Those are not government(tax payer owned). That is why I am not including non locals. You use public airwaves and want paid for it, then you get to have the same transparency the government has. List your price. I don’t care what your expenses are, or any of that, just what you’re asking for. Or give up publicly owned airwaves.
Phoenix Meredith stations dispute?
- Thread starter DJ Lon
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 318
- Views 27K
But they're (local broadcasters) not government and they're not dealing with the government. I think you'd have a stronger stance if the license was truly free. Just my opinion of course.
They have government contracts for the public airwaves. That means they are treated the same as government. Same thing happens with construction companies that have government contracts. Anything involving the government contract is public information.
Oh thanks for reminding me; I'm running low on widgets and need to pick some more up
And it is. How much they pay for their licenses IS public information. I think it's a stretch to say that means the retrans contracts should be public.
They probably won't release how much extortion they charge because they're ashamed.
I just found out I lost Fox 10 out of Mobile.
But after checking the weekly evening shows there is only one show which is MasterChef mainly for the wife. I was going to take my OTA adapter off of my Wally and put it on the Hopper 3. But for only one show and two nights she can watch it live on my Sony which has an antenna hooked up to it.
But after checking the weekly evening shows there is only one show which is MasterChef mainly for the wife. I was going to take my OTA adapter off of my Wally and put it on the Hopper 3. But for only one show and two nights she can watch it live on my Sony which has an antenna hooked up to it.
Last edited:
I'm not sure how much it matters (to me) much about their finances. If a station is doing really well good for them, it doesn't affect how I see the process works. I agree do we have to know how much X business pays for what we buy? Either we agree to the price or don't buy it there.
There is a difference however in that in the example of X business they have competition for the same product, the locals do not.
I don't think the public should be charged by the local to watch a signal that should be provided for free, or are providing for free to some and not to others. (By not having a strong enough signal) Charge the provider a convenience fee to pass along to subscribers who could get the signal OTA but choose not to, but no charge to those who without Satellite/cable would not be watching.
I just have to laugh at the idea of government transparency.
I had more to say, but it was redacted.
I had more to say, but it was redacted.
I've been suggesting that for years.
Regarding competition... it is there. Maybe not for the same shows, but if you don't think broadcasters have competition, I'm not sure what you're smoking.
I find it odd that this fight is happening at the slowest part of the television season to do this. The Fox 10 (Mobile) station has been off for a few days before I found out being it had nothing on that we wanted to watch until last night.
I wonder how much the broadcasters pay the satellite companies to help broadcast their signal to the viewers they are supposed to serve? 
Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!
Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!
It comes down to when the last contract ended, which came down to when the contract before that ended, etc, etc, etc.
So now you're repeating yourself? You posted this at #64 and I responded at #66. MVPDs are more than welcome to charge for this service.I wonder how much the broadcasters pay the satellite companies to help broadcast their signal to the viewers they are supposed to serve?
Oh, and more spin... maybe (just throwing it out there) this "service" is being paid for in lower retrans rates.
Dish installed an outdoor antenna for me and I live in the city of Atlanta < 5 miles from most towers. They offered to include the OTA adapter, but it's only a single tuner. I already had an attic antenna and my own dual tuner adapter. I was already able to pick up the main 4 channels and many other ones; however, PBS (30.1 in Atl) eluded me, which is why I wanted to try the outdoor antenna.
The good news is that I can finally get PBS with the outdoor antenna; however, I wasn't able to pick up GPBS (8.1 in Atl) with the default install. I'm planning to try and repoint the antenna when I get some time. The bottom line, is this offer from Dish is totally worth it (free), but you'll need to buy a dual OTA adapter assuming the single one isn't good enough. Also, I should mention that the install includes a splitter, so you can feed another tv/device. I'm planning to hook up my TiVo to see if I can get even more channels since it has a better OTA.
Now THAT's a good one.Oh, and more spin... maybe (just throwing it out there) this "service" is being paid for in lower retrans rates.
40% average annual rate increases (15x the rate of inflation) were originally going to be 50% annual increases instead? NOW you're getting it!Now THAT's a good one.
Oh, I'm getting it, and it's no laughing matter. If any other product or service raised in price that much over the last 10-12 years, there'd be riots.
Not really. If it's something people are willing to pay that for, they would. If it's not something they're willing to pay for, they wouldn't buy it.
And stressing the % increase is spin as is "pennies a day".
At least with Dish, customers can decide it's not worth it and drop it (whether they hook up an antenna or not).
Well, I'm not willing to pay for it, but I'm being forced to. Not by Dish, but by Comcast.
I have Comcast for my internet, but the internet alone price ($60) is more expensive than a bundle of internet and limited basic cable + the required $10 local channels surcharge ($55).
If I had to buy eggs with my milk every time, then I'd go somewhere else. Instead I'm forced to either choose between buying milk alone at a price higher than buying milk and eggs together.
I don't want your eggs at the price being offered.
I have Comcast for my internet, but the internet alone price ($60) is more expensive than a bundle of internet and limited basic cable + the required $10 local channels surcharge ($55).
If I had to buy eggs with my milk every time, then I'd go somewhere else. Instead I'm forced to either choose between buying milk alone at a price higher than buying milk and eggs together.
I don't want your eggs at the price being offered.
Similar threads
