Originally posted by keenan
We need to get off this "free" thing, Comcast does not expect to get the signal for free, there is always some sort of compensation involved, they just want to apply similar agreements as most all other broadcasters have done across the country.
EXACTLY! Comcast is paying every station for their HD. Its an issue of greed. Sinclair wants more then the standard rates already set.
The networks upgraded to ATSC because they were required by law. If they did not wish to make this upgrade, they had the option to sell their affiliate. No one is forcing them to be in business.
By offering the product OTA, they are making zero compensation currently. By keeping their signal off of cable, they are making zero compensation. By offering their signal over cable, which does not cost them anything, they WILL make compensation. Why should Comcast give them more then what the other big 3 affiliates in the market have agreed to once they made this same realization. What does Comcast have to lose? Comcast is NOT going to make any more money by offering the Sinclair HD signal to their customers, in fact they will lose money by having to compensate Sinclair as they do currently with the other networks, in addition the bandwidth they will have to pay for to transmit the signal to their customers. Comcast wants to provide this signal to their customers beacuse it is a good PR
move, and it will keep their customer satisfaction ratings up.
Honestly, being in a Sinclair market and dealing with the annoyance of having no FOX HD, despite the bulk of the programming I watch actually being on FOX, I fully support Comcast because they are not "getting the siginal for FREE" and since the launch of their HD, they have not asked me to assist in paying for the HD (and it is not a hidden charge, because I would pay the same for cable with or without HD). I support Comcast because they essentially agreed to comply with Sinclairs request for increased compensation (and the HD "tier" would have remained the same cost, so Comcast would have taken a hit on their profits) UNTIL Sinclair demanded this compensation be based on TOTAL subscribers as oppesed to subscribers who actually use HD (based on a source within the organization).
The fact is, Sinclair gains everything from the increased exposure whereas the gains for Comcast are minimal. I challenge all who support Sinclair to prove me wrong on any of what I just said, because it is pretty clear cut.