I'm sure that you are right about Charlie not wanting to carry WGN any longer. That channel has very little worth in the way of programming now. I wouldn't carry it either if they insisted on bundling with local channels too.
Tribune Broadcasting Company Blacks Out DISH Customers in 33 Markets;
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 1K
- Views 147K
You're confused with the (local Chicago) version of WGN-9 - THEY are going to carry more live sports & are also dropping their CW affiliation to boot...which has nothing whatsoever to do with WGN-A, since they have NO programming in common anymore.
http://www.robertfeder.com/2016/05/23/chicagos-very-own-wgn-declares-independence-from-cw-network/
Easy solution for that: Pay the current market value with a provision to pay an add'l amount if WGN-America meets certain, agreed-upon goals.
You need an internet connection for VOD... That programming is streamed.
Shows what I know. I never use it. I think the few times I tried using it on the 722 it was very slow to navigate through the lists, so I gave up. But my memory isn't what it used to be (at least what I remember my memory being)
This is where Dish confuses things.... Channels 1 and 501 are labeled "VOD", yet those are satellite-delivered movies.
This all stems from the stupd implementation of Must Carry.
Honestly I'd love go to back to PT24 east and west.) (I miss the dual feed option) or just raw network feeds (just national content, like we had on C-band before scrambling).
But outside that, sat and cable shouldn't pay anything for retransmission. A nominal fee to cover facilities for fiber links or setup their own system with OTA antennas (allow sharing cost with other providers if they can agree on their own). Zero reason for station to get paid for what they broadcast freely.
Must carry should just require carriage of major stations in the DMA if any id carried. And no content changes (don't insert your own commercials). Changing the bit rate/compression us one thing, but don't mess with the content.
Honestly I'd love go to back to PT24 east and west.) (I miss the dual feed option) or just raw network feeds (just national content, like we had on C-band before scrambling).
But outside that, sat and cable shouldn't pay anything for retransmission. A nominal fee to cover facilities for fiber links or setup their own system with OTA antennas (allow sharing cost with other providers if they can agree on their own). Zero reason for station to get paid for what they broadcast freely.
Must carry should just require carriage of major stations in the DMA if any id carried. And no content changes (don't insert your own commercials). Changing the bit rate/compression us one thing, but don't mess with the content.
I'm even willing to compromise though I can't take credit for the idea it came out of a couple of posts in a another thread. If the subscriber is in a zip that gets OTA DISH pays for those subscribers to get it via Satellite. The process for how the negotiations go may or may not need to be modified for that.
If they can not get it OTA DISH and the OTA station pay costs for transmission to DISH and little else. Make it simple, just about how it is determined now if you qualify for Distants or not and apply that to what households cost DISH and which do not.
It benefits both in obvious ways, in addition it's fair (almost too fair lol) to the OTA because even those who would have a very hard time putting up an antenna but technically could get OTA would be counted as a cost to DISH.
Whatever the case the FCC/Government has us to where we are now, the Stations/Networks are simply playing by the rules so on that level I can't blame them.
Cable and sat carrying locals benefits the locals more than the other way.
If anything, the locals should be paying to be carried.
Carriage increases their market exposure. People who can't get OTA at reasonable expense (or at all). If it's there in the lineup, I'll see what they offer more readily then if I have to go to an alternate source.
Back when the big 3 were it, people spent $$$ on antennas to grab weak signals because that was the only option (I member 20+ft masts/towers, going out to turn the mast, etc). With the choices for programming now, who would do that? Not many.
I think most sat & cable customers would try OTA with a cheap antenna, then move on if locals weren't offered.
I think it's just a matter of time before cable and sat drop locals instead of paying big fees. So do the conglomerates, that's why they want to bundle other programming.
I would not pay for locals today if it wad unbundled from the packages. I would not spend hundreds on an antenna either. I'd find an alternate source that doesn't cost me extra or just not watch.
The networks and affiliates are making the same error the music business did. They are not paying attention to the changing market nor adapting to it. They think they still have a lock like they did in the 60s. They are wrong.
Sat and cable are paying more attention, but probably not enough.
Our resident NAB member would disagree with that statement.
Ergen: Dish and Tribune 'tens of millions of dollars apart'
Entering the second month of a blackout that has kept 42 Tribune-owned network affiliates in 33 markets off Dish Network (NASDAQ: DISH), Charlie Ergen, chairman and CEO of the satellite TV service, said his company is "tens of millions of dollars apart" with the broadcaster, and didn't sound hopeful about one of the largest ever retrans-related blackouts ending soon.
"It's a disagreement on pricing," Ergen said to investors during today's second-quarter earnings call. "We do hundreds of retrans deals. We know where the marketplace is, and we think they're out of line in terms of where they want to go."
Dish is facing two simultaneous impasses, with the NFL Network also off the satellite service amid a carriage dispute. Ergen said that negotiation is much closer to fruition, with the two sides haggling over more "positive, bigger picture issues.
http://www.fiercecable.com/story/er...nds&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Entering the second month of a blackout that has kept 42 Tribune-owned network affiliates in 33 markets off Dish Network (NASDAQ: DISH), Charlie Ergen, chairman and CEO of the satellite TV service, said his company is "tens of millions of dollars apart" with the broadcaster, and didn't sound hopeful about one of the largest ever retrans-related blackouts ending soon.
"It's a disagreement on pricing," Ergen said to investors during today's second-quarter earnings call. "We do hundreds of retrans deals. We know where the marketplace is, and we think they're out of line in terms of where they want to go."
Dish is facing two simultaneous impasses, with the NFL Network also off the satellite service amid a carriage dispute. Ergen said that negotiation is much closer to fruition, with the two sides haggling over more "positive, bigger picture issues.
http://www.fiercecable.com/story/er...nds&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
While it hurts me to defend the Networks, I can't totally agree. There is absolute benefit to DISH (anyone) carrying the locals. Primetime TV watching is far more on the Networks than Cable. When a Cable show reaches Network levels it's still a big deal. Also, people want their local news. Meanwhile it is certainly true those who can not get an OTA signal depend on Satellite/Cable and then the Station depends on them.
At this point in time it benefits both.
At this point in time it benefits both.
And there it is. Tribune is holding hostage the local channels primarily over the insistence of including WGN and over what they are asking for it. To DISH that value is a possible future value not yet achieved. Don't let Tribune remarks about what value it has, or that they are asking fair market value sway you, it doesn't matter. What maters is that all the locals are being bundled to a Cable channel most everyone here agrees has lost considerable reasons to watch it. Take out WGN and I bet the locals can be negotiated.
Tens of Millions dollars apart. Hold on it's going to be a bumpy ride....
If we were talking 13 million apart, that's 1 dollar per sub(assuming everyone has access). That is a huge difference, especially for locals and a failing channel... And that's assuming bottom dollar on that tens of millions apart. Could be greater than that.
Similar threads
