Bill to end carriage disputes

[sam_gordon]

I'd pay $1 per local HD channel to skip commercials, and $0.25 per SD local on a monthly basis, especially if I wasn't paying $12 just to have access to the channels in the first place.

OK, let's start there. Do you factor in automatic raises every year? Or you agree to $1/channel in 2019 and you still expect to pay $1/channel in 2050?

Then you get into the argument that people are paying $5/month+ for ESPN, yet more people watch broadcast TV. Without MVPDs, ESPN would have 0 viewers. Without MVPDs, broadcast stations would still have thousands (hundreds of thousands? Millions? across the country).

Yes, MVPDs help get the signal to places that can not receive terrestrial TV. But there are many more people who could receive OTA, but elect not to because "it's easier" to get everything from one box.

 

[NYDutch]

With pulling channels prohibited, I wonder if mandatory arbitration would work. Perhaps after some number of days past the contract expiration plus any extensions without a resolution. That would put pressure on both sides to settle before a third party gets to decide.

 

[ncted]

OK, let's start there. Do you factor in automatic raises every year? Or you agree to $1/channel in 2019 and you still expect to pay $1/channel in 2050?

Then you get into the argument that people are paying $5/month+ for ESPN, yet more people watch broadcast TV. Without MVPDs, ESPN would have 0 viewers. Without MVPDs, broadcast stations would still have thousands (hundreds of thousands? Millions? across the country).

Yes, MVPDs help get the signal to places that can not receive terrestrial TV. But there are many more people who could receive OTA, but elect not to because "it's easier" to get everything from one box.

I'd accept an increase of inflation, if the station will accept a decrease on deflation. I'd accept an increase above inflation if the station is willing to show their books which indicate their cost of delivery went up more than inflation and they didn't grow ad revenue.

ESPN isn't a broadcast station, so not an applicable comparison.

MVPDs are a net positive for broadcasters, and the broadcast station owners have treated them like trash. No wonder Dish and DirecTV are offering OTA and Locast options now.

 

[The Fat Man]

As much as it sounds good in theory, I see this as just reversing all the power in favor of the providers. I hate the whole "we're pulling the network and starting a switch provider campaign." I really do. But, Dish and Disney go at it. Now Disney can't pull their networks as they are in negotiations. Basically, Dish can just sit there and claim to be negotiating, and Disney has no recourse. It only looks popular to us subscribers because we don't see the effect, but it still isn't the right answer.

 

[sam_gordon]

I'd accept an increase of inflation, if the station will accept a decrease on deflation. I'd accept an increase above inflation if the station is willing to show their books which indicate their cost of delivery went up more than inflation and they didn't grow ad revenue.

What company is willing to show their books? Should Dish be forced to show their books?

ESPN isn't a broadcast station, so not an applicable comparison.

Disagree with it not being a good comparison.

MVPDs are a net positive for broadcasters, and the broadcast station owners have treated them like trash. No wonder Dish and DirecTV are offering OTA and Locast options now.

And LiL are a net positive for the MVPDs. Again, go back and look at the subscriber increase when LiL came out. LiL is a requirement for most subscribers. I've been crediting Dish for years for giving subscribers the ability to drop locals and save the money. However, most subscribers would rather not bother with putting up an OTA antenna.

 

[ncted]

What company is willing to show their books? Should Dish be forced to show their books?


Disagree with it not being a good comparison.


And LiL are a net positive for the MVPDs. Again, go back and look at the subscriber increase when LiL came out. LiL is a requirement for most subscribers. I've been crediting Dish for years for giving subscribers the ability to drop locals and save the money. However, most subscribers would rather not bother with putting up an OTA antenna.

Dish doesn't have a public-interest broadcast license from the FCC. Different rules apply, but Dish's finances are available in SEC filings, so they are pretty public.

Whatever. I've [unfortunately] worked with TV broadcast media executives in a previous job. They don't need the money for retransmission, nor do I think they are entitled to it based on my understanding of the original intent of radio/TV broadcast licenses. However, this is just my opinion, so feel free to disagree.

 

[Juan]

That all changed when networks started charging affliates

Dish doesn't have a public-interest broadcast license from the FCC. Different rules apply, but Dish's finances are available in SEC filings, so they are pretty public.

Whatever. I've [unfortunately] worked with TV broadcast media executives in a previous job. They don't need the money for retransmission, nor do I think they are entitled to it based on my understanding of the original intent of radio/TV broadcast licenses. However, this is just my opinion, so feel free to disagree.

