Time Warner Cable HDTV [Text View] - Page 23

Timothy31

05-18-09, 11:13 PM

Time Warner Cable Dropping HDNet Channels Nationwide May 31

Cable Operator Says There Is ‘Limited Appeal' for Mark Cuban-Backed Services

By Todd Spangler -- Multichannel News, 5/18/2009 9:32:23 AM MT

Time Warner Cable confirmed Monday it will stop offering HDNet and HDNet Movies across all of its systems effective May 31.

The move by Time Warner Cable, which has 8.7 million digital cable subscribers, is a blow to the Mark Cuban-backed HDNet, which was among the first HD services to cable operators.

Asked why the company was dropping HDNet's services, Time Warner Cable director of corporate public relations Robyn Watson said, "There's a limited appeal for the programming. In a world with more than 100 HD channels, being in HD is not enough. We are adding other channels in HD to give our customers more choice."

HDNet and HDNet Movies has been available to Time Warner Cable customers in the HD Xtra premium-priced tier, which depending on market costs up to $8.95 extra per month.

HDNet representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The flagship channel features up to 20 hours per week of original features, including a newsmagazine hosted by former CBS anchor Dan Rather.

Time Warner Cable disclosed the plans to drop the two HDNet services on its Web site May 15. The company also said on or about June 1 it will launch MAV TV HD, as part of the HD Xtra tier.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/232772-Time_Warner_Cable_Dropping_HDNet_Channels_Nationwide_May_31. php

Well this ticks me off. HDNET movies has movies that i watch fairly regularly. I can't even drop the damn HD tier until next march. We got the 2yr contract price lock thing. So if we drop it we break the contract. I know its only $3.95 but this sucks.

nickdawg

05-18-09, 11:38 PM

Berk32

05-18-09, 11:51 PM

$3.95? It's $6.95 here!! :(

Do you have a HD DVR + HDXtra combo deal?

In NYC - HD DVR is $10.95 and HD Xtra is $8.95 - but together they are $15... (and it also includes the sports package HD channels: NHL Network, CBS College Sports. Big Ten Network, Tennis)

BenJF3

05-19-09, 06:08 AM

Wow! $3.95??? I would have kept it for that price, but it's $6.95 here as well and that wasn't worth it for the 3-4 channels that were in the package.

Riverside_Guy

05-19-09, 10:24 AM

Well this ticks me off. HDNET movies has movies that i watch fairly regularly. I can't even drop the damn HD tier until next march. We got the 2yr contract price lock thing. So if we drop it we break the contract. I know its only $3.95 but this sucks.

I highly doubt the price lock means anything... this is an extra service and as such, if they unilaterally change it, by regulation you have (IMO) the right to terminate that service without penalty.

Riverside_Guy

05-19-09, 10:34 AM

$3.95? It's $6.95 here!! :(

This particular tier in most markets seems too have a stand alone price (I think it's 9 bucks here) and a bundle price, typically with DVR service. Interestingly enough, iin my market the individual prices keep going up, but the bundle price (15 bucks) seems to stay the same.

There's a LOT of grousing going on around the web... more so than I would think for some speciality channel. Could the outcry change anything? Could thousands of customers canceling the whole extra tier cause something to charge? My guess is mass defections from the tier are more likely to make any change...

Riverside_Guy

05-19-09, 10:42 AM

Do you have a HD DVR + HDXtra combo deal?

In NYC - HD DVR is $10.95 and HD Xtra is $8.95 - but together they are $15... (and it also includes the sports package HD channels: NHL Network, CBS College Sports. Big Ten Network, Tennis)

One odd thing is that both the DVR service and the stand alone price have risen while the bundle price has held the same. I think this is VERY intentional as it originally was a 5 HD only channel service... then channels started to get dropped. Then they added in a bunch of SD minor sports channels; which had ZERO to do with what the tier was sold as. I have always considered it as similar to the premium services, the incremental cost was not quite as much as the big guns, but while HDNet was fabulous, there wasn't as much programming as the big ones.

Far as I can tell, absent the few sports channels, it will remain as a 2 channel HD tier, Smithsonian and MGM, so even though it's a 4 buck incremental cost, there's no value for most subs.

Skipdrive

05-19-09, 10:54 AM

There's a LOT of grousing going on around the web... more so than I would think for some specialty channel. Could the outcry change anything? Could thousands of customers canceling the who extra tier cause something to charge? My guess is mass defections from the tier are more likely to make any change...

Somebody should start a petition to save them; maybe that would get the point across. When adding or deleting channels, they always say they're just giving the customer's what they want, more "choices". They just said nobody wants HDNet. But I've been a TWC subscriber for years and I've never once seen a questionnaire or survey of any kind asking me what channels I wanted to see. It's all just lying corp-speak, and if they're never called on it, if there's never any PR price to pay, they'll just keep doing it.

The fact is that HDNMovies is the best pure movie channel out there. Taking it away for some niche channel nobody cares about or asked for certainly doesn't serve their customers' interests.

DSperber

05-19-09, 12:17 PM

I'm annoyed.

I've been an HD Tier subscriber for years, specifically because that's where TWC/LA put HDNet and HDNet Movies. That is all that was on that channel (along with UHD, which doesn't count) for quite a while. But I was willing to pay the $5 price (for each tier TWC/LA offers) just for those two channels, because I really wanted them.

Recently they added MGM-HD, and soon they'll have Smithsonian HD. Total... 4 channels (until the two HDNet channels disappear). I will not pay $5 for these two remaining channels.

To make it worse, here in LA they put MLB in the Variety Tier (which is not free, but costs $5 like every tier does... since they don't have a "Digital Basic" as other areas do). MLB had rolled out MLB and required at least a digital basic service, and declared they wanted no subscriber to pay extra for MLB. But since TWC/LA had no "free" package" that conformed to the "minimal digital basic" level of service, they agreed with TWC/LA's decision to add it to Variety Tier (which was digital) since 85% of subscribers paid for that tier and MLB was happy with that coverage.

Unfortunately, I hadn't previously subscribed to Variety Tier but found myself forced to do so because I really wanted MLB. But this also gave me the other Variety Tier channel I'd really wanted, namely ScienceHD. I had subscribed to Choice Tier because it had NatGeoHD and I had previously decided I wanted NGCHD more, although I really wanted them both.

Now if TWC/LA had lived up to the requirements of MLB they could have made MLB available in ALL tiers. Since everybody has at least one tier (in order to be "digital") that would have satisfied the MLB intent of making their channel available for free to all digital subscribers. But no... TWC/LA obviously double-talked them into accepting distribution on a non-free for-pay tier that reached 85% of LA. Screw the customer.

And now they will be eliminating the two channels which provide the only reason to get HD Tier (at least for me), since UHD is worthless and MGMHD doesn't have DD5.1 sound yet.

So, having been "forced" to subscribe to ALL their tiers because of their "clever" spreading of my desirable channels around all of the tiers, I will now fight back by obviously canceling HD Tier. And I will also cancel Choice Tier, although I'd like NGCHD but it is the only channel in the tier that I watch and very rarely at that.

I'm annoyed and will express that with my wallet. I'd also be glad to sign a petition if someone will start it.

Mr Magic

05-19-09, 01:58 PM

Somebody should start a petition to save them; maybe that would get the point across.

A petition will have no effect. This is all part of the negotiating process. They obviously haven't gotten anywhere with Cuban so they're basically telling Cuban to agree to their terms or they will take his channels off the air. Time Warner has done it in the past with the LIN channels so don't think they won't do it. Time Warner took the local LIN NBC affiliate off the air for a month and replaced it with Starz when LIN tried to make Time Warner pay for broadcasting their HD feed. LIN eventually backed down and the channel was added back the night before the November sweeps started.

Cuban needs Time Warner far more than Time Warner needs Cuban's HDNet channels. That said, I will cancel Time Warner if the channels are removed.

DSperber

05-19-09, 03:43 PM

A petition will have no effect. This is all part of the negotiating process. They obviously haven't gotten anywhere with Cuban so they're basically telling Cuban to agree to their terms or they will take his channels off the air.Sounds very similar to the chicanery that went on a few years back with ABC/ESPN when that contract also came up for renewal. Eventually, with enough spitting back and forth the two sides worked out some kind of acceptable compromise (or the lesser partner got raped and just took it).

And then there was some NFL TV coverage crisis in the same vein. The whole nation got hysterical, and lo and behold they settled at the last minute and nobody lost their football.

I suspect you may be right here... that with enough pressure Cuban may give in, or TWC may give in to customer outrage (if enough complain and threaten to unsubscribe to optional services).

Gary J

05-19-09, 03:49 PM

He said he'd unsubscribe to TWC not the optional services so I'm sure they're shaking in their boots right now. :rolleyes:

Marcus Carr

05-19-09, 04:28 PM

Goodell Wants To Huddle With Time Warner Cable

In Wake Of Comcast-NFL Network Deal, Commissioner Looks To Score Other Carriage Accords

Mike Reynolds & John Eggerton -- Multichannel News, 5/19/2009 2:02:03 PM MT

Glenn Britt should expect a call from Roger Goodell soon.

The NFL commissioner figures to reach out to Time Warner Cable chairman in the wake of Comcast reaching a long-term deal with NFL Network, video-on-demand content and the pro football league's proposed Red Zone channel.

Goodell and Roberts shared a conference call with reporters announcing the top cable operator's pact, which both executives agreed was accelerated through personal discussions.

Asked if the NFL was currently negotiating with Time Warner Cable, which along with Cablevision, Charter and Suddenlink have been locked at the negotiating line of scrimmage with NFL Network over price and positioning, Goodell said "not to my knowledge. But I hope to open dialogue with Time Warner Cable."

Goodell went on to say that with the availability of the RedZone Channel, which showcases scoring opportunities and touchdowns, there is "a new way to create value and open up opportunities, similar to the arrangements with Brian."

Comcast, which has been engaged in various legal disputes with NFL Network, will move the service from a sports tier, where it has attracted about 2 million subscribers, to its Digital Classic service by Aug. 1. The upgrade will make NFL Network available to some 10.8 million Comcast subscribers, according to Goodell.

The deal, terms of which were not disclosed and were not specified by the executives on the conference calls, also means an end to their program carriage dispute currently before an FCC judge, and legal action in New York.

Sources put the term at 10 years with a monthly subscriber fee in the 40-50 cent range.

Roberts, who noted that if Goodell had not gotten personally involved that this would have "taken longer," said both sides made compromises, with Comcast looking to balance making the service broadly available, while keeping costs at long-term, predetermined, sustainable rates. "We didn't want to have discussions every few years," he said

To that end, Goodell said no determination had been made yet about adding two more games to the NFL regular-season slate (the league's owners are currently meeting in Fort Lauderdale) and if such an addition would trigger NFL Network ultimately presenting a full-season's worth of games.

As to the RedZone Channel, Roberts said Comcast was planning to position it on the sports tier. "In our view [RedZone Channel is] a logical replacement for NFL Network on the sports tier," he said. "We'll look to make a decision on that before the season."

During the conference call, Goodell said that with deals in place with DirecTV and now Fox and CBS, under two-year extensions through the 2013 season, the league could push ahead with the RedZone channel. He said the NFL wants to deploy the service "in the most effective ways to our fans and we want to stay on free TV in an effective way for our Sunday partners."

The service doesn't figure to have the ratings impact on the Sunday carriers on a sports tier that it could if it were made more widely available.

As part of new rights deals, CBS will televise Super Bowl in 2013, with Fox carrying the NFL championship game in 2014.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/232987-Goodell_Wants_To_Huddle_With_Time_Warner_Cable.php

nickdawg

05-19-09, 04:34 PM

Do you have a HD DVR + HDXtra combo deal?

In NYC - HD DVR is $10.95 and HD Xtra is $8.95 - but together they are $15... (and it also includes the sports package HD channels: NHL Network, CBS College Sports. Big Ten Network, Tennis)

I have a HD DVR and the HDTV Tier. Never once was I informed about a 'combo deal'. :(

What I can't believe is TWC waited until now to delete these channels. Why are they suddenly interested in "offering more choice"? Aren't a majority of TWC systems already on switch digital video(SDV), where bandwidth is almost unlimited? There should be no need to remove any channels.

It's a shame to see HD Net Movies go. It was a nice channel of commercial free, bug free, OAR movies.

wdaub1

05-19-09, 05:00 PM

In Albany NY we use to be the first to get new HD but now we have not seen anything new since December 08 So much for all of the better choices in lew of HD net avaliable on TW.

DSperber

05-19-09, 05:42 PM

TWC/LA programming alerts page has been updated.

It at least leaves the door open a little bit, and says:

"Effective May 27, 2009, Smithsonian HD will be launched on the HD Tier (an HD box is required) on channel 420."

"Effective May 27, 2009, we will be required to cease carriage of HDNet and HDNet Movies unless an agreement with the programmer is reached. If an agreement is reached HDNet will move from channel 420 to channel 459 and HDNet Movies will move from channel 421 to channel 458."

No mention of whether or not the HDN channels would be moved to "free" status or would still be part of HD Tier as part of the channel number reassignment. Previously this seemed to be different from how the channel number change for HDNet was announced in TWC/NY... with TWC/LA seemingly planning on keeping them in non-free HD Tier (assuming they were retained).

STEELERSRULE

05-19-09, 10:59 PM

Not sure if it has been mentioned before, but TWC Northeast Ohio(Akron, OH hub) customers should be aware that we "should" be getting about 5 new HD channels/month, at least according to a published report with a TWC representative.

We did get the new HD promised this past month, albeit about 7 days after they promised(promised 4/29/09, and got it around 5/7/09), but I chalk that up to the old Adelphia systems(which I was a customer with until TWC took over) having problems accepting the new SDV that was being incorporated into the system. But all that seems to be behind them now, so i would expect another 5 "free" HD channels coming within the next 3-4 weeks, with a total of about 100 HD "free" channels by 2010.

Also, this new deal with Comcast/NFl Network now has me wondering when/if TWC will do a similiar deal down the road. They are the 2nd biggest cable provider, and would be next on the NFL's list to get the deal done. But of course, the venom between these two is just as bad as it was between Comcast and the NFL. Probably worst since TWC(I was/am stil 100% on TWC's side on the previous problems with the NFL) NEVER carried The NFL Network at all. Not even on a Digital sports tier. But this new deal may pave the way for TWC, Cablevision, and others to put together a deal to let Lowest Digital Tier people get the channel. Stay tuned.

nickdawg

05-19-09, 11:39 PM

From Time Warner Cable, NE Ohio:

On or after May 27th, the following services will be added to the HD Plus Tier: Mav TV and Smithsonian.

Time Warner Cable’s agreements with programmers to carry their services routinely expire from time to time. We are usually able to obtain renewals or extensions of such agreements, and carriage of programming services is discontinued only in rare circumstances. The following agreements with programmers are due to expire soon, and we may be required to cease carriage of one or more of these services in the near future.

WFXP, WFXP HD, WJET, WJET HD, WTRF, GSN, E!, FSN Pittsburgh, WYFX HD, WTVG, WYTV, WKBN HD, WBNX, WAOH, Lifeskool On Demand, Great American Country, BBC America On Demand, Inspirational Life, NBA TV, ShopNBC, Style, Weather Channel, HD Net, HD Net Movies.

Nothing specific about HD Net being dropped from the lineup.

PedjaR

05-20-09, 12:39 AM

...
When adding or deleting channels, they always say they're just giving the customer's what they want, more "choices". They just said nobody wants HDNet. But I've been a TWC subscriber for years and I've never once seen a questionnaire or survey of any kind asking me what channels I wanted to see. It's all just lying corp-speak, and if they're never called on it, if there's never any PR price to pay, they'll just keep doing it.

The fact is that HDNMovies is the best pure movie channel out there. Taking it away for some niche channel nobody cares about or asked for certainly doesn't serve their customers' interests.

