Comedy Central just to name a few, presumably including the HD versions). Viacom has just unleashed a scathing announcement that calls the carrier's refusal to pony up "outrageous," and publicly pleads for its bigwigs to reconsider and open up the checkbook. In essence, Viacom is asking for a fee increase of just under $0.25 per month, per subscriber -- which, admittedly, sounds rather high given the lack of MTV-related content that's a) watchable and b) in high-definition -- but TWC is straight-up refusing.

Read the rest here:

http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/12/30/viacom-stations-to-go-dark-on-time-warner-cable/#readercomments

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-viacom31-2008dec31,0,2623602.story

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28440958/
 
Why should I pay more for channels I almost never watch? The only show on their channels I might watch is South Park and that's it.
 
Great. Just great.

First, Time-Warner strong-arms their way into the Los Angeles territory, buying out the territories of other companies and getting city approval, even though local laws against a cable monopoly exist. (READ $)

Then, they go and kick out the NFL Network, which was carried by the company that had my territory's franchise previously.

Next, they start having blackouts at the wackiest times possible. So many story endings, games, and such are missed.

In the 11 years that I've lived at my present address, cable blackouts were never an issue with the three previous franchise holders (Media One, AT&T, Comcast). They were never an issue because they NEVER happened! :mad:

Recently, Time-Warner, skirting around a federal law, quietly, very quietly announced that they are getting rid of the public access channel and production facility come January 1st. The loopholes allowing this to happen were provided by the California State Legislature. The big lobbiest supporting this? Time-Warner Cable. The voice of the "common man" is being silenced by Big Media, at least as far as L.A. is concerned.

Now, they want to wipe out 19 Viacom channels. (sarcasm) Gee, I wonder if they'll want to lower their monthly bill now that they'll be so many fewer channels? :mad:

I can only imagine what Time-Warner's phone & Internet service must be like.

Satellite service is starting to look so much better. Time-Warner keeps giving it all the arguments it needs.

I've had it with Time-Warner's nonsense! :mad:
 
Lucky for Houston, All of my favorite Viacom channels are safe; For the rest of The State of Texas, Every city Time Warner serves are feeling very vulnerable right now. It's time to go to Plan B.
 
This sounds like the same kind of mess that happened with Viacom and Dish Network a few years back. BOTH sides are wrong for not getting this settled before now. It will probably turn out the same way with TW and Bright House turning off the networks for a few days, customers will howl (hopefully at BOTH sides) and something will be worked out where both sides will claim they won, and that could have been done sooner. I won't be surprised if this happens with Charter sooner or later.

I had Dish when this happened before and I can remember my wife was babysitting some kids who asked why Nick was gone and she told them that it had been dropped becauise of the dispute. One kid said "They need to be spanked!!!" ;D Perhaps that's what needs to be done to Viacom, TW, and BH all three, because the're ALL acting like spoiled brats. ::)
 
i only watch one program on one of those channels and is already in reruns, i can go by store or order it from amazon. i read that the head person of viacom has some financial problems that he should get rid of, instead of forcing subscribers to pay more for nothing much on. companies are getting too big and losing it.
fox, viacom , abc/disney , nbc/universal and timer warner owns just about the entire cable channel's
 
RicoGregg said:
Great. Just great.

First, Time-Warner strong-arms their way into the Los Angeles territory, buying out the territories of other companies and getting city approval, even though local laws against a cable monopoly exist. (READ $)

Then, they go and kick out the NFL Network, which was carried by the company that had my territory's franchise previously.

Next, they start having blackouts at the wackiest times possible. So many story endings, games, and such are missed.

In the 11 years that I've lived at my present address, cable blackouts were never an issue with the three previous franchise holders (Media One, AT&T, Comcast). They were never an issue because they NEVER happened! :mad:

Recently, Time-Warner, skirting around a federal law, quietly, very quietly announced that they are getting rid of the public access channel and production facility come January 1st. The loopholes allowing this to happen were provided by the California State Legislature. The big lobbiest supporting this? Time-Warner Cable. The voice of the "common man" is being silenced by Big Media, at least as far as L.A. is concerned.

