|
Cablevision and Fox don't reach deal, stations now blacked out
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 16 October, 2010
Following months of negotiations with no resolution, News Corp. has blacked out their Fox broadcast signal to over 3 million Cablevision subscribers in metropolitan New York, New Jersey and Philadelphia.
Cablevision refused to negotiate any longer and declared an impasse at 8 p.m.
Says president of Fox Networks Affiliate Sales and Marketing Mike Hopkins: "We started this process in ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
16. October 2010 @ 02:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
Cable companies are the past. Can't wait till Comcrap dies more.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Member
|
16. October 2010 @ 03:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
And the only ones who really lose are the customers..
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
16. October 2010 @ 03:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
Who cares about the customers? Fox is trying to charge for something that is 100% paid for by the built-in ads, while cablevision refuses to pay for the content that they currently get for free and charge a huge fee for. Want fox? Get an antenna...and then dump the cable company! While you are at it, dump fox.
|
Member
|
16. October 2010 @ 03:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
That's not the point and you know it.
If I subscribe to a cable provider expecting to get Fox and it's suddenly dropped due to a conflict which has nothing to do with me, then I'm the one hurt by it. Why the hell should I have to find an alternate means of watching content that should be there since it's what I'm paying for? My parents recently went through this with Time Warner and TW pissed and moaned until the last minute then caved when subscribers started cancelling their service. My mother was pissed because she wouldn't be able to watch the few shows she actually wants to see.
--aaron
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. October 2010 @ 03:55
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
16. October 2010 @ 06:38 |
Link to this message
|
They are both wrong...but considering the fact that Fox is essentially blackmailing the cable companies, I hold them responsible. When fox wants to charge as much as HBO, just to rebroadcast something that is free, that just isn't right. We don't see any other networks (not even HBO & showtime) doing this crap.
There is something very liberating about dumping the cable company, and something even more liberating about dumping TV all together. There is enough media on the market to last a dozen lifetimes...Netflix has replaced my cable...for $9 a month, I can see what I want, when I want, with no DVR programming, with no commercials, and with a selection of shows that is larger than the combined total for every network for the whole year...and that is ignoring the movies!
|
|
bigfamei
Junior Member
|
16. October 2010 @ 06:39 |
Link to this message
|
But the FCC should step in and stop Over the Air companies from blacking out their signal on other pay services. Cable channels I can understand. Subscription fees pay for that. Over the air channels are free with out any pay service so their transmission should be unaffect even on pay services.
|
Member
|
16. October 2010 @ 08:07 |
Link to this message
|
My parents live in a small town and until recently still used dialup.
Now they're on shitty and unreliable dsl, so until the internet options there increase netflix is not an option. More likely than not if she ever did lose fox I would just dump the shows on a dvd for her every couple weeks and mail them.
--aaron
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. October 2010 @ 08:08
|
Member
|
16. October 2010 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
Remember in the end they never care about "us" its all about money. so f.u fox. glad i dont watch your channel. BUNCH OF crybabys!
For Sale:
Parachute, Used Once, never opened small stain.
Best Offer!
|
Senior Member
|
16. October 2010 @ 11:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
edited by ddp
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. October 2010 @ 19:22
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
16. October 2010 @ 19:59 |
Link to this message
|
Welcome to the digital age, why do you think analog was so unwanted to free up the airwaves? please. Digital TV OTA can also be blacklisted, so the whole put up antenna argument doesn't work.
wait till radio goes all Digital and the RIAA start blacklisting songs because there not getting paid what they want.
Powered By
 |
|
airman
Newbie
|
16. October 2010 @ 20:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
Cablevision was not getting FOX for free. They were paying 70 million a year. FOX wants to double that.
Cable companies are already suffering and with the overhead and maintenance will likely soon be a thing of the past. We canceled all the channels as we have satellite. We did keep the broadband as it's the cheapest I can get and the fastest in the area at 15 Mbs. Connect speeds are measured in Mega bits per second, not bytes (MBs)
I had ISDN and then DSL in the "early days" when they cost a fortune.Both were only a fraction of the cable's speed and my Internet bill back then was about $290 a month.
Airman
|
|
xnonsuchx
Senior Member
|
17. October 2010 @ 19:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
Welcome to the digital age, why do you think analog was so unwanted to free up the airwaves? please. Digital TV OTA can also be blacklisted, so the whole put up antenna argument doesn't work.
Putting up an antenna to receive local stations doesn't work??? Blacking out local broadcasts mainly hurts the affiliate and would strain relations between them and the network, so is unlikely. After all, they can't pick and choose what individuals receive OTA signals, so they can't just turn it off for certain cable company subscribers.
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
17. October 2010 @ 19:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xnonsuchx:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Welcome to the digital age, why do you think analog was so unwanted to free up the airwaves? please. Digital TV OTA can also be blacklisted, so the whole put up antenna argument doesn't work.
Putting up an antenna to receive local stations doesn't work??? Blacking out local broadcasts mainly hurts the affiliate and would strain relations between them and the network, so is unlikely. After all, they can't pick and choose what individuals receive OTA signals, so they can't just turn it off for certain cable company subscribers.
they blacklist certain content on OTA, effectively killing that channel for a given amount of time. there for antenna's don't work as an effective get around.
after all where do you think you get OTA, the Airwaves Fairies. Most OTA is Being broadcast by Cable TV operator.
Powered By
|
|
oscarin
Junior Member
|
18. October 2010 @ 13:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
I get FOX in the NY area, last friday fox 5 and 9 were not the only channels blocked out, i lost also NAT GEO WILD channel and FOX SPORTS EN ESPANOL, we dont care about the FREE channels we can get with the antenna ( which we dont use and see anyway)but why block these 2 channels we really like and watch on a daily basis, you coulda take that crappy FOX NEWS CHANNEL which i dont understand why it's still on the air since it is FOX also, FX still on and FOX MOVIES are also on the air, FSN also is on which i am glad
|
|
Blessedon
Member
1 product review
|
20. October 2010 @ 12:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
I take great exception to the bias of the article;
Cablevision is paying a higher amount to Fox's competitors even though they now have lower ratings. Newcorp has grown dramatically in 2 years and wants to be paid commensurately. Cablevision needs to renegotiate lower contracts with it's other providers, not continue it's shell game on Fox.
If you were Fox you would have done the same thing with a carrier refusing to negotiate in good faith.
Pub blame where it is due.
|
Staff Member
4 product reviews
|
20. October 2010 @ 14:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Blessedon:
I take great exception to the bias of the article;
Cablevision is paying a higher amount to Fox's competitors even though they now have lower ratings. Newcorp has grown dramatically in 2 years and wants to be paid commensurately. Cablevision needs to renegotiate lower contracts with it's other providers, not continue it's shell game on Fox.
If you were Fox you would have done the same thing with a carrier refusing to negotiate in good faith.
Pub blame where it is due.
You must work for Fox....
Cablevision pays less to ABC, NBC and CBS combined than what Fox wants.
|
|
Blessedon
Member
1 product review
|
20. October 2010 @ 16:15 |
Link to this message
|
NoOriginally posted by DVDBack23:
You must work for Fox....
Cablevision pays less to ABC, NBC and CBS combined than what Fox wants.
No I don't work for Fox. But my understanding is different. How much do the others receive?
|
Staff Member
4 product reviews
|
21. October 2010 @ 20:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
Blessedon, don't quote me here but I believe Cablevision pays ABC $29 million per year, and similar numbers to other broadcasters. The company has made it clear however through their campaign that Fox wants more than the other combined.
sbhere, the World Series will be on Fox. If the Yankees make it you can expect this fight will be over with as Fox would lose a lot of its leverage.
|
|
Blessedon
Member
1 product review
|
21. October 2010 @ 23:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'll not quote you friend. But thanks for updating that. I looked all over and could not verify what I'd been told.
Well, have to think about that...
|
|
telewig
Newbie
|
22. October 2010 @ 07:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
In Britain, we have Sky TV (murdoch). They did the same to their rival satellite provider, then bought them up. They then took SciFi, Bravo, Discovery and a few others (previously free) into their stable and started charging. They've not managed it in Germany, apparently, so they've still got a lot of free analogue satellite channels).
They recently did exactly the same with Our Cable provider but collapsed when they lost a monolpoly on televising Soccer (the most profitable spectator sport here). They've now merged with the cable company and we expect an imminent surge in prices. Their licences for public viewing in bars has rocketted and many pubs/bars are giving up on it.
Support your cable company, or you'll find yourselves without anything affordable to watch except half-hour programs scheduled for 2 hours of viewing, with lots of canned laughter in the comedies(?) and loud bass notes drowning out any dramatic scenes in drama, sci-fi, thrillers and cops. You'll be able to watch continuous re-reuns simply because you'll never be able to catch the thread of the program.
At least we've got free-to-air in the UK.
|
|
Spliceman
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. October 2010 @ 08:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don't know the logic behind which stations they pull vs. which they leave. But the "they" is Fox. They will give us their news broadcast all day for free. Obviously in some markets they can't pull the sports down without pissing off their advertisers. In the fight with Dish Network it is painfully obvious that Fox has a monopoly on sports broadcasting. To watch your regional sports team you are stuck with fox. Getting an antenna wont fix that problem. Are there any serious competitors that could come in and broadcast sports and do contracts with the leagues like Fox sports net? If you want to see your regional sports teams and you have Dish Network you are still going to be forced to go to a provider that carries Fox. So then it is just a matter of time before Fox jacks up the price to that provider. No good solution that I can see. If Fox needs more money it is the people that want their content that are going to have to pay, no matter what deal you had with your provider. During the interim there needs to be a solution. People are crazy about their sports. I would be willing to pay an extra $5/month to treat the Fox suite of channels like any other premium package I.E. HBO & Showtime. People get angry with the provider but they are just trying to keep the cost down for the consumer.
|
|
rick930
Newbie
|
22. October 2010 @ 12:24 |
Link to this message
|
Actually there are lots of alternatives to seeing regional sports in your area without needing FOX. The problem is that FOX negotiates to pay higher fees to the leagues in order to try and have that perceived monopoly on sports broadcasting. In truth as News Corp. starts to loose more of its viewing audience by service providers blacking them out they'll also begin loosing that revenue stream that FOX News generates since advertisers won't be able to reach their target audience to make their own money. Mr. Murdoch's recent annual report to the shareholders of News Corp. made it pretty clear that it is all about the money and politics, and not about providing actual honest and integtrity to their viewers and the service providers.
So yes right now FSN may have a monopoly for airing specific regional sports, but as they begin losing money on that side of the FOX empire, they will eventually have to come back to the service providers with more acceptable offers if they wish to continue being seen by the viewing audience. So right now News Corp. faces losing adverstising dollars, viewer ratings, and the income normally generated from the license fees they obtain from the service providers. How long do you think the News Corp. shareholders are going to let that continue before they start demanding Mr. Murdoch pull his head out and put things right? And to think that he was foolish enough to put his head on the block by telling shareholders that if they don't like the way he is doing things they could vote him out.
Keep in mind that thanks to Mr. Murdoch, News Corp. has been steering in the wrong direction for the last two years. Instead of honest and integrity in the companies efforts to provide sports and news, it has become a political arm of the GOP in every aspect. The $1 million donation Mr. Mudoch made on the behalf of News Corp. to various GOP political entities fired up the shareholders who have begun to question Mr. Murdoch and his strategies. Across the country a steadily growing anti-FOX News movement to cease airing FOX News in business establishments has resulted in numerous major corporations publicly stating they would no longer air FOX News. You can't run a company like News Corp. if you don't have an audience. And companies rely heavily on advertising to generate sales, so if News Corp. is losing their viewing audience because of their failed business practices, then they lose the advertisers as well.
So while it is a loss for DISH and Cablevision customers, keep in mind that the service providers are doing the right thing; they are fighting back against the overall corporate greed of News Corp. They are also sending back a message that News Corp. will stand to lose far more in revenue by trying to strongarm the service providers into paying unrealistic license fees just to carry their programming that costs them a fraction of that cost to generate in the first place. If you don't believe me read Mr. Murdoch's recent annual report to the shareholders. In it you'll find he spends a considerable amount of time talking about the $2.3 billion in new revenue that News Corp. generated in the past year alone just from the advertising through FOX News. Is there any doubt that Mr. Murdoch's concern is only about the money and the growing monopoly they have right now?
Every so often you have to bring a giant down to his knees. For Mr. Murdoch, News Corp., and FOX News, that time has come and the movement is already growing across the country to prove that. During a time when families are struggling to pay their bills, and companies are struggling to keep operating, News Corp. has gone out of its way to make money with lies and hatred against the very people that they want to be a part of their viewing audience. You can't keep attacking your viewers on a regular basis and then expect them to be grateful and toss money your way. Even the TV evangelists learned that lesson the hard way.
Something tells me that at the rate News Corp. is making decisions that shareholders vote may be coming soon.
|
|
Spliceman
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. October 2010 @ 14:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
Agreed - Makes you want to pick up some NEWS just to have a vote...
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
22. October 2010 @ 14:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
Originally posted by xnonsuchx:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Welcome to the digital age, why do you think analog was so unwanted to free up the airwaves? please. Digital TV OTA can also be blacklisted, so the whole put up antenna argument doesn't work.
Putting up an antenna to receive local stations doesn't work??? Blacking out local broadcasts mainly hurts the affiliate and would strain relations between them and the network, so is unlikely. After all, they can't pick and choose what individuals receive OTA signals, so they can't just turn it off for certain cable company subscribers.
they blacklist certain content on OTA, effectively killing that channel for a given amount of time. there for antenna's don't work as an effective get around.
after all where do you think you get OTA, the Airwaves Fairies. Most OTA is Being broadcast by Cable TV operator.
No, OTA's are broadcast by local affiliates NOT cable companies! And NTSC or ATSC channels can be black listed this has nothing to do with digital!! Obviously FOX isn?t free nor is TBS, WGN and so on outside of their local arena, Atlanta, Chicago, and so on? It also is not just Cable companies that are fighting this issue of worth Dish Networks is also dropping FOX programming. I?m glad I have DirecTV as they continue to support FOX and I watch FOX stations more than other national feeds. If you truly want to blame anyone for this system you must look at the FCC as they are the regulatory body.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. October 2010 @ 14:45
|