Couldn't agree more. I'll be really mad if the HDNet Movies gets dropped. The point of HDNet channels is far from just being HD as TW is presenting it; it is high quality content, all in HD and DD with closed captioning, uncut and with absolutely no interruptions - that's what makes it a premium channel. In my area, HD tier consists of the two HDNets, MGM HD and UniversalHD. Why is Universal a premium channel is beyond me - it has commercial interruptions and censors movies; I haven't watched it in more than a year. MGM HD is a HDNet Movies wanna be, more or less the same idea but noticeably worse execution: 1. much more obtrusive logo that is on all the time; 2. stereo sound (HDNet Movies offers DD); 3. no closed captioning; 4. somewhat worse choice of movies (that one is subjective); 5. some movies (not all) get interrupted - granted, only once per movie, and just for a single commercial advertising another movie, but interrupted nonetheless; 6. No nice on the web monthly schedule per day and per movie, you can only see a web page showing a day at the time. There is not a single thing MGM HD does better than HDNet Movies. I'd gladly pay HD tier price for HDNet Movies alone, but for MGM HD only, I am not sure (thay are adding Smithsonian, which appears to be yet another National Geographic/Discovery type channel, I would not pay for that). Actually, this is enough to make me consider dropping TWC altogether and getting a provider that offers HDNet Movies (which seems to be everybody else).

Riverside_Guy

05-20-09, 10:29 AM

Sounds very similar to the chicanery that went on a few years back with ABC/ESPN when that contract also came up for renewal. Eventually, with enough spitting back and forth the two sides worked out some kind of acceptable compromise (or the lesser partner got raped and just took it).

And then there was some NFL TV coverage crisis in the same vein. The whole nation got hysterical, and lo and behold they settled at the last minute and nobody lost their football.

I suspect you may be right here... that with enough pressure Cuban may give in, or TWC may give in to customer outrage (if enough complain and threaten to unsubscribe to optional services).

Don't forget that absent HDNets, how many NON ad supported channels do you get for the price of the tier (and I'm specifically not even looking at the few very minor sports channels they have in the bundle in my market)?

Riverside_Guy

05-20-09, 10:44 AM

Couldn't agree more. I'll be really mad if the HDNet Movies gets dropped. The point of HDNet channels is far from just being HD as TW is presenting it; it is high quality content, all in HD and DD with closed captioning, uncut and with absolutely no interruptions - that's what makes it a premium channel. In my area, HD tier consists of the two HDNets, MGM HD and UniversalHD. Why is Universal a premium channel is beyond me - it has commercial interruptions and censors movies; I haven't watched it in more than a year. MGM HD is a HDNet Movies wanna be, more or less the same idea but noticeably worse execution: 1. much more obtrusive logo that is on all the time; 2. stereo sound (HDNet Movies offers DD); 3. no closed captioning; 4. somewhat worse choice of movies (that one is subjective); 5. some movies (not all) get interrupted - granted, only once per movie, and just for a single commercial advertising another movie, but interrupted nonetheless; 6. No nice on the web monthly schedule per day and per movie, you can only see a web page showing a day at the time. There is not a single thing MGM HD does better than HDNet Movies. I'd gladly pay HD tier price for HDNet Movies alone, but for MGM HD only, I am not sure (thay are adding Smithsonian, which appears to be yet another National Geographic/Discovery type channel, I would not pay for that). Actually, this is enough to make me consider dropping TWC altogether and getting a provider that offers HDNet Movies (which seems to be everybody else).

Excellent analysis... many seem to forget that some of us get agast at paying extra for ad supported channels!

BTW, don't forget to catch the "Girlfriend Experience" tonight on HDNet... keep in mind that we have seen several films before they even opened in theaters on HDNet. This one is Soderberg's latest film... and it's female lead (Sasha Gray) is a porn star who... well, google her!

Marcus Carr

05-20-09, 12:29 PM

This one is Soderberg's latest film... and it's female lead (Sasha Gray) is a porn star who... well, google her!

What a way to start your "legit" career! (She's beautiful, but a bit too...uh..."extreme" for my taste.:eek:)

strutter

05-20-09, 01:58 PM

LL3HD

05-20-09, 02:03 PM

i dont get into puke and urine.:eek::confused: Way more than we needed to know... but ... Glad to see we're staying on topic...isn’t that Time Warner’s tagline. :p:D

lilcasino

05-20-09, 02:12 PM

Our Wed newspaper legal add says we're getting Smithsonian & RFD to replace hdnet/hdmovies. Earlier this month legal add said Smithsonian & Mav. I went to RFD and can't believe its a hd channel.

LL3HD

05-20-09, 02:15 PM

I went to RFD and can't believe its a hd channel. The only thing I know of RFD is that they simulcast the Imus In The Morning show.

strutter

05-20-09, 02:19 PM

:eek::confused: Way more than we needed to know... but ... Glad to see we're staying on topic...isn’t that Time Warner’s tagline. :p:D

sorry.........:D

jcalabria

05-20-09, 03:23 PM

Latest update on the Charlotte Channel Changes web page:
May 31, 2009: HD Net (Channel 292) and HD Net Movies (Channel 293) will no longer be available on the Digital Cable HD Tier. The following channels will be added to the HD Tier:

Smithsonian Channel - Channel 292
MavTV - Channel 293
Hallmark Movie Channel HD - Channel 294

posg

05-20-09, 06:18 PM

jcalabria

05-20-09, 06:53 PM

bastards !!!!

Don't hold back... tell us how you really feel!:D

posg

05-20-09, 08:24 PM

Don't hold back... tell us how you really feel!:D

No problem, they're bastards.

PedjaR

05-20-09, 11:51 PM

Excellent analysis... many seem to forget that some of us get agast at paying extra for ad supported channels!

BTW, don't forget to catch the "Girlfriend Experience" tonight on HDNet... keep in mind that we have seen several films before they even opened in theaters on HDNet. This one is Soderberg's latest film... and it's female lead (Sasha Gray) is a porn star who... well, google her!

Well, our web site got the same kind of update as Charlotte (Smithsonian, MavTV & Hallmark Movie Channel HD in place of the two HDNets). Exactly how is Hallmark Movies a premium channel? Isn't it just like AMC but with worse movies? And MavTV appears to be a complete waste of bandwidth. Of 64 HD channels we have, most are a total waste of time - I have actually recorded stuff from only 10 of them (and occasionally glimpsed another 4 or 5 live), and they are taking two of those 10 away, including my favorite. :mad: Of course, adding something I'd actually watch, like IFC HD, is apparently strictly forbidden.

Thanks for the "Girlfriend Experience" tip. Once a month (when HDNet puts the schedule on their web site) I make a list of what I'd like to see and when it is showing, and luckily that one was included; on the other hand, apparently I wasted my time to include June data. Starting a few days ago, I am trying to record a lot of stuff from HDNet Movies while the channel is still there. Of course, eSATA is broken, so I have space for only 20 hours or so. I just loooove TW right now.

Riverside_Guy

05-21-09, 11:38 AM

Of course, adding something I'd actually watch, like IFC HD, is apparently strictly forbidden.

Actually, if you had IFC HD, you'd be very disappointed. Pretty much everything they show is a 4:3 version, distorted/stretched horizontally. Damn shame.

scott_bernstein

05-21-09, 06:19 PM

Actually, if you had IFC HD, you'd be very disappointed. Pretty much everything they show is a 4:3 version, distorted/stretched horizontally. Damn shame.
In the last few days (weeks?) I've noticed a few more movies in true HD. But there doesn't seem to be any consistency, nor does there seem to be any way to find out which movies are actually in HD w/o checking in on it (though I believe that once a movies is confirmed in HD it continues to be shown in HD for all subsequent showings).

PedjaR

05-21-09, 07:07 PM

Actually, if you had IFC HD, you'd be very disappointed. Pretty much everything they show is a 4:3 version, distorted/stretched horizontally. Damn shame.

Thanks, now I feel better about not having it ;)

Silvers24

05-21-09, 11:30 PM

Ken H

05-21-09, 11:33 PM

nickdawg

05-21-09, 11:43 PM

Signed up for TWC about a month or two ago, had their internet for years, so, since D*TV was no longer being nice to us, we got a kick ass deal on TWC bundle.

Happy so far, but very hard to find any info relating to them adding more HD Channels for us in Conneaut Ohio.

Apperantly Conneaut was former Adelphia, I dont know how it works, so it would be nice to know.

Any info when TWC will be adding more channels here? And what about HD channels for HBO, and the sort, one HD channel, though nice, is painful.

Yes, TWC NE Ohio is adding more HD channels. They're in the process of adding channels now, but it depends on whether or not your particular area has Switched Digital Video-SDV yet. All of the existing TWC areas and former Comcast areas in NE Ohio have SDV, and only some parts of former Adelphia have SDV.

The following channels have been added to date:
USAHD
SCIFIHD
Palladia HD
DiscoveryHD
DisneyHD

If you have the channels listed below, your area has SDV:
TLCHD
Anizal PlanetHD
BravoHD
ABC Family HD
ESPN News HD
CNBC HD
MLB HD

If you have the seven channels above, these channels should be arriving on May 26:
CNN HD
F/X HD
Science HD(Discovery Networks)
FOX News HD
Golf Channel HD
National Geographic HD
Smithsonian HD
MAV TV HD

Also, here is a link to the Cleveland Ohio TWC thread, the current discussion:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=287017&page=641

LL3HD

05-21-09, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by OSUBuckly in the local TWNY thread...

I emailed Mark Cuban asking him if there was anything I could do to help save HDNet and HDNet Movies on TWC. It took him only 40 minutes to write me back with some people to contact. Here they are:

Time Warner Cable Executives:

Darryl Ryan - Director Of Media Relations
darryl.ryan@twcable.com

Alexander Dudley - Vice President, Public Relations
(212) 364-8229
alex.dudley@twcable.com
AlexTWC on Twitter

John Orzolick - Customer Care Advocate, Corporate Office
customercarefeedback@ndc.rr.com

Mariam Asmar
mariam.asmar@twcable.com
MsmarTWC on Twitter

Please contact these people and let them know you want HDNet & HDMovies to stick around!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16507624#post16507624

Silvers24

05-21-09, 11:49 PM

I Have these:

The following channels have been added to date:
USAHD
SCIFIHD
Palladia HD
DiscoveryHD
DisneyHD

But not the rest.

So I guess we have not yet went through the SDV?
Is this the same as the DTV that's suppose to happen June 12 (Which I know will happen here in Conneaut)

nickdawg

05-21-09, 11:57 PM

I Have these:

The following channels have been added to date:
USAHD
SCIFIHD
Palladia HD
DiscoveryHD
DisneyHD

But not the rest.

So I guess we have not yet went through the SDV?

Correct. Those 5 channels were added in the beginning of April to all areas, regardless of SDV.

You should be getting SDV within the next few weeks. An unofficial date for the Bainbridge area is May 27th. Like usual, TWC has dropped the ball on this project.

Is this the same as the DTV that's suppose to happen June 12 (Which I know will happen here in Conneaut)

No. The June 12 DTV transition is completely unrelated to cable television. Cable will continue to broadcast the same after June 12, it is only analog over the air channels that will be going away.

SDV = Switched Digital Video. SDV is a way for cable companies to add more high definition channels with the limited amount of bandwidth they have. Less viewed channels are put on SDV, along with the new HD channels.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=287017&page=641

Silvers24

05-22-09, 12:02 AM

nickdawg

05-22-09, 12:11 AM

I see, thank you.

So basically, the HD channels is a waiting game, it will eventually happen, but slowly?

I am also going to guess that Premium HD Channels for Premium tiers (HBO/etc) will come slowly aswell, right?

The plan is for at least 5 channels a month, but we usually get close to 7. Plus the next batch after May 25 is on June 15, which means they might be coming twice a month. :D We're supposed to have around 100 channels by 2010.

The problems now are with the SDV. Some areas don't have it yet, and areas that do have it have problems with it. When the channels including TLC, CNBC, Anizal, etc were added, the channels did not work in most areas, there were just black screen on those channels. It took a few days to work the bugs out.

The link to Cleveland TWC is in my post above.

Silvers24

05-22-09, 12:12 AM

Nice, well, here is hoping it happens for us soon.
Otherwise, Conneaut sucks. :( (Although, it does anyway. Haha)

But that is awesome, 100(+) channels in one year.

nickdawg

05-22-09, 12:20 AM

Nice, well, here is hoping it happens for us soon.
Otherwise, Conneaut sucks. :( (Although, it does anyway. Haha)

But that is awesome, 100(+) channels in one year.

I sure hope so. Next month will be my celebration:rolleyes: of three years with TWC HD. I'm ready for more channels to be added to that anorexic, piss poor lineup. And finally some real HD, unlike TNT, TBS and their stretched programming that looks like crap.

Silvers24

05-22-09, 01:25 AM

I sure hope so. Next month will be my celebration:rolleyes: of three years with TWC HD. I'm ready for more channels to be added to that anorexic, piss poor lineup. And finally some real HD, unlike TNT, TBS and their stretched programming that looks like crap.
I hear you, I hate how they stretch the damn shows.
Just makes me...:mad:

We where use to DirecTV, we were paying for the HD.
At the time, WELL WORTH IT.
When we finally went with TWC, we liked the deals, but did not know we where losing so many HD channels.

But for the price, and them adding them monthly, and the way DTV screwed us over (After 13 years of being with them) the switch was worth it.

Still getting use to TWC, but hey, isn't so bad. :D

lilcasino

05-22-09, 09:40 AM

My official response

Thank you for writing us. You have reached the Office of the President for Time Warner Cable.

After extensive negotiations, Time Warner Cable’s agreements with HDNet and HDNet Movies have officially expired. Consequently, Time Warner Cable will drop the HDNet and HDNet Movies channels by the end of this month.

Time Warner Cable’s largest expense is programming. The price we charge our customers is directly affected by the price we must pay for programming. That is why we are doing everything in our power to control programming costs, which continue to increase every year.

HDNet would only allow us to keep these channels if we moved HDNet to the Digital Basic Tier. We believe that offering HDNet on a broadly distributed tier is not the right value proposition for our customers.

We work to provide quality HD programming at fair value to our customers. Therefore, we are excited to be upgrading our HD Tier. New networks include all of the following: Smithsonian Channel HD and RFD HD launching by the end of the month, as well as MavTV HD launching at the end of summer ‘09. This new programming, offered through Time Warner Cable’s Premium HD Tier, will provide distinctive and high-quality HD programming geared toward, but not limited to, our arts and outdoors enthusiasts, movie lovers and MMA fans.

For more information or any updates about this decision, please visit our homepage www.timewarnercable.com .

Please know that we value you as our customer and we apologize for any inconvenience or frustration this decision has caused you.

Regards,

Ms. Rutherford

Customer Care Advocate

Time Warner Cable Corporate Office

Riverside_Guy

05-22-09, 10:06 AM

In the last few days (weeks?) I've noticed a few more movies in true HD. But there doesn't seem to be any consistency, nor does there seem to be any way to find out which movies are actually in HD w/o checking in on it (though I believe that once a movies is confirmed in HD it continues to be shown in HD for all subsequent showings).

It's odd, after we got IFC HD, the next 3-4 times I checked, it seemed to be all HD. Since that time, every time I've "checked in" I find it all stretch-o-vision.

While the little "HDTV" tags that appear in the program's description are spotty at best, they never seem to be shown on IFC.

Still, for a channel like this, I'm quite shocked... I mean if you don't have or don't want to c create a HD version, for heaven's sake show the bloody widescreen version in SD without destroying the picture!

Riverside_Guy

05-22-09, 10:15 AM

Mr Magic

05-22-09, 10:25 AM

HDNet would only allow us to keep these channels if we moved HDNet to the Digital Basic Tier. We believe that offering HDNet on a broadly distributed tier is not the right value proposition for our customers.

So that's what the dispute is over. Cuban is crazy if he thinks Time Warner is going to budge on this issue. The Big Ten Network wasn't successful with this strategy so what makes him think he will? He'll come to his senses when the channels get dropped at the end of the month.

lilcasino

05-22-09, 11:00 AM

Since work is dead today I sent my TWC response to Mark...replied within 5 min.

Sad. we reduced the cost of the networks by about 75pct and they said it was still too much.

Where do you live ? Im happy to help you find another distributor of HDNet and HDNet Movies.

Unfortunately we dont have the leverage that big companies have so TWC thinks they can abuse us

thank you for taking the time to follow up with TWC and me

m

mecasull

05-22-09, 02:02 PM

nickdawg

05-22-09, 04:24 PM

So now they are claiming they dropped HDNet because Cuban wanted his channels to be part of the basic HD package, not as a pay extra channel. The irony is that we get a bunch of unwatchable stretch-o-vision, non HD channel taking up a lot of bandwidth on the basic package, yet a channel like HDNet which is amoung the very few 100% HD channels gets dropped?

BOGUS

Time Warner is stupid. First they used bandwidth as a reason why they can't add GOOD HD channels. Now that they have the bandwidth(through SDV) they're still using the "we want to add better/more services" excuse. It' truly sad that the hands down BEST HD movie channel is being dropped in favor of a channel that has little or no HD(Mav TV) and I can only assume eventually other channels will be added that are stretched only. Because god forbid J6P calls from the trailer park complaining that every inch of his new flatscreen isn't filled! ;)

http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/4631/cwclolcat.jpg

Crime Warner Cable: Appeasing the Lowest Common Denominator in the Cheapest Way Possible.

wdaub1

05-22-09, 05:07 PM

Any dates you have from TW are worthless. We have had channels to be added since Dec 2008 but nothing has been added at all. We at one time had the most HD of any division now we are the worst. When email TW the tell me we are adding channels all the time but when I aske them to name one added since DEC 2008 I get no answer. We have ONETV a news channel which has zero HD content but are told we don't have channels like USA FoxNews SiFi Big Ten HBO's eTC as these are not requested or worth while channels.

Marcus Carr

05-22-09, 05:55 PM

Disgruntled Time Warner Cable Sub Switches To Dish Over HDNet

L.A. Subscriber and Mixed Martial Arts Fan E-mails Mark Cuban Over Carriage Spat

MCN Staff -- Multichannel News, 5/22/2009 1:13:11 PM MT

Time Warner Cable's move to stop carrying Mark Cuban's HDNet as of the end of the month has prompted at least one of the cable company's subscribers to cancel his service -- and immediately subscribe to Dish Network.

Chris Carey, a Los Angeles resident who is evidently a huge fan of HDNet's mixed martial arts programming, e-mailed a missive Friday to Cuban detailing his unhappiness with the cable operator's decision.

Carey, who copied several Multichannel News staffers, HDNet and Time Warner Cable employees, and others, asked whether Cuban would be able to "close the deal" with Dish when that contract was up for renewal.

Cuban replied in less than an hour: "We just signed a new deal with Dish, so you are safe. Thanks so much for your support!"

Here's the text of Carey's original e-mail:

Dear Mr. Cuban,

I Want My MMA!

I had to jump through a few hoops this week to get it.

I've been a very disgruntled Time Warner Cable customer. I'll spare you the laundry list of customer service issues I've suffered through. It turns out that none of the issues were a true deal breaker.

Time Warner Cable's legal notice earlier this week that HDNet would be dropped from their channel line-up at the end of this month was that deal breaker. I finally pulled the trigger. On Monday evening, I called Dish Network and scheduled an installation appointment. It took some convincing to get my landlord to sign off on the installation-agreement form. (You have to know my landlord to understand why that is easier said than done.) I got the form signed, and I successfully made the switch to satellite yesterday. Today, I'm visiting my local TWC office to drop off both of their lousy Motorola DVR set-top boxes.

Alright, those weren't such bad hoops, but they have been enough of a hindrance to get me to tolerate frequent outages, constant pixelation, and an unreliable DVR. Sorry, I said I'd spare you the laundry list. Trust me, it is much longer than that.

Dropping HDNet was Time Warner Cable's last straw. I'm a huge MMA fan. If I'm going to pay a lot of money every month for television, the service provider must have HDNet. The first thing I do every Friday evening when I get home from a long week of work is tune in to Bas Rutten on Inside MMA. I pull all-nighters watching the live broadcasts of Dream and Sengoku from Japan. There is no way I'm going to miss the 'roid raging freak Jose Canseco get his ass handed to him by a 7" tall Korean freak show in the early morning hours of next Tuesday.

When asked why Time Warner Cable was dropping HDNet, Multichannel.com reported TWC director of corporate public relations executive Robyn Watson as stating "There's limited appeal for the programming."

I feel this statement is a bit shortsighted. HDNet broadcasts an extensive amount of the best non-UFC branded mixed martial arts programming. The sport is growing rapidly, and so is the audience. Do they understand that are dropping a revenue stream with excellent growth potential. Do the TWC executives not realize that even though HDNet doesn't carry UFC programming, they will be losing subscribers like myself that spend upwards of $50 monthly on UFC pay-per-view events?

Mr. Cuban, I'm not writing just to kiss your ass. I do have a question for you.

Are you going to be able to close the deal when HDNet's contract with Dish Network is up for renegotiation? I have no clue as to when your deal with Dish Network ends, and I signed a 2-year agreement as a new subscriber. Needless to say, the early termination penalty is fairly stiff.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/263581-Disgruntled_Time_Warner_Cable_Sub_Switches_To_Dish_Over_HDNe t.php

strutter

05-22-09, 06:32 PM

^^
thats walking the walk.
too bad one sub wont mean a thing to TW. they dont care what people want. its just about the pennies to them.

STEELERSRULE

05-22-09, 07:45 PM

Yes, TWC NE Ohio is adding more HD channels. They're in the process of adding channels now, but it depends on whether or not your particular area has Switched Digital Video-SDV yet. All of the existing TWC areas and former Comcast areas in NE Ohio have SDV, and only some parts of former Adelphia have SDV.

The following channels have been added to date:
USAHD
SCIFIHD
Palladia HD
DiscoveryHD
DisneyHD

If you have the channels listed below, your area has SDV:
TLCHD
Anizal PlanetHD
BravoHD
ABC Family HD
ESPN News HD
CNBC HD
MLB HD

If you have the seven channels above, these channels should be arriving on May 26:
CNN HD
F/X HD
Science HD(Discovery Networks)
FOX News HD
Golf Channel HD
National Geographic HD
Smithsonian HD
MAV TV HD

Also, here is a link to the Cleveland Ohio TWC thread, the current discussion:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=287017&page=641

Thanks for the confirmation on my info nickdawg.

I am out here in NW Pennsylvania, and I get my cable via TWC out of Hermitage, PA. It was a former Adelphia system that was bought out.

The few days prior to getting TLC, AnimalPLNT, MLB, CNBC, etc... went HD my HD4250 went "crazy". It turned on and shut off, on it's own, and then went through the hard reset on it's own like 3-4 times over a 3 day period.

I did nothing. It just did it on it's own. Then when those channels fiirst got listed, I got no picture, and "maybe" sound. But most likely nothing at all(especially on CNBC+, TLC, and Bravo). But after a day of that evrything up to this point(5/22/09) seems to be working just fine.

You don't like SDV? Why? I just ask because I don't know the downside/benfits too it's existence at all. Just wondering why are you down on it, and if there is an upside to SDV. Or am I going to be seeing alot of problems in the furture with SDV?

I like my HD lineup(I don't have nor will I ever get the HD Tier. Offers nothing IMHO that would interest me) the way it is. Local, Standard HD, and Digital Tier HD is more than enough for my appetites.

MLB Network is GORGEOUS in HD. As is ESPNNews for some reason. Looking forward to the new stuff coming over the summer.

Hopefully TWC and the NFL will strike a similiar deal and we will have NFL Network/NFL Network HD/NFL on Demand/NFL Red Zone channel by the beginning of the 2009 season.

Gary J

05-22-09, 08:11 PM

You don't like SDV? Why? I just ask because I don't know the downside/benfits too it's existence at all. Just wondering why are you down on it, and if there is an upside to SDV. Or am I going to be seeing alot of problems in the furture with SDV?

Of course there are benefits to SDV. It was just about 5 years ago when most of us had about 4-5 HD channels total. He is a TWC hater and SDV is part of TWC, that's all.

nickdawg

05-22-09, 09:17 PM

Of course there are benefits to SDV. It was just about 5 years ago when most of us had about 4-5 HD channels total. He is a TWC hater and SDV is part of TWC, that's all.

No, that's not the reason why. The reason why is SDV has been full of bugs since day one in most areas. I've had lots of trouble with it. Also, the majority of the comments in the Cleveland TWC thread around the time the channels were added were about problems with the new channels. It took at least a week and a half to two weeks to get everything working decently, in the areas that got SDV. Some parts of the TWC NE Ohio systems are still waiting for SDV to even be active.

I have the HDTV Tier, when they first started SDV, it was the HD Tier channels that were punished. It took TWO MONTHS and at least THREE service calls to finally get the problem fixed. And the in house service calls were useless because the problem had nothing to do with my end. It was some encoding problem at the headend.

bob2274

05-23-09, 12:22 AM

Cuban is awesome.

for me the only hd channel i dont get, but want/desperately need is NHL Network HD... But it will never happen here in North Carolina, despite the fact that this TWC division's territory includes an NHL team (that has even won a Stanley Cup)... but whatever.

I had posted this earlier on a FiOS thread-
All of this while TWC files appeal after appeal to keep MASN off of its North Carolina systems because they claim that no one wants it. The only thing I see that both of these things have in common is that they are independent channels that they don't want to deal with.

I thought about it later, and I have to add NFL Network to the list. We'll see if TWC can get a deal done with NFL-N since Comcast has reached a long term deal.

For those in the Triangle area, it's funny how you have probably the worst regional sports coverage anywhere in the country. FS Carolinas still does not show every Hurricanes game, much less in HD. Time Warner Cable is fighting carriage of MASN even though they agreed to the arbitration condition when Adelphia was bought. With that battle, they are fighting to ward off a channel that produces every single game of two baseball teams in HD. MASN doesn't show every game live in HD (every replay of a MASN2 game is HD), but they do show every single Nationals and Orioles game live. Whichever one is on the main channel is shown in HD regardless. Anyway, Time Warner is doing a great job keeping its costs down, just imagine how low cable bills would be if they didn't show any channels at all except for Time Warner channels...

lSunNYl

05-23-09, 01:37 AM

i dont kno if any1 else is having this problem , but ESPN keeps blacking out an returning , been happening for the past 2 days.. (upstate ny , albany)

Riverside_Guy

05-23-09, 11:52 AM

Of course there are benefits to SDV. It was just about 5 years ago when most of us had about 4-5 HD channels total. He is a TWC hater and SDV is part of TWC, that's all.

FWIW, in many of the biggest markets, TWC has more than sufficient overall bandwidth. I happen to be in one of the top 2. We have had most of our backbone redone in fiber (this happened almost a decade ago), so I am 2-300 feet from their fiber node.

What held us back was way, way too many analog channels... something like 75 or so. They dropped 40 or so and were able to pop in something like 60+ HD channels all at once. We still have bandwidth to spare AND another 35 or so analog channels. BTW, one analog channel takes the same bandwidth as roughly 3 HD channels. So for us, SDV isn't nearly as necessary as in some other markets.

glyph

05-23-09, 02:04 PM

I'm just dumbfounded that they don't have SpeedHD here in Dayton, OH. Why the hell not?

humdinger70

05-23-09, 06:37 PM

Just got the postcard today from TWC San Diego.

Smithsonian TV and MavTV to be added on May 27, channels 717 and 720, respectively. The HDnet channels go away the same day.

Marcus Carr

05-23-09, 08:17 PM

Time Warner adding 5 channels, dropping 2

By Terry Morris
Staff Writer
Updated 3:58 PM Wednesday, May 20, 2009

DAYTON — Time Warner Cable taketh, but it also giveth.

Although it will no longer offer HDNet and HDNet Movies to subscribers across the country as of May 31, it will offer Dayton and Cincinnati area high-definition viewers several new options before then.

“The real story is that on May 27 we will be launching Bravo, CNBC, FX, Major League Baseball and Lifetime Movies, all in HD,” at no extra cost for high-definition subscribers, Time Warner spokesperson Pam McDonald said.

The additions will be available to customers with the standard HD package, whereas HDNet and HDNet Movies have been part of a premium level.

The cable firm cited “limited appeal” as the reason for dropping the two channels nationally.

Channel positions for the new HD channels will be different in Dayton and Cincinnati.

Dayton positions will be: Major League Baseball, 784; FX, 785; Bravo, 786; Lifetime Movies, 787, and CNBC, 788.

Cincinnati locations for the same channels will be: 958,959,960, 961 and 962.

McDonald said the moves are meant “to help us stay competitive.”

http://www.daytondailynews.com/entertainment/tv/time-warner-adding-5-channels-dropping-2-127276.html?showComments=true

DSperber

05-23-09, 10:03 PM

TWC/LA has now announced their replacements for the two HDNet channels, also in HD Tier: one is Smithsonian HD as seems to be a national thing, and the other is something called Crime & Investigation HD (WTF?? this is a channel?).

I still plan to drop this tier on Wednesday when the HDNet channels vanish.

Myron4

05-24-09, 06:41 AM

i dont kno if any1 else is having this problem , but ESPN keeps blacking out an returning , been happening for the past 2 days.. (upstate ny , albany)

ESPNEWS HD is black now in North Texas-Dallas (I called & confirmed issue at plant), while every other HD channel is fine (although some get outrageous data breaks from time to time). This happened with ESPNEWS HD a few weeks ago also during the weekend & it was fixed Monday late afternoon...

CSR said they're testing something in my part of Dallas this weekend (like removing HDNet & adding Smithsonian). Going to have to switch to FiOS shortly, luckily I have the option, HDNet offers some programming (DREAM MMA) that I can't do without.

hcour

05-24-09, 07:09 AM

If TWC drops HDNet and HDNet Movies, that'll be the last straw for me. I'm switching to satellite or U-Verse.

Skipdrive

05-24-09, 01:49 PM

Time Warner adding 5 channels, dropping 2

By Terry Morris
Staff Writer
Updated 3:58 PM Wednesday, May 20, 2009

DAYTON — Time Warner Cable taketh, but it also giveth.

The cable firm cited “limited appeal” as the reason for dropping the two channels nationally.

McDonald said the moves are meant “to help us stay competitive.”

What complete garbage. :rolleyes:

BenJF3

05-24-09, 01:53 PM

If TWC drops HDNet and HDNet Movies, that'll be the last straw for me. I'm switching to satellite or U-Verse.

It's pretty much a done deal from what I see. The HDNet's are getting dropped. For me, it's no big deal - I canceled them a long time ago. However, I see where the appeal is for other people.

kevinivey

05-24-09, 03:11 PM

I dropped the HD tier about a year ago, but would had welcomed the HDNets to the "free" HD lineup, oh well.

bidger

05-24-09, 05:46 PM

Hopefully TWC and the NFL will strike a similiar deal and we will have NFL Network/NFL Network HD/NFL on Demand/NFL Red Zone channel by the beginning of the 2009 season.

You might get the NFL Network this Season, but I believe according to the press release earlier this year the earliest you'll get Red Zone is the 2012 Season.

Weaselboy

05-25-09, 12:27 PM

I dropped the HD tier about a year ago, but would had welcomed the HDNets to the "free" HD lineup, oh well.

From what I have read, that was the deal killer for TW. The HDNet channels would have been forced on all of us and TW would have to pay Cuban for each subscriber with that channel, with the predictable end result being a fee increase to all of us for the "standard" packages we have now. I know Cuban is saying he offered to reduce the cost by 75%, but it still would have been forced on all of us for a cost.

I certainly am not a TW apologist, but I have to say I agree with TW in principle on both this and the NFL Ticket deal (same issue).

Skipdrive

05-25-09, 01:23 PM

What's wrong with leaving the HDNet's on the "HD tier", or whatever they used to call it? I always thought that's where it was, so the people who wanted those four channels or whatever it was would pay for it - which I gladly would in order to keep HDNM; whatever it takes. If they haven't changed that model, then Cuban has every right to complain about a reduction in his subscriber fee, and TWC has an obligation to keep it on the air somehow. Cubes provided them HD content when virtually nobody else was.

Berk32

05-25-09, 01:25 PM

What's wrong with leaving the HDNet's on the "HD tier", or whatever they used to call it?

That you need to ask Cuban... that's his company's demand.

jnv11

05-25-09, 02:41 PM

That you need to ask Cuban... that's his company's demand.

Is Marc Cuban looking to squeeze some money out of the cable companies to pay for his lawyer or lawyers :p ? In all seriousness, he is a defendant in an insider trading lawsuit brought by the SEC over some alleged insider trading involving the Mamma.com search engine.

Satch Man

05-25-09, 04:20 PM

From what I have read, that was the deal killer for TW. The HDNet channels would have been forced on all of us and TW would have to pay Cuban for each subscriber with that channel, with the predictable end result being a fee increase to all of us for the "standard" packages we have now. I know Cuban is saying he offered to reduce the cost by 75%, but it still would have been forced on all of us for a cost.

I certainly am not a TW apologist, but I have to say I agree with TW in principle on both this and the NFL Ticket deal (same issue).

Does anyone know what Mr. Cuban's cost proposed to TWC was (or is?) If those channels had been moved to HD Digital Standard, how much more on average would subs have to pay?

Jack

posg

05-25-09, 04:53 PM

Does anyone know what Mr. Cuban's cost proposed to TWC was (or is?) If those channels had been moved to HD Digital Standard, how much more on average would subs have to pay?

Jack

Cuban got greedy, plain and simple. Even if he reduced the rate per sub by 75% (read somewhere), the Digital Standard tier reachs more than five times as many subscribers as the tier that the HD Net channels were on. If less than 20% of the digital universe was willing to pay extra for the HD tier, well there you have it. Sometimes you just need to leave well enough alone, Mark.

I disagree with what TWC did, but I understand their logic.

gerhard911

05-25-09, 05:08 PM

the Digital Standard tier reachs more than five times as many subscribers as the tier that the HD Net channels were on.

Could you provide a source to validate that statistic you threw out ?

nickdawg

05-25-09, 06:32 PM

Does anyone know what Mr. Cuban's cost proposed to TWC was (or is?) If those channels had been moved to HD Digital Standard, how much more on average would subs have to pay?

Jack

I think this is just like TWC vs. NFL Network. TWC(the lying, cheating bastards) are pretending they have the customers' best interests by "saving" us from the greedy programming provider.

I don't care if the bill increases to add NFL Network or HD Nets to Digital Basic. I'd welcome that increase because at least it is for a valid reason.

But instead, we get TWC dropping HD Net and the damn bill will probably increase anyway.

posg

05-25-09, 06:46 PM

Could you provide a source to validate that statistic you threw out ?

Inside information. I could tell you my source but then I would have to shoot you.;)

Weaselboy

05-25-09, 06:53 PM

I think this is just like TWC vs. NFL Network. TWC(the lying, cheating bastards) are pretending they have the customers' best interests by "saving" us from the greedy programming provider.

I don't care if the bill increases to add NFL Network or HD Nets to Digital Basic. I'd welcome that increase because at least it is for a valid reason.

But instead, we get TWC dropping HD Net and the damn bill will probably increase anyway.

But there is the rub I suppose. I do care if the bill increases for more channels I do not care about and will not watch. With the extra channels in a separate package you still have the option of getting the channels, without me subsidizing the cost.

nickdawg

05-25-09, 07:22 PM

But there is the rub I suppose. I do care if the bill increases for more channels I do not care about and will not watch. With the extra channels in a separate package you still have the option of getting the channels, without me subsidizing the cost.

But still, the bill increases: channels or no channels. I used to be in the high $90s and now this year it is $103(and I'm sure its going up). Only reason I'm not foaming at the mouth is we are getting tons of new HD channels. I've seen the costs, NFL Network would not cost that much more broken down over all digital tier subscriptions. It's only 40 - 50 cents extra on Comcast. Big Whoop! And the original price would be 70 cents. So the Digital Tier would be $5.50 or $5.70 instead of just $5. At least we'd be getting NFL Network.

TWC knows people want the channel, and they know more people will subscribe to their otherwise worthless bulls... Sports Tier.

bob2274

05-25-09, 07:33 PM

The thing that kills me about big cable companies is that the only programming they deem worthy of basic carriage are channels that are owned by Viacom, Time Warner, Comcast, News Corp, and Disney. There are a couple of independent regional sports networks like NESN and YES that are thrown in there, but only because they show live games of the two most popular teams in baseball. Otherwise, the cable operators deem most independent channels "not popular enough" for any kind of wide distribution.

nickdawg

05-25-09, 07:59 PM

I agree. I think al of TWC's "tiers" are a load of crap. In NE Ohio we have a Sports Tier, Choice Tier and Movie Tier that are extra charge for four or five channels. The only one of those I can see justified is the Movie Tier, which is basically the Encore multiplex channels repackaged with Sundance and Flix included. The "choice" tier is a load because it includes channels like Fine Living and DIY that used to be part of the entry level Digital Tier. Plus there are other channels like Boomerang and some religious crap channels(Inspiration, Life, etc) and I'll bet those channels actual price combined comes nowhere near the $5 TWC charges for it. The Sports Tier is a load too. It has CBS College Sports, three extra FSN channels, Fuse. Also NHL and NBA---all SD only. Except for NBA and NHL-which could cost more and be included with premium sports packages, I doubt the extra FSNs, CBS and Fuel are worth the $5 TWC markup price.

Myron4

05-26-09, 08:22 AM

It's pretty much a done deal from what I see. The HDNet's are getting dropped. For me, it's no big deal - I canceled them a long time ago. However, I see where the appeal is for other people.

I don't pay for HDNet, in Dallas the 4-channel HD Tier is provided free to legacy customers. I'm sure Smithsonian is a nice channel but it's not a good trade off for me, I rarely take the time to watch history/science programming anymore. Recording DREAM 9 now.

mecasull

05-26-09, 02:16 PM

I had posted this earlier on a FiOS thread-
All of this while TWC files appeal after appeal to keep MASN off of its North Carolina systems because they claim that no one wants it. The only thing I see that both of these things have in common is that they are independent channels that they don't want to deal with.

I thought about it later, and I have to add NFL Network to the list. We'll see if TWC can get a deal done with NFL-N since Comcast has reached a long term deal.

For those in the Triangle area, it's funny how you have probably the worst regional sports coverage anywhere in the country. FS Carolinas still does not show every Hurricanes game, much less in HD. Time Warner Cable is fighting carriage of MASN even though they agreed to the arbitration condition when Adelphia was bought. With that battle, they are fighting to ward off a channel that produces every single game of two baseball teams in HD. MASN doesn't show every game live in HD (every replay of a MASN2 game is HD), but they do show every single Nationals and Orioles game live. Whichever one is on the main channel is shown in HD regardless. Anyway, Time Warner is doing a great job keeping its costs down, just imagine how low cable bills would be if they didn't show any channels at all except for Time Warner channels...

no doubt. The Canes were offered a decent deal (with promise of more games and more HD) to have their games on MASN over FSN-South, and they nixed it. why? because like you mentioned, Raleigh doesnt get MASN, and TWC is a corporate sponsor of the Hurricanes. The Canes could have essentially forced TWC to buckle, but they didnt.

i ended up sending a scathing email when i discovered that the playoff games werent in HD in round 1... a few otehr people did as well, and we scored maybe half the games, all of them at home. what a joke.

DaveA28

05-26-09, 06:43 PM

I wonder if Cuban wanted HDNet (non-movie) on the Digital Basic, and leave the HDNetMovie on a premium tier. That would make some sense. HDNet is better than many of the other HD channels on digital basic, and everything is HD on it.

Satch Man

05-26-09, 07:25 PM

I could see more of this logic if they were dropping HD Net and HD Net movies for something really cool if they couldn't agree to a contract for those channels. But with all the potential channels that could be added, why oh why, Mav TV??? Mav TV is little more than reality based gags and gimmicks with almost no real quality programing.

Normally, if TWC drops a channel, they try to put a channel of similar substance and programing in its place. But I can't believe that there were all these requests for Mav TV. And this was supposed to be a corporate decision? WTF? Who out there decided that MavTV was the channel up for consideration should HDTV and HD Net-Movies get dropped ? 100's of HD channels with the potential to be added and Mav TV was what they came up with as a replacement? To have Mav TV on an optional tier is even more ludicrous.

Smithsonian might be OK, but NOT as an optional HD Tier channel. This is just another History, Discovery, and A&E type channel. TWC could have found better channel replacements for these stations.

Jack

DSperber

05-26-09, 07:38 PM

Smithsonian might be OK, but NOT as an optional HD Tier channel. This is just another History, Discovery, and A&E type channel. TWC could have found better channel replacements for these stations.The TWC definition of what gets thrown in HD Tier is something that does not already have an SD-counterpart. If it did, then the HD version would be in the same tier as the SD version of that channel.

So HD Tier was the catch-all for anything random and HD-only, not necessarily something wonderful and unique.

In TWC/LA, they're not adding MAV. They're adding something called "Crime & Investigation HD", to go along with Smithsonian (joining UHD-worthless and MGMHD-DD2.0).

I have just now canceled my HD Tier subscription (which loses me nothing desirable) in protest to the loss of the HD Nets, along with canceling my Choice Tier subscription which only provided NGCHD as far as I was concerned (and thus which I've now lost). This leaves me only with Variety Tier, where most of the HD channels I watch reside (other than Premium HBOHD and SHOHD which I pay for separately anyway).

I fear FIOS will never come to my building, even though I'm in a Verizon area. But if it did I'd be there in an instant.

STEELERSRULE

05-26-09, 08:00 PM

PedjaR

05-26-09, 10:35 PM

Fred C. Dobbs

05-27-09, 12:38 AM

They made the changes a day early in West LA.
HDNet and HDNet Movies are both gone, Smithsonian and Crime are active.

I just got off the phone canceling the HD Tier.

Unfortunately, but true to form, the TW CSR didn't seem to care when I told him why I cancelled. So much for Customer concerns.

FCD

nickdawg

05-27-09, 12:58 AM

Both HD Nets still running in NE Ohio. There are plans for May 27 (today) to add Smithsonian and MAV TV. Makes me WISH we were getting Crime & Investigation. At least crime shows are more interesting what whatever the WTF "MAV TV" is. :mad:

Sorry, but I cannot participate in the "Great HD Tier Purge of 2009". Dropping the HD Tier would mean losing Universal HD, which is not an option for me.

HDtvaDict

05-27-09, 01:32 AM

Well HDNET and HDNET movies are finally gone: Here's what we got in Cincinnati OH (Southwest OH) division:

HD Channel list (free)
905 NBC HD
909 ABC HD
912 CBS HD
916 PBS HD
919 FOX HD
948 PBS (Cincinnati) HD
958 MLB HD
959 FX HD
960 Bravo HD
961 Lifetime Movie Network HD
962 CNBC HD – Would rather have the TWC HD
968 FSN Ohio (Reds) only when a reds game is on.
969 TNT HD (stretchovision)
970 HD Theater
975 ESPN HD
976 ESPN 2 HD
978 A&E HD
979 History HD (stretchovision)
980 TBS HD (stretchovision)
981 Food Network HD (stretchovision)
982 HGTV HD (stretchovision)
983 Nat geo HD
984 Discovery HD
985 TLC HD
986 ABC Fam HD – complete garbage
987 Disney HD (Hardly any HD content)
988 Hallmark Movie Channel HD – complete garbage
989 Golf HD (Hardly and HD content)
990 Fox News HD
991 CNN HD
992 ESPNU HD
993 Palladia HD
994 SCIFI HD
995 USA HD
996 Animal Planet HD
997 Science Channel HD
998 ESPN News HD

HD Premiums are
HBO
Showtime
Smithsonian HD (WTH...isn't that a musem? LOL)
MGM HD
Universal
and Retarded Mav TV HD

HDtvaDict

05-27-09, 02:40 AM

Haha, so I'm up at like 3am in the morning while TWC is switching the channels, and I notice that the New FX HD channel is actually HDNET movies in disguise. This is bloody brilliant. I only hope it stays like this. I know that when I awake tomorrow it will be regular FX, but hey I'm enjoying HDNETM for free! I dropped the service over a year ago. I didn't receive much benefit from paying 5 dollars for only one channel that I watched.

Mr Magic

05-27-09, 03:37 AM

Cuban got greedy, plain and simple.

Greedy and foolish. His channels are not that popular so I don't why he believed that he could get Time Warner to cave into his demands when more popular channels like NFL Network have not been able to get Time Warner to give into the same demands. Although I like both channels, the reality is that Joe Sixpack isn't going to miss the channels. Cuban will need to suck it up and accept reality if he wants his channels to return to the country's 2nd largest cable operator. Otherwise his channels will go the way of VOOM.

HDtvaDict

05-27-09, 03:58 AM

I agree HDNET and HDNET movies weren't that great. The played mostly old movies. I don't see what the big hype about losing them were in the first place.

gerhard911

05-27-09, 08:12 AM

PedjaR

05-27-09, 09:35 AM

I agree HDNET and HDNET movies weren't that great. The played mostly old movies. I don't see what the big hype about losing them were in the first place.

That's subjective. I like movies. I don't care to see 1 year old movies, if I wanted to see them, I saw them a theater, and it is too sooon to see them again. A good 20 year old movie I very much enjoy seeing again. Also, there are some even older movies that I haven't seen before. They show several real good ones each month. Add to it all HD, all DD 5.1, original aspect ratio, no cuts, no interruptions, unobtrusive and only intermittant logo, nice schedules (both per day and per movie) on internet, and, for me, HDNet Movies is clearly the best channel out there, period. I'd say that losing the best channel for yet another Discovery and some total junk is good enough reason for hype.
By the way, I have not watched the other HDNet channel in many months.

HDtvaDict

05-27-09, 10:05 AM

Point well taken! Don't get me wrong some movies on there were okay. I didn't see the cost benefit though. Basically you were paying 5 bucks for one channel? I think in terms of money not entertainment. I don't watch enough TV to be shelling out that kind of dough on one station. I hated Universal it was like other TV channels with commercials and stuff. HDNET would show some good stuff I like (old TV shows) but that's it. Not worth the investment IMO.

HDtvaDict

05-27-09, 10:07 AM

Expecting to lose the HDNets, I checked in this morning and sure enough, they are gone :(

Flipped to MAV and they have a friggin' infomercial selling knives :mad:

TWC thinks I should pay extra for that :rolleyes: Cancelled HD Tier immediately.

That is hiliarious!:D OMG WTF TWC think we are. I"m glad you cancelled that horsesh_t. When no boby pays for that bull, maybe they'll put it on the "free" tier. LOL I don't think I'd watch it on the "Standard" tier either.

PedjaR

05-27-09, 10:24 AM

sirjonsnow

05-27-09, 10:34 AM

I'd watch 6-8 movies a month from that one channel. Cheaper and more convenient than movie rentals.

Me too, especially all the old westerns I'd never had the chance to see before. I guess now I'll be using Netflix streaming even more.

Berk32

05-27-09, 10:45 AM

Thanks to the package available in NYC (HDDVR + HDXtra for $15) - HDXtra only costs $4.05 (DVR = $10.95) - and it includes the Sports Package (NBAtv, NHL Network, etc) - and since that alone would normally cost $3.95.... I'm getting whatever they want to include in HDXtra for just $.10 more

So while I'm somewhat sad to lose 2 decent channels, I'm happy that my bill wont be going up due to Cuban's demands.

DSperber

05-27-09, 11:51 AM

I didn't see the cost benefit though. Basically you were paying 5 bucks for one channel? I think in terms of money not entertainment. I don't watch enough TV to be shelling out that kind of dough on one station. I hated Universal it was like other TV channels with commercials and stuff. HDNET would show some good stuff I like (old TV shows) but that's it. Not worth the investment IMO.Because of the "tier system" TWC invented, they simply allocated every SD/HD pair of channels somewhere. Here in LA they had Variety Tier for most popular stuff, Choice Tier for mostly other garbage (plus NGCHD, to make that tier "desirable"), Sports Tier, etc..

Anything left over, that was HD only, they placed in this "HD Tier" catch-all. It wasn't meant to capture quality, it was meant to capture HD-only channels that they didn't want to put in some other tier... sucking you in to another $5/month charge even if you wanted just one of those HD-only channels. It was not provided with the cost of monthly DVR service nor packaged with Sports Tier, which were separate charges.

HD Tier was never good value. It was always really just the HD Nets. Now it's the worst value. Negative value in fact, based on content quality and quantity.

NOTE: TWC/LA does not have a "digital basic" service as such. They only have a "digital cable" package which consists of (a) local OTA broadcast channels in SD/HD, (b) basic cable channels in SD/HD, and (c) one optional tier, either $5/month Variety Tier channel group in SD/HD which 85% of subscribers choose or $5/month Choice Tier SD/HD channel group. $5/month Sports Tier (SD/HD) and $5/month Movie Tier (SD) are optional extras, as are the a la carte Premium SD/HD channels.

Riverside_Guy

05-27-09, 01:36 PM

Sorry, but I cannot participate in the "Great HD Tier Purge of 2009". Dropping the HD Tier would mean losing Universal HD, which is not an option for me.

While I would drop the tier if I was in your shoes, it points to another issue... UNHD is an ad supported network. AND they run TONS of ads. It should NOT be possible for TWC to make ANYONE pay extra for such a channel.

Nor should YOU be required to pay extra for a channel that most (I think) of TWC's customers do NOT pay extra for.

Things will change ONLY if enough folks hit TWC in their wallets.

Wonder what may happen if 80% of those who pay for the tier w/HDNet drop the extra pay tier?

Riverside_Guy

05-27-09, 01:48 PM

I'd watch 6-8 movies a month from that one channel. Cheaper and more convenient than movie rentals.

My strategy is to drop HDXtra tier and Starz and start a Netflix sub. We've NEVER had the Starz POD although it has existed for a number of years... and I read some system is getting Starz POD HD. Nor do we have any of the other premiums POD HD channel either. AND the POD are not extra cost options, they are paid for with the basic fee... so we are being denied something that will NOT cost TWC anything.

TravKoolBreeze

05-27-09, 01:53 PM

So while I'm somewhat sad to lose 2 decent channels, I'm happy that my bill wont be going up due to Cuban's demands.

Agree with the statement. If it wasn't people complaining about losing HDNets, people will be complaining that their bill went up because of HDNets and NFL Network (I bet a deal will be signed before Labor Day)

Riverside_Guy

05-27-09, 02:00 PM

HD Tier was never good value. It was always really just the HD Nets. Now it's the worst value. Negative value in fact, based on content quality and quantity.

Well, in my market, I found it a very good value. When I first "signed up" it was five ONLY HD channels... at a time when we had very few of those. The five original channels were all commercial free. Then channels started getting dropped... we SHOULD have gotten a discount or adjustment on the price. They did not, opting to dump some really minor SD sports channels... covering stuff that only about .05% of the population may actually want. AND those were ad supported channels as well.

Gradually it got to the point where it essentially was a 5 dollar tier that had 2 worthwhile channels, the HDNets. And it is NOT only for the movies, the non-movie channels had a lot of NASA coverage, MMA, some classic TV series, it's how we watched Torchwood in HD, it had some fabulous concerts as well. ALWAYS commercial free and ALWAYS showing what can be described as the best HD. In point of fact, it cost LESS than the premiums (HBO etc.) AND I thought I watched a few more hours from it than from the HBO/SHO folks.

HDtvaDict

05-27-09, 02:23 PM

Well on the upside of things I got 4 brand new HD channels some of which I'll probably never watch but hey, I guess losing HDNET and HDNETM was my gain since I didn't actually subscribe to that tier anyway. I count 40 HD channels now, 60 more to go before we catch up to Direct TV. I would go to Direct TV but I couldn't stand to lose my internet and suffer through the infamous "searching for signal" bs. I guess I'm stuck with the greedy TWC.

Riverside_Guy

05-27-09, 02:50 PM

My nabe got a ton of HD channels last December... but an awful lot of them are strictly faux HD. A lot have almost no actual HD content and several are stretch-o-vision specialists (most disappointing is IFC HD... a total waste of bandwidth as it seems every movie they show is stretched SD... you'll get a much better experience watching their SD channel and using the zoom function, you'll get full screen without the distortion in the HD channel).

nickdawg

05-27-09, 03:52 PM

While I would drop the tier if I was in your shoes, it points to another issue... UNHD is an ad supported network. AND they run TONS of ads. It should NOT be possible for TWC to make ANYONE pay extra for such a channel.

Nor should YOU be required to pay extra for a channel that most (I think) of TWC's customers do NOT pay extra for.

Things will change ONLY if enough folks hit TWC in their wallets.

Wonder what may happen if 80% of those who pay for the tier w/HDNet drop the extra pay tier?

I agree. UHD was originally my main motivation for getting the HD Tier. I like the various USA shows that are shown in repeats as well as the WWE repeats on Saturday night(which was nice before I had USA/SCIFI HD). And with all the commercials I see on this channel, including the four minute long Magic Jack SCAM commercial, this shouldn't be a pay channel. If they put UHD in regular HD, I'd drop the HD Tier in a heartbeat.

Because of the "tier system" TWC invented, they simply allocated every SD/HD pair of channels somewhere. Here in LA they had Variety Tier for most popular stuff, Choice Tier for mostly other garbage (plus NGCHD, to make that tier "desirable"), Sports Tier, etc..

Anything left over, that was HD only, they placed in this "HD Tier" catch-all. It wasn't meant to capture quality, it was meant to capture HD-only channels that they didn't want to put in some other tier... sucking you in to another $5/month charge even if you wanted just one of those HD-only channels. It was not provided with the cost of monthly DVR service nor packaged with Sports Tier, which were separate charges.

HD Tier was never good value. It was always really just the HD Nets. Now it's the worst value. Negative value in fact, based on content quality and quantity.

NOTE: TWC/LA does not have a "digital basic" service as such. They only have a "digital cable" package which consists of (a) local OTA broadcast channels in SD/HD, (b) basic cable channels in SD/HD, and (c) one optional tier, either $5/month Variety Tier channel group in SD/HD which 85% of subscribers choose or $5/month Choice Tier SD/HD channel group. $5/month Sports Tier (SD/HD) and $5/month Movie Tier (SD) are optional extras, as are the a la carte Premium SD/HD channels.

Totally agree. That "tier" s--t is a huge ripoff. Around this time last year, TWC rearranged and standardized our lineup. At that time, the new tiers were created. Some of the tiers include channels that used to be included in Digital Basic. They put DIY and Fine Living(that we used to get) in the Choice Tier along with some new channels including Boomerang and some religion crap. Then there's the Sports Tier that also costs $5 extra and the Movie Tier. The Movie Tier is just the Encore multiplex channels repackaged with Sundance channel. And even Sundance was included in Digital Basic at one point.

dack70

05-27-09, 06:36 PM

The HDNets are gone for me now too. I also called TWC and dropped the tier. I'm betting enough people will drop this tier for TWC to take notice. I would bet they eventually come to some agreement to get the channels back. I "liked" the HDNEts, but can live without them. On the plus side, they added more HBO HD channels, so that makes me pretty happy. (I subscribe to HBO)

As far as the NFL Network goes, I had given up on getting it but it sounds like it could be a possibility now? What do you guys think?

gparris

05-27-09, 08:01 PM

My entire TWC account is under review-by me, the subscriber.
While looking at ways to save I decided to scale back, this included my internet options and now, TWC has made it even easier for me, by dumping their so-called "HD Package" now that the HDNETs are going away.

BTW, our local TWC is testing the Smithsonian HD and MAVTV HD and while the first channel is somewhat interesting, I have several Discovery Channels already; MAVTV HD is just awful!
Thanks again for "testing" these "HD channels", TWC, you helped me make a decision...too bad I can't "dump" your cableTV service altogether.:p

zeruck

05-28-09, 03:08 AM

I agree HDNET and HDNET movies weren't that great. The played mostly old movies. I don't see what the big hype about losing them were in the first place.

If you are a MMA fan then losing HDNET is huge. I have already cancelled that tier and researching alternatives. I know this may sound funny, but I could cry. Fios is not available in my area and I might have line of sight issues with satellite. This sucks.

lilcasino

05-28-09, 09:18 AM

We lost ours HDNET/HDMovies this morning...RFD-HD looks great.

note: sarcasm

Riverside_Guy

05-28-09, 10:09 AM

The HDNets are gone for me now too. I also called TWC and dropped the tier.

All I gotta say is "good show, mate."

Last night I remembered another HDNet thing I'm going to miss... their trailer shows! They show 100% HD movie trailers and it's a good fill in for 5-15 minutes.

Brad1963

05-28-09, 11:50 AM

abcward

05-28-09, 12:00 PM

I canceled the HD tier last night. Why pay to get UNIVERSAL HD which sucks now? HD NET Movies was the crown jewel of the HD Channels and now it is gone. I sent Time Warner a nasty e-mail and am now considering DIRECTV. They had the nerve to tell me that ION was now added, and I replied "So you think a channel that is mostly Paid Programming is a worthy replacement?".

As a long suffering TWC customer, I have felt similar pain for years...not enough HD channels, rising rates, uncaring customer service. My last straw was the talk of TWC eventually instituting caps on internet usage. I made the leap to DirecTV 2 months ago and could not be happier. I realize current TWC customers get irritated with D* customers tell them to switch...shoot I felt that way in the past. But with rates being what they are for both providers, its prudent to at least check things out.

dack70

05-28-09, 12:29 PM

All I gotta say is "good show, mate."

Last night I remembered another HDNet thing I'm going to miss... their trailer shows! They show 100% HD movie trailers and it's a good fill in for 5-15 minutes.

I record the Ultimate Trailer show every week! (at least I used to) I'm really going to miss that too.

bidger

05-28-09, 11:16 PM

They had the nerve to tell me that ION was now added, and I replied "So you think a channel that is mostly Paid Programming is a worthy replacement?".

Ion has also filed for bankruptcy (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/233053-Ion_Media_Files_For_Bankruptcy.php).

I realize current TWC customers get irritated with D* customers tell them to switch...shoot I felt that way in the past. But with rates being what they are for both providers, its prudent to at least check things out.

There's no provider that's flawless, but there's usually one that fits your wants and needs best. With TWC I just felt there was a lack of effort. Case in point, my migration from TWC began in early 1998 after my NY Football Giants were bumped for Bills' games twice by the AFC coverage Network, NBC, the prior Season. I talked to someone last Season and find that TWC now opens up an alternate feed when there's a conflict. But, ten years ago they couldn't be bothered.

With DIRECTV HDNet is one of the channels you get with Total Choice and the HD Access fee, while HDNet Movies is in the HD Extra pack. It's something they fought HDNet over and they conceded. Suits me fine because I'm not that into films, but there's a few shows on HDNet I like to watch. I'll bet TWC could have worked a similar arrangement, but they didn't seem to want to be bothered. The provider that makes an effort is the one that gets my business. YMMV.

Myron4

05-29-09, 04:01 AM

As a long suffering TWC customer, I have felt similar pain for years...not enough HD channels, rising rates, uncaring customer service. My last straw was the talk of TWC eventually instituting caps on internet usage. I made the leap to DirecTV 2 months ago and could not be happier.

Certainly DirecTV is not your internet provider though. Probably the main reason I should switch to FiOS (although I understand most don't have the option).

Still getting HDNet & HDNet Movies in Dallas, Smithsonian & MavTV will be the conciliation here. Got ION HD here too, it's grouped with the local networks so 9 local HDs now.

allargon

05-29-09, 06:59 AM

Certainly DirecTV is not your internet provider though. Probably the main reason I should switch to FiOS (although I understand most don't have the option).

Still getting HDNet & HDNet Movies in Dallas, Smithsonian & MavTV will be the conciliation here. Got ION HD here too, it's grouped with the local networks so 9 local HDs now.

You have access to FIOS, and you stay with Time Warner? Most people I know are itching to leave Time Warner to go to U-verse of all things. Some go back. However, I never met anyone that went back to TWC from FIOS. The only folks I know defending TWC either never watch TV, hate the thought of satellite or have no dishes or live in multi-unit dwellings (little or no competition).

hdforpc

05-29-09, 11:09 AM

hdforpc

05-29-09, 11:11 AM

almost forgot. you also lost my vod movie buys. about 3 a week between my son and myself.

Riverside_Guy

05-29-09, 03:57 PM

its bad enough i will lose HDNet's amazing coverage of MMA but when adding in the loss of HDNet Movies which i watch more than any other movie channel, just can't justify sticking with TW. i just made the call to Directv. sorry TW, you just lost my $150 a month plus all my UFC PPV buys.

http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-rejected-hdnets-offer-to-lower-fees-provide-channels-to-all/14499/

Make sure TWC KNOWS they are totally losing you as a customer because of this.

IDRISCKY

05-29-09, 05:22 PM

I too am very disappointed to see HDNet go. I didn't even have a clue it was being dropped until I went to make sure Inside MMA was set to record tonight. Inside MMA, DREAM, and all the other great MMA program is the only reason I added this tier to my package. And to see it go without even being informed beforehand is rather upsetting.

Just another reason to switch to DirecTV and see how that goes I guess. I'll save around 50 bucks a month for the first 12 months and about 5 bucks after that, still be able to keep Road Runner as my ISP, and get a lot more value for my money.

At the very least I am dropping this tier for sure. No reason to keep it anymore.

Well on the upside of things I got 4 brand new HD channels some of which I'll probably never watch but hey, I guess losing HDNET and HDNETM was my gain since I didn't actually subscribe to that tier anyway. I count 40 HD channels now, 60 more to go before we catch up to Direct TV. I would go to Direct TV but I couldn't stand to lose my internet and suffer through the infamous "searching for signal" bs. I guess I'm stuck with the greedy TWC.

You can keep road runner without having cable TV. I called last night, before I even knew HDNet was gone because I have been thinking about switching to DirecTV for some time now, and they didn't even question me when I asked how much my bill would be for just internet access if I was to drop cable TV. And the surprising thing is that it was only around 3-6 bucks more than what I am paying for road runner right now, which just could have been them giving me a quote without taking the credit for owning my own modem off.

kmeisenbach

05-29-09, 05:24 PM

from the OC Register -

But according to HDNet owner Mark Cuban (yes, he’s also the owner of the Dallas Mavericks), the deal wasn’t about the usual increase in carriage fees, which is the money companies pay per subscriber to offer a network’s TV channels. (Remember the whole Viacom fiasco when Viacom’s fee increase nearly resulted in the loss of Jon Stewart, Sponge Bob and MTV?)

“No, the exact opposite. We cut the fees considerably,” said Cuban, via e-mail.

Interestingly, Cuban says he was trying to get HDNet to become part of Time Warner’s digital basic cable package so that all customers could access the channel. HDNet Movies would remain on the special HD tier.

The new deal would be “considerably less than what they were paying to have both on the (HD) tier,” he said.

http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-rejected-hdnets-offer-to-lower-fees-provide-channels-to-all/14499/

Mr Magic

05-29-09, 06:18 PM

Cuban brought it on himself. He got greedy and wanted to change the terms of his deal with Time Warner. Gone are the days when HDNet was one of the few HD channels in existence. It's a crowded marketplace and HDNet doesn't have much compelling content. Cuban needs to come down to earth and realize his channels aren't all that. Time Warner hasn't given into the NFL's demands so I don't know what made Cuban think they would give in to him.

Let's be honest, HDNet has been really going down hill this year. They have started inserting commercials into movies and live sporting events (much like MGMHD). Do I really need to see the same promo repeated over and over during a movie or live sporting event? The announcer will be talking and HDNet will interrupt his talk with a commercial. I know what channel I'm watching. It's not like they are advertising a commercial product. The viewer doesn't need to be reminded what channel they are watching when there's an onscreen bug. HDNet is fast becoming as unwatchable as MGMHD.

The big draw for HDNet nowadays is MMA. Last year they showed the Japanese MMA events live much to the delight of U.S. MMA fans. Then this year they get the bright idea that they should stop showing them live unless they occur on certain days of the week. Seriously, who wants to watch a two week old sporting event whose outcome is already published on many news sites? Not only that, they are cutting fights from events so they can squeeze them into timeslots that are much too short. It's not like HDNet has an abundance of original programming and can't accommodate sporting events that run long.

The people in charge at HDNet have made so many dumb decisions this year with regards to how it is run that I'm honestly not going to miss it that much (much like I won't miss MGMHD if it vanishes). They seem to be trying to run the channel into the ground.

If you want a good laugh, go to Cuban's blog and read the letter about the guy switching to Dish. Little does the guy know that Charlie Ergen uses the same tactic as Time Warner when negotiating new contracts (he drops channels if the companies don't agree to his terms).

AHDTVDiet

05-29-09, 08:02 PM

Satch Man

05-29-09, 08:42 PM

This stinks, I go to see what MMA is on tonight (Since Sci-fi killed Stargate SG-1 in S9, Fridays became a sports night for me) and I no longer have HDNet. No boxing on ESPN2 or anything on either.