Now, they want to wipe out 19 Viacom channels. (sarcasm) Gee, I wonder if they'll want to lower their monthly bill now that they'll be so many fewer channels? :mad:

I can only imagine what Time-Warner's phone & Internet service must be like.

Satellite service is starting to look so much better. Time-Warner keeps giving it all the arguments it needs.

I've had it with Time-Warner's nonsense! :mad:
Click to expand...
Having had cable tv in my area in Los Angeles since 1971, with Theta, Group W, Century, Adelphia and Time Warner, they ALL have been horrible. Right now my issue with Time Warner is the digital signal blacking out on certain channels for a few seconds and they have no solution. My area will soon have Fios and I will be forever gone from cable tv.
 
A 25c per month increase for all 20 channels sounds fairly reasonable to me. That would be about 1.1c per channel, or a 2-5% increase from the prior contract -- essentially keeping up with inflation.
 
The notion that Time Warner is taking away the channels is good marketing and completely false. Time Warner cannot legally run the channels if Viacom says no after the contract expires. Viacom could extend the agreement at current terms while negotiating. As is their right, they may choose not to do do, but it doesn't change the fact that they, not Time Warner, are making the decision to pull the plug....in effect, ordering Time Warner not to run the channels.
 
I was wondering if this affects B.E.T. or Showtime-Which by the way is owned by Viacom-The same company that owns MTV. (and its related channels)
 
PTBoardOp94 said:
A 25c per month increase for all 20 channels sounds fairly reasonable to me. That would be about 1.1c per channel, or a 2-5% increase from the prior contract -- essentially keeping up with inflation.
Click to expand...

You're right of course, but this is what big companies do, they purposely break large issues into tiny pieces to reduce the effect and make it seem insignificant.

The better question is WHY the need for the increase at all. Is there anyway the company can cut 25¢ per month salary of the top executives down the line and hold the price stable?

Maybe? Maybe not?

I have the phone company, the Internet, the CTA (Chicago Transit) all crying for more of my money yet none seem to explain WHERE it's going. Am I paying for infrastructure or the bonus of the CEO. And would the CEO leave if no bonus? Would a cheaper CEO be less effective.

See companies rarely answer questions like these
 
Big discussions about that on this base

Who cares about MTV,M2 and VH-1 -- UTTER GARBAGE AND A WASTE OF BANDWIDTH ANYWAY!!!
 
Troy Goodwin said:
I was wondering if this affects B.E.T. or Showtime-Which by the way is owned by Viacom-The same company that owns MTV. (and its related channels)
Click to expand...

Not Showtime -- that's CBS's property now. And personally, even if Viacom still owned Showtime, it would be exempt, as viewers must pay extra for the channel.
 
From what I am reading as comments to blog entries, the hate seems to be directed at Time Warner...they must have caved.

On one blog, those who were spitting mad said they were canceling Time Waner and going with satellite. Most of them had children that watched Nickelodeon or Noggin, and they didn't want to explain to their children that their shows were being pulled (they wanted their TV babysitter - I guess they never heard of PBS). Others didn't want to be without Comedy Central and Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Most trashed MTV for not playing music videos, and could care less if that channel left the air.

There were reports Viacom was going to block Time Warner cable internet users from viewing video on their websites. While net neutrality is gone...such action would lead to an FCC investigation, even though program providers are not regulated unlike cable service providers (see Comcast and BitTorrent).

Both sides went public with the dispute only 24 hours before the deadline. Time Warner set up a website with the help of a marketing and PR firm, and Viacom ran scrolls and took out a full page ad in the New York Times.

Personally...I am with Time Warner on this if they can reduce the cost of the core product (the programming). Reducing operating costs like Comcast and Charter does is another story.

It sounds like Viacom was going to block TW internet users...and people were going to switch to the dish. The cards sound stacked against Time Warner.
 
MTV has alot of nerve demanding more money for the GARBAGE they show!! (I TURNED IT ON A LITTLE WHILE AGO AND 2 OR 3 BLONDES WERE LICKING SOME GUY (TOTALLY DISGUSTING!!))
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom