|
Viacom removes 19 channels from Time Warner systems
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 31 December, 2008
Viacom has pulled 19 popular networks from Time Warner Cable systems after a dispute over fees left no resolution.
The conglomerate has been displaying ads on the bottom of the 19 networks explaining how Time Warner is forcing them to pull the stations and is expected to take out full page color ads in the major newspapers explaining the situation.
A few of the affected networks are ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
navi1199
Junior Member
|
31. December 2008 @ 17:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
this is bull... i have time warner! i want the MTV channels back even though i hardly watch tv >=/
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
|
31. December 2008 @ 17:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
I wonder if they will lower my cable bill then. i'll be damned if i'm going to pay the same price when those are the channels i watch the most. My daughter is going to be pissed if she doesn't get her noggin. Greedy bastards!
|
|
mediabob
Member
|
31. December 2008 @ 17:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
just watch tv online. its so much more convinient
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
31. December 2008 @ 18:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
I watch Spike, MTV 1/2, and Comedy Central.
Both sides are blaming each other. I've seen the ad Viacom's been running across the screen, and I've read the info TW posted on their site.
Either way, it doesn't matter. If I lose these channels tonight, I'm done with TW cable. I lost G4 and NGC when they did their last "restructure". So this will be the last straw.
|
|
atomicxl
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
31. December 2008 @ 20:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
I read on another site that this increase would be roughly 25 cents per customer. Aren't cable companies notorious for jacking up the prices by full dollars?
Why are they being such hard asses about a quarter that they could easily pass on to customers and wouldn't even be noticed by them.
|
|
Tecbot
Junior Member
|
1. January 2009 @ 01:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
i hardly watch tv anymore maybe this will make more people stop watching tv too and get off the couch...
|
Senior Member
|
1. January 2009 @ 01:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, an agreement was reached between the two. Guess one wanted more money and the other will charge more money. And who pays....we do!!
|
|
51area
Newbie
|
1. January 2009 @ 02:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
Edited for content that violates forum rules ~ Language
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. January 2009 @ 12:33
|
|
beanos66
Member
|
1. January 2009 @ 05:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ccwdude:
I wonder if they will lower my cable bill then. i'll be damned if i'm going to pay the same price when those are the channels i watch the most. My daughter is going to be pissed if she doesn't get her noggin. Greedy bastards!
When a similar dispute occured between Sky tv (channel supplier)and Virginmedia (cable company) here in the U.K. A lot of people threatened to leave VM and where offered incentives to stay, that included lower prices and extra services.
After almost a year, we got the channels back
|
Member
|
1. January 2009 @ 11:00 |
Link to this message
|
I guess Time Warmer see what its feels like when they bend there customers over like they have for years including secret contracts with apartment complexes to force them to use there service & not Direct TV.
|
Senior Member
|
1. January 2009 @ 11:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
No such luck here in Charlotte, Sponge Bob is still with us, as well as MTV, Spike and the rest. Someone somewhere came to their senses and stopped pouting like children.
|
|
tin23uk
Junior Member
1 product review
|
1. January 2009 @ 12:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
i read something that said in order to make enough money to pay viacom what they are asking, time warner would have to add 19c per month on each of their customers bills.
i say add the 19cents and let their customers continue to have access to viacom channels.
another reason time warner is bitchin and not moving on this is because of viacoms online reruns, time warner feels they should recieve some of the profit that viacom makes from the ads on their web pages that display on demand viacom content.
|
|
noncomjd
Newbie
|
1. January 2009 @ 13:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
I grab 90% of what I watch on line, losing a station big deal, losing cable who cares. You should have only have to pay for what you watch, not a whole lot of junk you don't.
This whole topic is moot anyway...
Time Warner Cable, Viacom Reach Agreement in Principle
Networks Will Continue to Be Available On All Time Warner Cable Systems
NEW YORK, Jan. 1 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Time Warner Cable (NYSE: TWC) and Viacom (NYSE: VIA and VIA.B) jointly announced this morning that they have reached an agreement in principle to renew carriage for Viacom's MTV Networks. The companies expect to finalize the details of the agreement over the next several days.
Glenn Britt, President and CEO of Time Warner Cable said, "We are pleased that our customers will continue to be able to watch the programming they enjoy on MTV Networks. We are sorry they had to endure a day of public disagreement as we worked through this negotiation."
Philippe Dauman, President and CEO of Viacom said, "We've been partners with Time Warner Cable for a long time, and we're happy to be renewing that partnership for the benefit of their customers and our loyal viewers. It's gratifying that we could reach an agreement that benefits not only our audiences but that is also in the best interest of both of our companies."
SOURCE Viacom
-0- 01/01/2009
|
|
georgeluv
Member
1 product review
|
1. January 2009 @ 13:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
viacom owns all the powerhouse cable networks. aside from espn, if viacom wont sell you their package then you cant operate a cable network, period. no household in america will buy your cable package if it doesnt come with nickelodeon, parents NEED nick to shut thier kids up. watch the new dish network ads, they basicly say "we are the cheapest way for you to get nickelodeon, single mothers pay attention".
i want my mtv but i wanted to see time warner tell viacome where to shive it, 25% rate hike? on a down year? when new rating technology has shown that all your networks have poor commercial retention? viacom has lost its mind. basicly im just bitter that mtv is garbage now and i dont get mtv hits or mtv jams, thats actualy a reason time warner should have told them to gfo. time warner already has the raw deal, no premium mtv channels, so why pay all that money just for mtv and mtv2? those channels are TERRABLE. just call them the slut reality tv channels and get it over with.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
1. January 2009 @ 14:31 |
Link to this message
|
Here is the full article from MSNBC, where the agreement has been made:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28440958/
Now, it states that 25% of TWC's viewership is on Viacom channels, but Viacom only gets 2.5% of the revenue from a cable bill. To not call Time Warner a bunch of greedy thieves is the pot calling the kettle black, but TWC already blew smoke on Big Ten and NFL Networks before. Now, who is the one trying to get fatter?
Personally, I dropped TWC in a heartbeat after they only offerred 30 HD channels, compared to 100 or so on DirecTV. TWC's customer service is terrible, if something breaks, they can't come out to fix it for 1-2 weeks and many of my channels would blackout, pixelate, or not come in at all!
Combine the cable service with the RoadRunner ISP, and these fat cats need to start putting back into the system, instead of robbing people of their money... especially in a recession!
|