What does TWC replace the HDNets with? Two hack channels that probably won't survive or be watched by me and certainly don't need to be paid for.
MavTV....WTF is that, completely useless from looking at its schedule.
Smithsonian....meh I rather have History International be on HD. I do already have History HD, HDT, NATGHD, DISCHD, TLCHD, SCI HD, and about 50000 freaking PBS stations why do I need another one of these types of stations.

At least they could have made SPIKE or Vs HD so I could see some HD MMA (and Hockey). The only useful change I see this time is that FX HD was finally added and FX generally has some good movies.

Still, I may have to finally see if I have good enough direction and line of site to get DirectTV installed on my condo. This stinks. Well, until something changes I guess Friday will now become game night, get me started for the long gaming weekend.

I hear what you are saying, and I don't even get the Premium HD package, which now isn't so premium with those channels gone. I wish that TWC would actually add the stations that people would like to see that are popular. I agree, Mav TV? WTF? A stupid reality and niche gags and gimmicks channel that I am sure won't survive. Smithsonian's a little better with some interesting content. But it's really just another History, Discovery, and National Geographic/ Science Channel rolled into one, making it just OK, but not something that's a big deal and certainly not something where subs should have to pay extra.

If I was TWC corporate I would work to get

SPIKE TV-HD
COMEDY CENTRAL-HD
CHILLER-HD
TENNIS-HD
ALL PREMIUM MOVIE CHANNELS HD
ALL PREMIUM MOVIE CHANNELS ON DEMAND HD
NFL NETWORK HD

Now those are some channels and changes that customers want and deserve. Deals have been made at the corporate level for the first 4 channels on the list, but it is still the call of the local TWC system whether or not to carry them. MAV-TV????? ARE THEY FRICKING KIDDING ME???!!!

Add their 5000 Spanish stations eating up bandwidth to their 50000 PBS stations in place of some better channels that could be there!

Jack

zeruck

05-29-09, 08:50 PM

I too am very disappointed to see HDNet go. I didn't even have a clue it was being dropped until I went to make sure Inside MMA was set to record tonight. Inside MMA, DREAM, and all the other great MMA program is the only reason I added this tier to my package. And to see it go without even being informed beforehand is rather upsetting.

Just another reason to switch to DirecTV and see how that goes I guess. I'll save around 50 bucks a month for the first 12 months and about 5 bucks after that, still be able to keep Road Runner as my ISP, and get a lot more value for my money.

At the very least I am dropping this tier for sure. No reason to keep it anymore.

You can keep road runner without having cable TV. I called last night, before I even knew HDNet was gone because I have been thinking about switching to DirecTV for some time now, and they didn't even question me when I asked how much my bill would be for just internet access if I was to drop cable TV. And the surprising thing is that it was only around 3-6 bucks more than what I am paying for road runner right now, which just could have been them giving me a quote without taking the credit for owning my own modem off.

Try DSL for internet access. I had cable internet because it was first in my area for high speed internet access. I recently switched to verizon dsl and even though top speed is slower, Netflix streaming for example is much smoother. RR internet access is awful IMHO.

nickdawg

05-29-09, 08:59 PM

I hear what you are saying, and I don't even get the Premium HD package, which now isn't so premium with those channels gone. I wish that TWC would actually add the stations that people would like to see that are popular. I agree, Mav TV? WTF? A stupid reality and niche gags and gimmicks channel that I am sure won't survive. Smithsonian's a little better with some interesting content. But it's really just another History, Discovery, and National Geographic/ Science Channel rolled into one, making it just OK, but not something that's a big deal and certainly not something where subs should have to pay extra.

If I was TWC corporate I would work to get

SPIKE TV-HD
COMEDY CENTRAL-HD
CHILLER-HD
TENNIS-HD
ALL PREMIUM MOVIE CHANNELS HD
ALL PREMIUM MOVIE CHANNELS ON DEMAND HD
NFL NETWORK HD

Now those are some channels and changes that customers want and deserve. Deals have been made at the corporate level for the first 4 channels on the list, but it is still the call of the local TWC system whether or not to carry them. MAV-TV????? ARE THEY FRICKING KIDDING ME???!!!

Add their 5000 Spanish stations eating up bandwidth to their 50000 PBS stations in place of some better channels that could be there!

Jack

I want Comedy and Spike too!! TWC would have been better off dumping Smithsonian, MGM and UHD into Digital Basic Tier land and adding Spike TV or Comedy instead of "MAVHD". I just created a new thread about MAVTV in the main HD forum. The PQ on this channel is terrible. Much of the program appears to be the quality of SD widescreen. Night and day difference between HD Net and MAVHD. Regardless of PQ, the programming on MAVHD just plain sucks!! :mad:

IDRISCKY

05-29-09, 08:59 PM

Try DSL for internet access. I had cable internet because it was first in my area for high speed internet access. I recently switched to verizon dsl and even though top speed is slower, Netflix streaming for example is much smoother. RR internet access is awful IMHO.

No need. I'm keeping Road Runner. I have had cable internet since 2003 and never had trouble. Before that I had DSL and I prefer cable, especially sine the phone lines in my house and outside are crap to begin with.

I have also grown quite attached to a constant 15Mbps or higher.

I want Comedy and Spike too!! TWC would have been better off dumping Smithsonian, MGM and UHD into Digital Basic Tier land and adding Spike TV or Comedy instead of "MAVHD". I just created a new thread about MAVTV in the main HD forum. The PQ on this channel is terrible. Much of the program appears to be the quality of SD widescreen. Night and day difference between HD Net and MAVHD. Regardless of PQ, the programming on MAVHD just plain sucks!! :mad:

I also would have liked Spike and/or Comedy Central. I honestly haven't watch these two stations in 2-3 years. I don't really like to watch SDTV anymore, so I would have loved to get Spike HD so I could watch TUF. I also used to watch Comedy Central daily.

nickdawg

05-29-09, 09:11 PM

PedjaR

05-29-09, 09:17 PM

...
Let's be honest, HDNet has been really going down hill this year. They have started inserting commercials into movies and live sporting events (much like MGMHD).
...

Don't know about HDNet, but HDNet Movies never had a single commercial interrupt a movie, as far as I know (and I watched that channel a lot the last two years), and their logo is quite unobtrusive and not on all the time.

bidger

05-29-09, 09:20 PM

Try DSL for internet access. I had cable internet because it was first in my area for high speed internet access. I recently switched to verizon dsl and even though top speed is slower, Netflix streaming for example is much smoother. RR internet access is awful IMHO.

No need. I'm keeping Road Runner. I have had cable internet since 2003 and never had trouble. Before that I had DSL and I prefer cable, especially sine the phone lines in my house and outside are crap to begin with.

I have also grown quite attached to a constant 15Mbps or higher.

I've had Verizon DSL for 4 and a half years now. I'm still at the same download/upload speed that I started at, 1.5Mbps/368kbps. I talked to a Verizon installer who was parked in her van because I saw an item on broadbandreports.com that there would be an upgrade to 7Mbps by the end of July for qualified customers and I wanted to know if it applied for my circumstance. She left a message yesterday that due to the gauge of phone lines in my area it was a no go. It forces my hand to go to Road Runner. Bottom line seems to be as far as Verizon goes, if you're not in a FIOS area, you're nothing.

IDRISCKY

05-29-09, 09:27 PM

I'd watch Comedy Central and Spike TV in black & white analog over MavTV HD! ;)

Who is the phone company in your area? In my area we have AT&T and I'm very satisfied with their DSL service. I guess it all depends on areas. I've been lucky that phone service is good here(Bell System-->Ohio Bell-->SBC-->AT&T) but if you have other providers, quality is hit or miss.

I'm in Bedford, Ohio and have AT&T as my phone company. But again, I have no reason to switch, personally I like cable internet much better, I like my speed, I like the quality, and I like the price.

Why would I want to switch when I have no problems with my ISP?

I've had Verizon DSL for 4 and a half years now. I'm still at the same download/upload speed that I started at, 1.5Mbps/368kbps. I talked to a Verizon installer who was parked in her van because I saw an item on broadbandreports.com that there would be an upgrade to 7Mbps by the end of July for qualified customers and I wanted to know if it applied for my circumstance. She left a message yesterday that due to the gauge of phone lines in my area it was a no go. It forces my hand to go to Road Runner. Bottom line seems to be as far as Verizon goes, if you're not in a FIOS area, you're nothing.

That sucks. I have been keeping a eye out for FIOS to come to my area. Now that is something I'd be willing to switch to for internet access. But that also depends on the available packages, price and down/up speeds.

nickdawg

05-29-09, 09:40 PM

IDRISCKY

05-29-09, 09:45 PM

If you don't have any problems, don't switch. My comments were about not being 'stuck' with TWC just for internet. AT&T is a good provider and if I were to dump TWC, I'd want to dump every service from them.

HDtvaDict didn't seem to know you could keep Road Runner and still cancel your Cable TV so I was just letting him know. Personally I have no problem with keeping Road Runner when switching to another TV provider. I'm not going to jump on a bash TWC bandwagon or anything, I'm just going to get TV from somewhere else, somewhere I can get a good price and a better value.

Riverside_Guy

05-30-09, 09:49 AM

You can keep road runner without having cable TV. I called last night, before I even knew HDNet was gone because I have been thinking about switching to DirecTV for some time now, and they didn't even question me when I asked how much my bill would be for just internet access if I was to drop cable TV. And the surprising thing is that it was only around 3-6 bucks more than what I am paying for road runner right now, which just could have been them giving me a quote without taking the credit for owning my own modem off.

In my market, it's 10 bucks more to have RR without either of their other two services. However, in reality it's more... because many of us are operating on various "deals" they at times are willing to offer. Such "offers" operate off the triple play, so it's impossible to pin where the savings actually are.

Riverside_Guy

05-30-09, 10:01 AM

...I saw an item on broadbandreports.com that there would be an upgrade to 7Mbps by the end of July for qualified customers and I wanted to know if it applied for my circumstance. She left a message yesterday that due to the gauge of phone lines in my area it was a no go. It forces my hand to go to Road Runner. Bottom line seems to be as far as Verizon goes, if you're not in a FIOS area, you're nothing.

Ah, very interesting. IP access is a very big part of my options. Right now, I'd have a drawn out fight to put up a dish for DTV.... and I THINK I may have the right line of sight, but there's no guarantee. BUT, DTV don't do IP, so my choices would be crappy DSL (less than a third the speed of cable, it's 3M down, 256k up) or paying through the nose to keep RR (it would run my close to 60/month).

I WILL get FIOS, the only question is when... most indications have it before the end of this year.

zeruck

05-30-09, 10:27 AM

Ah, very interesting. IP access is a very big part of my options. Right now, I'd have a drawn out fight to put up a dish for DTV.... and I THINK I may have the right line of sight, but there's no guarantee. BUT, DTV don't do IP, so my choices would be crappy DSL (less than a third the speed of cable, it's 3M down, 256k up) or paying through the nose to keep RR (it would run my close to 60/month).

I WILL get FIOS, the only question is when... most indications have it before the end of this year.

Interesting, I guess it all depends on where you live. My RR service was twice the speed of my current Verizon dsl (15mbps vs 7mbps), yet Verizon dsl wins hands down.

Fios will be in my area soon also, can't wait.

LionelLines

05-30-09, 05:35 PM

I'm in Bedford, Ohio and have AT&T as my phone company. But again, I have no reason to switch, personally I like cable internet much better, I like my speed, I like the quality, and I like the price.

Why would I want to switch when I have no problems with my ISP?

That sucks. I have been keeping a eye out for FIOS to come to my area. Now that is something I'd be willing to switch to for internet access. But that also depends on the available packages, price and down/up speeds.

I could be wrong (please correct), but I'm pretty sure that if your phone company is AT&T, then you're not going to get FIOS.

nickdawg

05-30-09, 05:56 PM

Correct. FIOS is available in areas serviced by Verizon. AT&T's answer to FIOS is AdvancedTV/Uverse in areas with AT&T phone service.

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 06:10 PM

I could be wrong (please correct), but I'm pretty sure that if your phone company is AT&T, then you're not going to get FIOS.

I said I was waiting for it to become available in my area. It has nothing to do with my current phone company, or future phone company for that matter. I'm watching for a eta on when Verizon starts to work on offering their service in my area of Ohio because I would like FIOS for my ISP.

nickdawg

05-30-09, 06:14 PM

I said I was waiting for it to become available in my area. It has nothing to do with my current phone company, or future phone company for that matter. I'm watching for a eta on when Verizon starts to work on offering their service in my area of Ohio because I would like FIOS for my ISP.

Yes it does. If you're area is serviced by AT&T, FIOS isn't coming.

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 06:21 PM

Yes it does. If you're area is serviced by AT&T, FIOS isn't coming.

Really? Why not? What I have read said that Ohio is with Verizon's territory and Verizon has plans on making FIOS available.

If you could provide information on why this is not true I'd appreciate it.

LionelLines

05-30-09, 06:36 PM

I'm in Bedford, Ohio and have AT&T as my phone company. But again, I have no reason to switch, personally I like cable internet much better, I like my speed, I like the quality, and I like the price.

Why would I want to switch when I have no problems with my ISP?

That sucks. I have been keeping a eye out for FIOS to come to my area. Now that is something I'd be willing to switch to for internet access. But that also depends on the available packages, price and down/up speeds.

Really? Why not? What I have read said that Ohio is with Verizon's territory and Verizon has plans on making FIOS available.

If you could provide information on why this is not true I'd appreciate it.

Here's the thing.

AT&T provides its TV service in (some) of its phone service area. Verizon provides FIOS in (some) of its phone service area.

That's why.

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 06:40 PM

Here's the thing.

AT&T provides its TV service in (some) of its phone service area. Verizon provides FIOS in (some) of its phone service area.

That's why.

I don't understand that reasoning. Could you maybe explain it better?

Are you say there is no chance of FIOS becoming available in my area in the future because it isn't right now?

nickdawg

05-30-09, 06:41 PM

Really? Why not? What I have read said that Ohio is with Verizon's territory and Verizon has plans on making FIOS available.

If you could provide information on why this is not true I'd appreciate it.

You can check you address at the Verizon FIOS (http://www22.verizon.com/residential/fiostv/checkbyaddress/) website. I checked mine and it is not available in [my area].

Also, have found maps of AT&T and Verizon service areas.

http://www.puc.state.oh.us/pucogis/BIGLEC/AT_T.pdf

http://www.puc.state.oh.us/pucogis/BIGLEC/Verizon.pdf

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 06:47 PM

You can check you address at the Verizon FIOS (http://www22.verizon.com/residential/fiostv/checkbyaddress/) website. I checked mine and it is not available in [my area].

Also, have found maps of AT&T and Verizon service areas.

http://www.puc.state.oh.us/pucogis/BIGLEC/AT_T.pdf

http://www.puc.state.oh.us/pucogis/BIGLEC/Verizon.pdf

I already know it isn't available in my area as of right now. But that does not mean that it will not be available in the future, correct? It takes time and resources to expand, but just because I can't get FIOS right now doesn't mean I won't be able to in the future. No?

nickdawg

05-30-09, 06:53 PM

I already know it isn't available in my area as of right now. But that does not mean that it will not be available in the future, correct? It takes time and resources to expand, but just because I can't get FIOS right now doesn't mean I won't be able to in the future. No?

If you currently have AT&T, it won't be available ever. Unless service areas change, it won't happen. If AT&T controls the area, Verizon's services are not getting in.

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 07:03 PM

If you currently have AT&T, it won't be available ever. Unless service areas change, it won't happen. If AT&T controls the area, Verizon's services are not getting in.

That's what I don't understand. I don't follow this type of stuff so could please explain it to me, is there some kind of law that would prevent both from providing their services in one area?

Gary J

05-30-09, 07:14 PM

That's what I don't understand. I don't follow this type of stuff so could please explain it to me, is there some kind of law that would prevent both from providing their services in one area?

Yes there is. Do your research.

rdgcss

05-30-09, 07:21 PM

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 07:25 PM

Yes there is. Do your research.

in the fewest possible words the answer is: the FCC

Thanks. I wasn't aware of anything like that. I thought something like that would fall under monopoly/competition law, but again I don't follow that type of stuff and really have no reason to research it since all I am doing is waiting for the future possibility. I only asked because they kept stating that it would never happen without an actual reason.

