There used to be a TV antenna where I live. The old owners abandoned it for cable. I am sure they used to get a signal. Antennaweb.org says it does not look for me for OTA.
I don't know what to think exactly.
Dish about to lose even MORE local channels
- Thread starter Sponge14
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 146
- Views 21K
There used to be a TV antenna where I live. The old owners abandoned it for cable. I am sure they used to get a signal. Antennaweb.org says it does not look for me for OTA.
I don't know what to think exactly.
I personally feel that any programmer (cable or broadcaster) accepting advertising and infomercial dollars should be prohibited from charging a carriage fee. If the cable favorites (even the ones few people watch and would be out of business if not subsidized by grouping them with programming people actually watch) are allowed to collect advertising and subscription dollars from a PAY TV provider, then why should the local broadcaster not be afforded the same opportunity if they so desire? Also, if ESPN can bundle the other useless ESPN channels nobody watches (besides ESPN2), then why can't the broadcaster's employ the same tactic?
As it has been mentioned, most of the public can continue to receive the most popular programming (it really does cost $$ to run a broadcast facility and create programming like CSI, Criminal Minds, The Mentalist, Survivor, Boston Legal, Grey's Anatomy, Law and Order, The Office, 24, American Idol, and The Simpson's) by using a free over-the-air antenna if they wish.
The bottom line is the networks have been a gold mine for Dish Network, and the broadcasters are simply asking for reasonable compensation for the most popular programming being carried by a PAY TV service. Of course, Dish Network is guarding its Gravy Train like a starving junk yard dog. Only the naive will be duped into believing it is all the "Broadcaster's Fault" when E* jacks up the locals rate to $7-$10 per month, although the nominal 60 - 80 cents in additional local carriage fees won't warrant a $2-$5 price increase.
Where in the heck is all that money E* is supposed to be saving customers on VOOM and Gol TV? Never mind...I just realized it was in Tivo's back pocket!
Anyway, I feel that the folks at this local NBC are pulling a "Cheesedick Charlie" by trying to bundle the CW subchannels. All I can say is with the SuperBowl coming up, Charlie has no option but to pay the ransom. Sometimes when you play the game of chess, someone is going to crown you. These disputes are sympomatic of a much larger problem, which will only be solved when meaningful rules and regulations are passed to protect the consumer and provide a level playing field for MSOs, Broadcasters, Programmers and CE Manufacturers alike.
Of course, the first step will be to provide the consumers with [many] more programming options to include a la carte. I cannot wait to see the looks on faces of Commedy Central, E!, and SpikeTV (name your least favorite channels) when they are no longer permitted to pick my pocket each month by grouping their ilk in with my cherished channels.
As it has been mentioned, most of the public can continue to receive the most popular programming (it really does cost $$ to run a broadcast facility and create programming like CSI, Criminal Minds, The Mentalist, Survivor, Boston Legal, Grey's Anatomy, Law and Order, The Office, 24, American Idol, and The Simpson's) by using a free over-the-air antenna if they wish.
The bottom line is the networks have been a gold mine for Dish Network, and the broadcasters are simply asking for reasonable compensation for the most popular programming being carried by a PAY TV service. Of course, Dish Network is guarding its Gravy Train like a starving junk yard dog. Only the naive will be duped into believing it is all the "Broadcaster's Fault" when E* jacks up the locals rate to $7-$10 per month, although the nominal 60 - 80 cents in additional local carriage fees won't warrant a $2-$5 price increase.
Where in the heck is all that money E* is supposed to be saving customers on VOOM and Gol TV? Never mind...I just realized it was in Tivo's back pocket!
Anyway, I feel that the folks at this local NBC are pulling a "Cheesedick Charlie" by trying to bundle the CW subchannels. All I can say is with the SuperBowl coming up, Charlie has no option but to pay the ransom. Sometimes when you play the game of chess, someone is going to crown you. These disputes are sympomatic of a much larger problem, which will only be solved when meaningful rules and regulations are passed to protect the consumer and provide a level playing field for MSOs, Broadcasters, Programmers and CE Manufacturers alike.
Of course, the first step will be to provide the consumers with [many] more programming options to include a la carte. I cannot wait to see the looks on faces of Commedy Central, E!, and SpikeTV (name your least favorite channels) when they are no longer permitted to pick my pocket each month by grouping their ilk in with my cherished channels.
I'm a little confused. If the whole haggle thing is over profiting from a free signal, why don't the satellite people do what my local cable company does. All their locals are free (Shreveport, LA. & Little Rock, AR) and included in their $50 dollar basic package in which very few people can afford in this part of the country (SW Arkansas). I'm sure if this small two town, two bit cable company had to pay a retransmission fee they would not be able to afford and therefore not air them, but some how they do. Yet, I'm about 100 miles form Shreveport and 100 miles from Little Rock and OTA is virtually impossible but according to DMA we are forced to watch Shreveport locals despite the fact we live in Arkansas by more than two counties in. Now if you live one more county north and have D* you can get both locals but not E*. Can anyone explain that other than the small exception that a U.S. Congressman lives there.
Anyway, I'm on the side of Dish as adding locals is a service to both the subs and the tv stations. All I want is for the whole shooting match to be on level playing field and HD locals available to all and to all a good night! Merry Christmas
Anyway, I'm on the side of Dish as adding locals is a service to both the subs and the tv stations. All I want is for the whole shooting match to be on level playing field and HD locals available to all and to all a good night! Merry Christmas
Not always the case. There are stations I can get on analog that I cannot pickup at all on digital. Some channels are crystal clear. The problem is the power of the digital stations are much less than the analog ones and it takes a good enough signal to lock in to get the station at all vs. getting a picture with static in the past.
I stated in another thread that the satellite and cable companies should create some sort of union to fight these channel providers on price increases.
Local channels are a business like any other business, and they have to have income to survive. Fewer people are watching local channels now with all the additional choices provided by satellite and cable. Local channels are still trying to hang on to their old business model that was created in the early days of broadcasting. If they were still making the same kind of money they were back in the 70's before cable really took off then I don't think this would really be an issue. It was about that time that broadcasters started realizing that they were competing head to head with the new cable networks. If cable companies were paying to carry WTBS, USA, and CNN, why shouldn't they pay to carry local channels too? Many cable companies were carrying out of market locals back in the early days too, thanks to strategically placed antennas and microwave relays. That's why we have retransmission agreements now, because of all of the abuses back at the beginning.
So anyway, now that most people watch local channels via cable or satellite rather than OTA as was intended by the FCC, local channels really are at the mercy of pay tv providers. It is the web of legislation created over the years to prop up local TV that even keeps it going. If local channels had to fend for themselves now without the FCC to back them up, a large number of them would be gone forever. IMHO it is time to change the rules and take local TV off life support. Perhaps the FCC could mandate that satellite receivers have digital OTA tuners in them (as all the newer Dish models already have), but eliminate must-carry altogether. The FCC should put the burden of signal transmission back on the local stations where it should be, instead of on pay TV providers. If a pay TV provider can reach an amicable retransmission agreement with a local station, then great. If not, there should not be any legal burden for the local station to be carried on cable or satellite.
So anyway, now that most people watch local channels via cable or satellite rather than OTA as was intended by the FCC, local channels really are at the mercy of pay tv providers. It is the web of legislation created over the years to prop up local TV that even keeps it going. If local channels had to fend for themselves now without the FCC to back them up, a large number of them would be gone forever. IMHO it is time to change the rules and take local TV off life support. Perhaps the FCC could mandate that satellite receivers have digital OTA tuners in them (as all the newer Dish models already have), but eliminate must-carry altogether. The FCC should put the burden of signal transmission back on the local stations where it should be, instead of on pay TV providers. If a pay TV provider can reach an amicable retransmission agreement with a local station, then great. If not, there should not be any legal burden for the local station to be carried on cable or satellite.
I agree, but they do have a high tower where they can reach all of the locals via OTA. Cable here claims they are free. Does that make a difference? But the point I was making is that they apparently have a better deal since they are airing two local markets and satellite can't. In fact I'm forced to have locals (unless I move) in another state which is very unfair to me.
I think stations are asking for more money than what they need to survive. It's called greed. Eventually the rates will be so high, rising more than the rate of inflation, that people will start wondering why they are paying so much and quit paying. They will raise rates as much as they think they can get away with.
I have never understood why cable companies and sat providers must pay to carry a signal that is delivered OTA to the same geographic region for free. I can understand if it is a carriage outside a market like the superstations, but not standard local coverage.
It has to do with copyright law and retransmission without consent. Some stations are happy to be carried by a pay TV provider, but they are usually the channels that have few viewers (public television and smaller independents). Other stations, usually the major network affiliates, feel that what they have to offer is so valuable that they can charge pay TV carriers to distribute it. Pay TV providers are caught in the middle. Their customers usually want those local channels, but broadcasters can legally withhold them without a retransmission agreement. The current business model for local broadcasting IMHO is not sustainable long term. With the digital transition next year, and the economic downturn reducing ad revenue, I think there is going to be a big shakeout. Broadcasting is no longer the license to print money that it once was.
I have read a news article regarding a big shakeout that the local network stations are going to do and that cable/satellite are going to be the losers and the local network stations are going to be the winners in the end. I posted about this in another thread. We will probably end up paying $2-3 more for just the network stations if not more than that on top of the annual $2-3 raise that we see. We may either see two raises in a year's time or a very high raise Feb 2010. How would you like to see a $5 raise every year on satellite? It's coming with the way things are looking.
If they raise the locals package again, I'll cancel them. And there's probably more people doing the same.
I've invested in a nice OTA setup, and don't want, and don't want to pay for, locals via satellite.
Network programming is garnering a declining share of viewers. Outside of that, local stations really only have local news and weather to offer. I simply don't see that as putting them in the driver's seat. And with so many stations moving to relatively low power transmissions with the conversion, it appears even they don't support their own business model. It seems they want to move to just providing content to cable and satellite, and derive major revenues from there. Certainly, local advertising is in decline too, during this downturn.
Network programming is garnering a declining share of viewers. Outside of that, local stations really only have local news and weather to offer. I simply don't see that as putting them in the driver's seat. And with so many stations moving to relatively low power transmissions with the conversion, it appears even they don't support their own business model. It seems they want to move to just providing content to cable and satellite, and derive major revenues from there. Certainly, local advertising is in decline too, during this downturn.
What, you mean like DirecTV and Dish Network haven't been raising rates higher than the rate of inflation for years?Stargazer said:
Funny how some are decrying the business practices of the networks and their affiliates, but when they apply to the satellite companies everyone turns a blind eye.
I tell you what. Everyone complain to Dish Network to get those "wasteful" local stations off the service. Then half of Dish Network subscribers will leave over the course of a year.
It is not just the local stations, all the channels are trying to raise their prices.
But, I see the local channels winning this in the end. They have exclusive rights to their content in their area. The satellite and cable companies have no choice but to deal with them, and quite frankly it is suicide as a provider not to carry them.
Viewers are not going to protest the station license renewals over this. They do not even see this as the stations fault, they see it as a satellite/cable issue.
But, I see the local channels winning this in the end. They have exclusive rights to their content in their area. The satellite and cable companies have no choice but to deal with them, and quite frankly it is suicide as a provider not to carry them.
Viewers are not going to protest the station license renewals over this. They do not even see this as the stations fault, they see it as a satellite/cable issue.
With the digital date nears and analog is finally gone, it will be suicide for the ota stations to NOT Be carried by both satellite and cable. Digital signals are very hard to receive in parts of the country and as such the local stations will depend on satellite and cable to carry them or they will lose many viewers on 2/17/09. Most if not all network material is free on line to view on the network websites , so that leaves only local news and weather that many subs will be out of if they don't carry one or two of the local stations in a market. They can simply watch the ones that do have the news. I say let the locals stay OFF till THEY capitulate to the sat companies . IF not YOU will be paying more and more for YOUR locals. It is the duty of both satellite and cable to properly educate their viewers to why they aren't carrying a certain station in their local market and also to give them a credit for not having all the locals in that market ,due to disputes. They can easily do that by running a slate with a detailed explanation on those stations that they took off due to the dispute. I wish that network tv was a national channel like the others we buy in a programming pack. Then we could do without the local stations playing games trying to charge more for a signal that they put out for FREE if you receive them ota.
It doesn't SOUND like it, it flat out says it.
Obviously, they can't carry all the subchannels, but if this is the only CW in the area, it seems fair to carry it, and I'm sure the customers would appreciate it. But they probably don't want to open things up so every channel demands that their RTN and Weather feeds and all that other stuff be carried.