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[ncted]

That all changed when networks started charging affliates

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

Interesting point, especially considering all the ad-funded content on the Internet now. I wonder if it will take the same path as broadcast TV with networks who charge affiliates who charge MVPDs who charge viewers, who are ostensibly already paying with their eyes (or souls it were).

 

[Voyager6]

That all changed when networks started charging affliates

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

Didn't that start after the affliates started collecting retrans fees?

 

[Juan]

I dunno...but I know the networks push for retrans fees

Didn't that start after the affliates started collecting retrans fees?

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[sam_gordon]

I dunno...but I know the networks push for retrans fees

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

I'd say "demand", not "push". And I think they ask for a dollar amount, not a % of the rate (which would make more sense to me).

 

[ekilgus]

I've said it before but this retrans nonsense is completely backwards. Dish and others provide an extended reach (larger audience) for these networks at absolutely no cost to them. They then can charge advertisers more because if their increased viewership. If anything Dish and the others should be charging the networks.

Another aspect of this retrans nonsense is that it should be illegal to charge someone for the same exact product they provide for free to others.

 

[Justy5]

This would be good karma for the broadcasters and programmers. Bring this bill on! Pass a law and protect the subscribers from their greedy behinds. We have had enough of being stuck in the middle of these carriage disputes.

 

[sam_gordon]

I've said it before but this retrans nonsense is completely backwards. Dish and others provide an extended reach (larger audience) for these networks at absolutely no cost to them. They then can charge advertisers more because if their increased viewership. If anything Dish and the others should be charging the networks.

Another aspect of this retrans nonsense is that it should be illegal to charge someone for the same exact product they provide for free to others.

And Dish gets more subscribers because they have locals. Haven't seen them dropping subscription rates because they get more eyeballs.

And viewers aren't allowed to charge others to watch their programming. As long as you don't charge, you can have it for free.

 

[TheKrell]

Haven't seen them dropping subscription rates because they get more eyeballs.

Well, we have all seen them increase rates when they lose eyeballs!

 

[zack]

I've said it before but this retrans nonsense is completely backwards. Dish and others provide an extended reach (larger audience) for these networks at absolutely no cost to them. They then can charge advertisers more because if their increased viewership. If anything Dish and the others should be charging the networks.

Another aspect of this retrans nonsense is that it should be illegal to charge someone for the same exact product they provide for free to others.

Do you think that "Dish and the others" are able to receive the normal over the air broadcasts, and then rebroadcast those via satellite?

No. The individual network stations (channels) must have and pay for an alternate source to get the signal to "Dish and the others"!

That could mean sending the signal by fiber, or more likely, by transmitting the signal to a satellite in space!

Whichever, the network channels are in a contract for that, that still must be paid for even if " Dish and the others" stop paying!

" Dish and the others" also have to have a receiving station to be able to rebroadcast the signal via their normal means!

ekilgus, just stop and think for a minute, "at absolutely no cost to them" ?

Who paid for your antenna, cables, and tv? And who pays for the electricity for that?

You imply that it is free, but almost everything has a cost involved! Your cost is just a little bit less than theirs!

 

[osu1991]

Do you think that "Dish and the others" are able to receive the normal over the air broadcasts, and then rebroadcast those via satellite?

No. The individual network stations (channels) must have and pay for an alternate source to get the signal to "Dish and the others"!

That could mean sending the signal by fiber, or more likely, by transmitting the signal to a satellite in space!

Whichever, the network channels are in a contract for that, that still must be paid for even if " Dish and the others" stop paying!

" Dish and the others" also have to have a receiving station to be able to rebroadcast the signal via their normal means!

ekilgus, just stop and think for a minute, "at absolutely no cost to them" ?

Who paid for your antenna, cables, and tv? And who pays for the electricity for that?

You imply that it is free, but almost everything has a cost involved! Your cost is just a little bit less than theirs!

That’s not correct for many markets. Dish receives many market signals via OTA at a central location and then the signals are sent to a Dish uplink facility. The locals are doing nothing.

 

[comfortably_numb]

I support this bill. Regulated market capitalism works.

 

[Bobby]

That’s not correct for many markets. Dish receives many market signals via OTA at a central location and then the signals are sent to a Dish uplink facility. The locals are doing nothing.

This is true, in the San Francisco Bay Area all local channels are taken off of an antenna just like I have on my house and then transported to an uplink center.

 

[comfortably_numb]

This is true, in the San Francisco Bay Area all local channels are taken off of an antenna just like I have on my house and then transported to an uplink center.

No direct fiber connects in SF?