Guess there is always hope of a service area change. Less likely now, but it's not like companies never buy each other out and things like that. Nothing really changes for me though, so I'll keep waiting to see what happens in the future.

Gary J

05-30-09, 07:33 PM

First of all monopoly is not illegal and in some cases like public utilities there is positive cost/benefit.

posg

05-30-09, 07:40 PM

I just got a notice in the mail announcing the addition of (and deletion of) channels effect tomorrow. I'm just curious if they have violated any FCC rules regarding notification before I make a fool of myself on the phone.:D

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 07:46 PM

First of all monopoly is not illegal and in some cases like public utilities there is positive cost/benefit.

I admit I am not knowledgeable in these areas.

nickdawg

05-30-09, 07:56 PM

coyoteaz

05-30-09, 07:57 PM

Maybe I'm imagining this, but don't notification rules only apply to channels carried in the basic tier?

posg

05-30-09, 08:01 PM

Maybe I'm imagining this, but don't notification rules only apply to channels carried in the basic tier?

Could be, that's why I asked, but I'm thinking it has more to do with billing in advance of services being delivered.;)

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 08:22 PM

It's not going to happen because AT&T owns and maintains the lines in the area. Verizon is only in Medina county and other rural parts of NE Ohio. The areas with Verizon hardly seem to be a priority for deploying FIOS and AT&T owns most of the major city/suburb areas.

There's no problem with the monopoly. AT&T owns and maintains the lines, why should they have to "share" with Verizon? If anything, this "competition" has done more harm than good to the telephone, IMO.

I was under the impression that Verizon was laying down their fiber for FIOS underground as they went, which was another reason it takes so long. So I wasn't even thinking about them sharing lines to be honest.

DSperber

05-30-09, 10:33 PM

That's what I don't understand. I don't follow this type of stuff so could please explain it to meForget for the moment about FIOS or uVerse.

You live in an area that's served by one phone company or another... e.g. either Verizon or AT&T (or some such flavor). You don't have your choice of phone company provider... you just are mandated to which company your local PUC has granted the monopoly to in your physical location. Period. That's it.

So, if you're in a Verizon area you can NOT ask for AT&T to be your phone company. And vice versa. Period. That's it.

Now extend that to the additional services now marketed by these phone companies, such as TV and Internet, along with telephone. Once again, you can NOT ask for FIOS (available from Verizon) if you are in an AT&T area (and thus only could opt for AT&T's uVerse product), and vice versa. No matter that you might want it... you can't have it!

Just like with the non-interchangeability of pure telephone service, your PUC has granted a monopoly to one company for your area. That's it. You're stuck, as long as you live there. No choice, for pure telephone-only products as well as for the new enhanced "tripleplay" set of Internet and TV as well.

IDRISCKY

05-30-09, 11:23 PM

Forget for the moment about FIOS or uVerse.

You live in an area that's served by one phone company or another... e.g. either Verizon or AT&T (or some such flavor). You don't have your choice of phone company provider... you just are mandated to which company your local PUC has granted the monopoly to in your physical location. Period. That's it.

So, if you're in a Verizon area you can NOT ask for AT&T to be your phone company. And vice versa. Period. That's it.

Now extend that to the additional services now marketed by these phone companies, such as TV and Internet, along with telephone. Once again, you can NOT ask for FIOS (available from Verizon) if you are in an AT&T area (and thus only could opt for AT&T's uVerse product), and vice versa. No matter that you might want it... you can't have it!

Just like with the non-interchangeability of pure telephone service, your PUC has granted a monopoly to one company for your area. That's it. You're stuck, as long as you live there. No choice, for pure telephone-only products as well as for the new enhanced "tripleplay" set of Internet and TV as well.

Thanks, very informative.

I actually feel rather retarded now for not knowing this stuff. I just always assumed these things were at the discretion of the company.

Sorry for derailing the thread so much also.

homcom

05-31-09, 01:48 AM

Usually channel changes notification rules are local franchise rules based on those contracts, not a federal thing.

bgooch

05-31-09, 02:14 AM

Verizon Overbuilding AT&T U-verse with FiOS
09 Jun, 2008

A very interesting competitive development is taking place in the Dallas, TX suburbs. Verizon is apparently preparing to overbuild AT&T U-verse territory with Verizon FiOS service. This is a first, at least that I'm aware of, where large incumbent "baby bells" enter each other's territory with competing landline services. Apparently, the rules have changed, and dramatically so. Verizon appears to be taking advantage of statewide video franchising rules (as Texas provides), and acting as a cable overbuilder, as opposed to a traditional telecom CLEC. The development was reported in this OneTrack post. I guess the gloves are slowly coming off.

This strategy does go counter to conventional wisdom. Verizon is entering the market as the third triple play provider, competing with well established brands (not to mention the DBS competition). Most business consultants would advise against such a move. What does Verizon have up their sleeve? Do they feel that strongly about FiOS and its competitive advantage/differentiation? Perhaps. It will be an interesting test case to observe. If Verizon has some success with this overbuild strategy, will we see it in more territories where Verizon is geographically positioned against AT&T and Qwest? Verizon's purchase of GTE several years ago gives them multiple territories in multiple states that are closely aligned with incumbent AT&T and Qwest territories. Qwest would seem to be more vulnerable, since they have no triple play network of their own. Of course, if Verizon aggressively moves on an overbuild strategy, AT&T certainly won't sit back and wait - they may decide to strike first. I recognize this is just speculation, seeing as the first household in AT&T territory has yet to be lit with FiOS. But this is definitely a development to keep a close eye on. We may be witnessing the first salvo of an historic competitive battle.

http://www.telecompetitor.com/node/671

Verizon (FiOS) begins overbuilding AT&T (U-verse) in Texas
Monday, June 09, 2008
By: Matt Stump

Verizon has begun an overbuild of AT&T in the Dallas suburbs, extending its FiOS service northward from Plano into Frisco and Allen, areas where both AT&T (U-verse) and Time Warner Cable offer video services.

On May 15, Verizon filed an amendment to its original cable franchise application with the Texas PUC to not only add sections of Plano, Keller and Watauga, where it already offers FiOS services, but for citywide franchises in Frisco and Allen, where AT&T offers its U-verse IPTV service. (AT&T received franchise approvals in those cities on Nov. 20, 2006.)

The filings, coupled with reports of corresponding construction activity, represent the first indication Verizon is willing to overbuild AT&T U-verse, and could have significant implications for other out-of-market territories (Florida, California, Indiana, Washington and Oregon) where Verizon operates inside AT&T and Qwest territory.

OVERBUILD COVERS ROUGHLY 60,000 HOMES

Based on a reading of the maps AT&T and Verizon have filed with the state PUC, the current overbuild appears to cover roughly 60,000 homes. Frisco counts 30,000 occupied homes and Allen 25,000 occupied homes.

The Plano amendment covers an area bordered by Route 121 to the north, Custer Rd. to the East, North Dallas Tollway to the west and Hedgcoxe Rd. to the south. That area clearly falls within the maps AT&T provided the PUC in its 2006 franchise application for the greater Dallas area.

The Frisco and Allen coverage maps Verizon filed with the state PUC mirror the established citywide boundaries, and mirror the same boundaries AT&T had in its November 2006 application.

An official in the Allen city government confirmed that Verizon has submitted plans for building permits in the city. Typically, those plans cover three to four subdivisions at one time, he said. Verizon has told city officials the company hopes to complete the Allen buildout within 12 months.

The state approved Verizon's service area amendment on June 9. Meanwhile, residents on message boards report that early construction (utility markings) has begun in AT&T in north Plano, Frisco and Keller.

The northern Dallas suburbs host a menagerie of telecommunications companies. Verizon has a sizable portion, having purchased GTE Corp.’s telephone operations more than 10 years ago. Even within individual communities, such as Plano and Keller, Verizon is the historical phone provider in some parts of town, while AT&T offers service in other parts of the same community.

Although some video overlap would appear inevitable, the Frisco and Allen forays go beyond any kind of minor overbuild.

NEW OVERBUILD ECONOMICS

The net effect is that Verizon, in one bold stroke, is striking down what had been the conventional wisdom on overbuilding, that two wireline video providers could barely survive in the same market and that three would be tantamount to financial suicide.

The track record of non-AT&T and Verizon overbuilds of cable is mixed. WOW, RCN, Knology, Grande, Surewest and others have managed to sustain a foothold in some markets, aided by the ability to offer three services---data and voice, along with video--- in effect chasing the accumulated telecommunications spending of $100+ in the average home, versus $40 to $50 for a video-only service.

But some of those overbuilders are also selling off operations, consolidating and exploring financial alternatives, indicating that overbuilds, at least by smaller competitors, is a risky business.

Verizon, of course, is not small, and also provides wireless service. The average ARPU of a FiOS subscriber is north of $120, and the wireless component could boost ARPUs to $200 a month. A sizable chunk of money is at stake.

VERIZON'S ADVANTAGES

In any “nonhome” market where Verizon offers FiOS, it has a number of advantages (business, political, technological, operational) to build beyond its initial “phone” service territory:

First, Verizon has already built a video hub office in Texas, and has the manpower (installers, technicians and CSRs) already hired. From a construction standpoint, it’s nothing more complicated than laying fiber into the next subdivision and is no different, economically, from extending service inside Verizon territory.

Second, the area has already been bombarded with FiOS advertisements, so hundreds of customers are already pre-disposed to FiOS.

Third, in statewide franchise states, like Texas, Verizon can file service area amendments without public fanfare, and start offering service in a matter of weeks, without the drudgery of going town to town for franchise approvals.

Fourth, Verizon is accustomed to competing against AT&T (wireless, enterprise), unlike cable operators who typically don't compete against each other in the same territory.

Fifth, Verizon likely believes, with some justification, its FiOS data and TV services are better than AT&T. FiOS’s top speed of 50 Mbps is five times faster than AT&T’s top U-verse speed (10 Mbps). AT&T can respond with pair bonding, but Verizon’s GPON (gigabit passive optical network) architecture will increase the bandwidth ante again. FiOS also appears to be a more stable video platform, at the moment, and isn’t subject to AT&T’s HD stream and distance-from-the-VRAD limitations.

Sixth, Verizon already has a base of subscribers in these overbuild areas: the company’s wireless-phone customers. It would be easy to text them, e-mail them or direct-mail information about FiOS TV and data services.

Seventh, the absence of copper phone plant and thus legacy wireless phone service is actually an advantage. Verizon can go in “clean” without legacy copper issues to wrestle with.

Still, can there possibly be a return on investment for Verizon to compete against not only AT&T, but incumbent cable companies (largely Time Warner Cable in this case), not to mention DirecTV and DISH Network?

If the answer from Frisco and Allen is yes, it’s time to rewrite the book on overbuild economics, again.

http://www.onetrak.com/ShowArticle.aspx?ID=3487

bicker1

05-31-09, 07:50 AM

Yes that's the case. This is a local issue.

While it is possible that they flubbed the notification deadline, I rather doubt it. We just got US mail, separate from our bill, with notifications from Comcast... why not wait for the next bill? Probably because they've be burned enough by notification rules that they watch them like a hawk now, even incurring the cost of an additional mailing just to make deadlines. I suspect TWC is as well-versed in this as Comcast is.

posg

05-31-09, 09:48 AM

I'm not sure this is a local issue. Read below.

The National Football League called the next play in its ongoing battle with Time Warner Cable, filing a petition with the FCC to direct Time Warner to restore the NFL Network to the basic cable package on the Adelphia systems that Time Warner took over as of today (Aug. 1).

The petition claims that Time Warner violated Section 76.1603(b) "of the Commission’s rules requiring adequate notice to subscribers before dropping a cable channel from cable systems Time Warner recently acquired from Adelphia Communications and Comcast Corporation." That period of adequate notice is 30 days, according to the Commission’s rules.

"As a result of Time Warner quietly and suddenly pulling our NFL Network channel off cable systems around the country last night at midnight, we were left with no alternative under FCC rules but to file this injunction," said the league in a statement. "NFL fans who called us today said they were not given a fair chance on the eve of the NFL season to have their voice heard on this decision by Time Warner. We owe it to our fans to help them fight for their rights. Those rights were abruptly and unfairly taken from them late last night."

§ 76.1603 Customer service—rate and
service changes.
(b) Customers will be notified of any
changes in rates, programming services
or channel positions as soon as possible
in writing. Notice must be given to
subscribers a minimum of thirty (30)
days in advance of such changes if the
change is within the control of the
cable operator. In addition, the cable
operator shall notify subscribers 30
days in advance of any significant
changes in the other information required
by § 76.1602.

johnosolis

05-31-09, 01:39 PM

I has a question.

If'n we all get RFD-HD, will Hee Haw be in Hi Definition, or will it look like the Zapruder film on my 58" plasma?

Jackie Ray

John Mason

05-31-09, 02:24 PM

strutter

05-31-09, 02:41 PM

we lost the HDnets today as promised.
amazingly, here they actually sent a letter out that i received yesterday. nothing special just making sure that we knew they were doing this for us to have more choice.:rolleyes:
well after looking through 7 days guide data on those 3 replacements i'm gonna choose to cancel that tier.:)

HDtvaDict

05-31-09, 04:05 PM

Anyone who is fed up with TWC and want other options. You're in luck, well maybe, if you Live in Cincinnati and are in the available areas you can try these guys: Cincinnati Bell Fioptics. It's sort of like what Verizon's FiOS TV is offering but with much fewer content. You can check out their channel list here:
http://www.cincinnatibell.com/shared_content/pdf/tv/Cincinnati_Channel_Listings.pdf

The prices however are about the same. One thing I noticed is they have HDNET and HDNET movies. A few more HD channels, otherwise it's the same thing. Also their internet is supposedly faster. I'm seriously thinking about making the switch.

Riverside_Guy

05-31-09, 05:40 PM

Since NYC's TWC dropped the HDNets the day before June 1, just canceled my HD-Extra package, which included the HDNets, early, too. While I was at it, ended my long-time "All the Best" premium subscription (all the movie premiums), by canceling two premium sections. -- John

I hope they pick up on guys like you and I (I'm also going to drop one premium while I'm in a dropping mode) who call because they dropped HDNet and, by the way, dropped more services. As in "Oh my gosh, we lost $xxxx.xx in other services when people called to cancel the tier with HDnet on it."

Yeah, I know, wishful thinking! Maybe if this is picked up in the general press... assuming it's more than just you and I!

holl_ands

05-31-09, 06:47 PM

I don't understand that reasoning. Could you maybe explain it better?

Are you say there is no chance of FIOS becoming available in my area in the future because it isn't right now?
FRANCHISE AUTHORITY and ECONOMICS are the primary issues at work .

Some states passed statewide cable TV franchise deregulation bills.
The detailed deregulation legislation varies from state to state:
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/cablelaw.pdf
http://reason.org/news/show/122367.html
Note that Congress made monopolies illegal since Dec 1992.

Here in California, it changed the "rules of engagement" between cable TV providers
and local franchise authorities (your city gov't)...it did not eliminate them,
but stipulates that a city must negotiate in good faith, even if it results
in overlapping service areas.

There also have been many attempts to deregulate cable TV franchises in
Congress, with some success--although skirmishes continue:
http://www.multichannel.com/article/80670-U_S_Court_Rules_FCC_Within_Authority_On_90_Day_Franchise_Req uests.php?q=cable+franchise

Fol. summary is out of date, but details the "wandering around the wilderness":
http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/161980700.html

COST TO IMPLEMENT is, by far, the biggest impediment to providing service
into a area already serviced by either cable or phone (they are now intertwined).

Current cable and phone service providers usually lease the above/underground
right-of-ways, and own above/underground fibre optic cables to local nodes and
either hard copper (AT&T) or local RF distribution network (amplifiers & splitters)
to each home (whether currently serviced or not).

A company desiring to ALSO provide service to an existing area would need to
negotiate for access to above/underground right-of-ways or initiate a very
expensive underground digging operation. New Fibre Optic cable would need
to be laid and local equipment nodes installed (just as AT&T did to deploy U-Verse).
The most expensive part would be digging up the streets to connect the local
node to each and every home.....which is why new/recent housing areas are
more desirable for FiOS when underground access to each home was pre-planned.

This is where AT&T avoided a big cost--they used EXISTING copper wires to each house.
FiOS is concentrating on new (or recent) development areas where it is easy to
install FO cable to each house---and multi-family apartments/condos that can serve
many families on each FO cable, thereby reducing the per family installation cost.

OBTW: By the time they do all this they might find that there are fewer and
fewer phone customers (Cell Phones rule) and fewer and fewer Internet
customers (Cell Networks, WiMax and WSD) and SAT viewers are steadily growing.
And ATSC MobileTV might start to deploy in a few more months....joining MediaFlo.
[PS: WSD = White Space Devices aka TVBD = TV Band Devices.]

PS: Don't blame any of this on the FCC---they are only trying to enforce the
"Laws of the Land", as implemented by K-Street Lobbyists (oops, I mean Congress).

Ken H

05-31-09, 07:24 PM

I'm not sure this is a local issue.

It is a local issue.

mrvideo

06-01-09, 12:22 AM

If'n we all get RFD-HD, will Hee Haw be in Hi Definition, or will it look like the Zapruder film on my 58" plasma?

Think about it for a moment.... I know, that was hard, but Hee Haw was recorded on NTSC video tape.

nickdawg

06-01-09, 04:50 AM

Think about it for a moment.... I know, that was hard, but Hee Haw was recorded on NTSC video tape.

You know what that means! Expect to see Hee Haw in HD on TBS coming soon!! ;) Or on any other stretch network! :eek:

strutter

06-01-09, 10:51 AM

well, i went down to cancel the extra tier and guess what...if i do that then my actual bill will be $3 higher:eek:
seems some of my services are still coded as adelphia and if i drop the $5 tier they would have to recode everything to TWC. in doing so my bill will be $3 more than what it is with the tier.
they said eventually all the coding will be changed over anyways but they don't know when. i told her I'll just wait until they're done with that then I'll cancel that tier and HBO, SHO.

she didn't seem impressed at all:D

johnosolis

06-01-09, 10:55 AM

Think about it for a moment.... I know, that was hard, but Hee Haw was recorded on NTSC video tape.

In fact, Hee Haw won a 1971 Emmy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Video Tape Editing (by Marco Zappia) for its episode featuring Country Music Hall of Famer Roger Miller, winner of 11 Grammy Awards (perhaps best known for the song “King of the Road”).

Although CBS cancelled Hee Haw as part of its so-called “Rural Purge” of 1971, the show continued to be produced in syndication for over 20 years, finally ending production in 1993.

Since Hee Haw was shot directly on videotape (a process pioneered by comedian Ernie Kovacs), it cannot effectively be converted to HDTV, as can TV shows originally shot on film, such as Hogan’s Heroes, whose cancellation is counted as collateral damage in the 1971 purge. Shows shot on film but edited on video (a popular process, most notably used for Seinfeld), can be converted to HDTV but at great cost. Since the original film elements must be located, re-edited and telecined. The increased cost of this process, however, means only the most popular series with the greatest money-making potential are likely to undergo conversion.

Some victims of the “rural purge,” such as Beverly Hillbillies and Green Acres, were indeed shot on film (“This has been a Filmways production, darling”), as was Mayberry R.F.D., whose title gave rise to RFD-TV’s name.

R.F.D. is the abbreviation for “Rural Free Delivery” a program instituted by the U.S. government in 1896 in which rural mail carriers brought the U.S. mail directly to the homes of residents in rural areas of the country. Previously, these folks were required to travel on their own to the post office (often many miles away) to pick up their own mail, or subscribe to a private courier service for home delivery.

I have read that RFD-HD will be added to the HDExtra Tier (or its equivalent) to replace the HDNets in some cities, but I wonder if Time Warner will add RFD-HD in markets like LA and NY, given some urbanites’ contempt for rural culture.

Has anyone heard anything on this?

Mhorn

06-01-09, 12:12 PM

hcour

06-01-09, 12:28 PM

Well, we also lost the HDNet and HDMovies channels here in Cola, SC. So now, there's really no channel available on TWC that show HD movies in OAR, uncut, commercial-free, is there? Don't HBOHD, ShowtimeHD, et al, pan and scan their movies?

jcalabria

06-01-09, 12:44 PM

Riverside_Guy

06-01-09, 01:00 PM

Yes they do... everything is cropped to full screen 1.78:1 regardless of OAR.

Mmmmm, not totally. We've certainly seen OAR on the premiums (the Star Wars HD versions come to mind).

It can also get complicated. I think it was War of the Worlds that was academy standard in theaters (2.35:1), but 16:9 (1.78:1) for the DVD and for the cable broadcast.

How about Dark Knight? I'd bet it was 2:35:1 in regular theaters (didn't see it there so I COULD be wrong) but I saw it in IMAX which is (in the theater I saw it in) very close to square (I'd guess 5:4, something like that).

jcalabria

06-01-09, 01:24 PM

Mmmmm, not totally. We've certainly seen OAR on the premiums (the Star Wars HD versions come to mind).

It can also get complicated. I think it was War of the Worlds that was academy standard in theaters (2.35:1), but 16:9 (1.78:1) for the DVD and for the cable broadcast.

How about Dark Knight? I'd bet it was 2:35:1 in regular theaters (didn't see it there so I COULD be wrong) but I saw it in IMAX which is (in the theater I saw it in) very close to square (I'd guess 5:4, something like that).

There may be some exceptions such as Star Wars, but the vast majority are full screen 16x9. I personally can't remember seeing any that were not full screen. OAR is certainly not their norm.

Dark Knight is on HBO June 13 (premiere?)... the Blu-ray release is mixed 1:78 (IMAX scenes) and 2:35 (the rest).

Gandu

06-01-09, 02:23 PM

I'm so not impressed with the MavTV and SmithsonianHD additions, so I just cancelled my HDTier service as well. Saves me $7/mo. I've done what I can - sent the emails and have now cancelled the service.

Just got off the phone with TWC cancelling the HD VIP Pack due to the removal of HDNet. The rep I spoke with noted the reason for my cancellation and said the marketing department was very closely tracking the number of cancellations due to the loss HDNet. He admitted he was disapointed in the loss of HDNet too, as he liked the MMA fights.

sirjonsnow

06-01-09, 02:58 PM

hdtvfan2005

06-01-09, 03:03 PM

sirjonsnow,

Yes your Tivo HD will work with Fios though you'll probably need to have an attenuator installed since the Fios signal is too strong for it. You can get an M-Card for about $4.00 a month.

xnappo

06-01-09, 03:10 PM

Riverside_Guy

06-01-09, 03:39 PM

There may be some exceptions such as Star Wars, but the vast majority are full screen 16x9. I personally can't remember seeing any that were not full screen. OAR is certainly not their norm.

Dark Knight is on HBO June 13 (premiere?)... the Blu-ray release is mixed 1:78 (IMAX scenes) and 2:35 (the rest).

Interesting... I had a big fight with someone on another board re: Dark Knight. I saw it in an IMAX theater, and the entire movie was full to it's screen. It seems other may have seen it differently. The screen SEEMS to be "squarer" than the typical 4:3 (1:78).

Agree the majority seem to be 16:9, but I seem to see thin black bars top and bottom pretty regularly. But I think we should acknowledge that this is not ALWAYS laid the the final distribution outfit (i.e. HBO etc.), I think the studios MAY sometimes send the version they want for that channel.

Riverside_Guy

06-01-09, 03:45 PM

Called TW this morning and dropped the HD tier. I did upgrade to their "all-in-one" package though, since it will save me about $20 from having a separate phone deal. Didn't do it before because work had been paying for my internet, but not any more.

I will be picking up an HDTivo ASAP and dropping their HD DVR though, now that I see I'll save about $17/month.

Will HDTivo still be usable with FIOS, if that ever comes to my area?

Called to drop it, I think every time you call them about your bill, they always come up with a deal. I wanted to cut 10 bucks off, HDXtra was 4 bucks. So I planned too drop Starz (I had three, HBO, SHO & Starz). I ended up with a deal of HBO, Max, SHO, Starz for 5 bucks less than what I was paying for the three.

It seems the cost of DVR service is actually a MUCh better deal with TWC than FIOS (here it's 11 bucks for TWC and something like 18 for FIOS). Given that, it MAY be that a TiVO on FIOS may not have as much additional cost as it would be in a TWC system.

Marcus Carr

06-01-09, 03:47 PM

Time Warner Cable Hits 100 HD Channels In Central New York

Operator Offers Expanded Lineup to Syracuse-Area Customers

Todd Spangler -- Multichannel News, 6/1/2009 12:26:19 PM MT

Time Warner Cable's Central New York Division began offering its customers in the Syracuse-area the ability to watch up to 100 high-definition channels as of May 31.

In addition, Time Warner Cable said in late June it will begin delivering its own locally produced, exclusive programming -- its 24-hour local news channel News 10 Now and Time Warner Cable Sports network -- in the high-definition format.

The company said it will offer 100 HD channels everywhere in its Central New York Division, including the southern tier, the Utica/Rome area and northern New York systems, with the addition of more HD channels later in June.

The operator freed up capacity to offer 100 HDs by using technologies including switched digital video, which delivers programming only when it's requested by a subscriber.

The 100-HD channel count includes all available networks, including optional "premium" networks like HBO, Showtime, Cinemax and Starz for which a subscription is required. An HD-capable converter is required to receive HD programming available, at the same rate as a non-HD converter.

In New York City, Time Warner Cable passed the 100-HD mark in February.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/277632-Time_Warner_Cable_Hits_100_HD_Channels_In_Central_New_York.p hp

ak3883

06-01-09, 04:37 PM

Time Warner Cable Hits 100 HD Channels In Central New York

Not bad, considering just 15 months ago TWC had only 17 HD channels in the Southern Tier of NY(Binghamton area). SDV paid off and has certainly allowed them to add more HD much faster than Comcast's decision to go with analog reclaimation.

Gary J

06-01-09, 04:45 PM

Not bad, considering just 15 months ago TWC had only 17 HD channels in the Southern Tier of NY(Binghamton area). SDV paid off and has certainly allowed them to add more HD much faster than Comcast's decision to go with analog reclaimation.

You are correct but beware the resident TWC/SDV hater. ;)

nickdawg

06-01-09, 05:05 PM

You are correct but beware the resident TWC/SDV hater. ;)

**AHEM** ;)

It's been downgraded to a Category 3 as the bugs are worked out and all areas of NE Ohio finally have SDV. But I still hate TWC. Who doesn't? ;)

Tom Wellman

06-01-09, 06:17 PM

Must be nice. The ex-Adelphia areas of Time Warner Cable are taking their sweet time to implement SDV. We're stuck with 42 HD channels (incl. premium+HDxtra tier) while the original San Diego Time Warner system has 48. WTF. I know we use Motorola while they use Scientific Atlanta/Cisco now, but its operated under the same TWC system. I know the TWC Los Angeles (or TWC SoCal as its known, San Diego and SoCal are different TWC divisions) has way more HD channels and most of that system was former Adelphia/Comcast and they are able to have way more HD channels. Its bugging the hell out of me. It seems like theres some disorganization going on at TWC.

petey1287

06-01-09, 09:06 PM

gerhard911

06-01-09, 09:11 PM

They are probably doing what my TWC area is - cramming three HD channels into one QAM slot :eek:

Really ugly :mad:

ProTuber

06-01-09, 10:32 PM

Just got off the phone with TWC cancelling the HD VIP Pack due to the removal of HDNet. The rep I spoke with noted the reason for my cancellation and said the marketing department was very closely tracking the number of cancellations due to the loss HDNet. He admitted he was disapointed in the loss of HDNet too, as he liked the MMA fights.What's interesting is that a poster in a local Albany, NY board reported when asked to talk to a supervisor "the supervisor's response to me was that what I said was fine,but that my complaint would go no further than her.She didn't care." http://albanyhdtv.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=Lineup&action=display&thread=3125&page=2#8027. Yet about an hour later another poster reports that "The rep asked if it was because of the removal of HDNet and HDNet Movies." http://albanyhdtv.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=Lineup&action=display&thread=3125&page=2#8028.

ProTuber

06-01-09, 10:38 PM

They are probably doing what my TWC area is - cramming three HD channels into one QAM slot :eek:

Really ugly :mad:Yes some action movies on some of the premium channels have so many artifacts that a co-worker mentioned to me that on occasion he has given up and would actually dig out his DVD copy of a movie rather than endure it on TW.

DSperber

06-02-09, 12:42 AM

It seems the cost of DVR service is actually a MUCh better deal with TWC than FIOS (here it's 11 bucks for TWC and something like 18 for FIOS).Are you sure about the pricing on the DVR? Apples to apples?

Here in TWC/LA there are two separate charges: DVR Service is $10, and DVR receiver (hardware+remote) is $6.50. together that's $16.50 for a DVR.

DSperber

06-02-09, 12:56 AM

Interesting... I had a big fight with someone on another board re: Dark Knight. I saw it in an IMAX theater, and the entire movie was full to it's screen. It seems other may have seen it differently. The screen SEEMS to be "squarer" than the typical 4:3 (1:78).On the subject of IMAX theaters, screens, expansion into many many outlets, etc....

There was this article last week in the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-bigpicture26-2009may26,0,1484505.story) about this very topic. Apparently there's quite a flap over disappointed ticket buyers wandering unexpecting into the new, medium-size theaters as compared to the older giant screens they were looking forward to.

holl_ands

06-02-09, 10:37 AM

LA Times omitted technical details. "Fake IMAX" (aka Digital IMAX) at AMC theaters is on a
28'x58' screen (2.07)--one fourth the area of a "True 15/70 IMAX" 76'x97' screen (1.28 sorta).
BLACK KNIGHT played in "True 15/70 IMAX" at some of the spherical theaters,
BUT, there were also reports of people seeing the "shrunk" picture in a small portion
of a spherical theater.....go figure....maybe the IMAX theater ordered the wrong one????

Here's a list of all IMAX theaters, denoting which are True (film) and which are Fake (digital):
http://www.lfexaminer.com/theaUSA.htm#MA

Only the big spherical screens are capable of "True 15/70 IMAX":
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/is-imax-digital-scamming-moviegoers/
http://www.naimark.net/writing/expo.html
http://azizisbored.tumblr.com/post/106587114/reblog-the-****-out-of-this-warning-amc-theaters-are
[Hint: You may or may not have to replace stars with the "f" word.]

A "True IMAX" projector is similar to a standard 35mm (4 perforations) FILM projector...except
the image is HUGE, taking up 15 "perforations" of 70mm film stock:
http://www.lfexaminer.com/formats.htm
http://www.mods.org/IMAX/experience.htm
To play 3D films, two separate film strips are fed into and overlaid in the camera.
In between is (expensive) 70mm film, but there have only been a limited number released:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_70_mm_films

Resolution of 35mm film drops roughly in half as it goes from film stock to final print:
http://digitalcontentproducer.com/mag/video_digital_cinemas_special/
http://www.cst.fr/IMG/pdf/35mm_resolution_english.pdf
IMAX rep provided fol. response re IMAX resolution:
http://www.tristanpipo.com/2005/03/18/last-update-was-sunday/
Also note drop in perceived resolution between master and release print.

AMC's "Fake IMAX" uses TWO 1980x1024 overlapping DLP projectors...with rube goldberg mods....
http://gizmodo.com/5250625/cineplexes-getting-imax-but-is-it-imax-or-conspiracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cinema
Which is reportedly only marginally better than the existing 1980x1024 "2K" digital cinema system.
But it's compatible with EXISTING theater screens and sitting configurations....
And the twin projector system maintains maximum frame rate with 3D films.

And is being replaced by Sony's SXRD "4K" projector:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cinema

For info re changing aspect ratios (DVD & BluRay are different), follow the
DARK KNIGHT link in fol. list of IMAX-DMR (Digital Re-Mastering) films:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IMAX_DMR_films

Surely you don't think you're going to get the full IMAX effect at home...until maybe 5 years from now...
Hmmm, if I punch out the wall in the living room and build a DOME......
"4K" HDTVs are readily available....for a price....but we're still waiting for a "4K/8K" PurpleRay Player....

PS: Why can't they simply adopt digital camera nomenclature???
"8K" = 33.2 Mpx, "4K" = 8.85 Mpx, "2K" = 2.2 Mpx and 1920x1080 = 2.1 Mpx.
That's right, we're only slightly better than a typical cell phone camera....