AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Time Warner Cable HDTV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Time Warner Cable HDTV - Page 20

post #571 of 9095
Major Headaches Lie Ahead For Goodell and the NFL
The Business of Sport

By EVAN WEINER
November 20, 2006

Roger Goodell is learning quickly that running North America's most successful sports organization is not an easy job. The National Football League currently does not have deals in place with either Time Warner or Cablevision to carry the small schedule of regular season games that are scheduled to air on the NFL Network beginning on Thanksgiving night. The Jets and Giants believe the league should loan them $300 million not $150 million to help finance their proposed Meadowlands stadium. Goodell also has yet to address problems with revenue sharing between the high-revenue owners, including Washington's Daniel Snyder, Dallas's Jerry Jones, Houston's Robert McNair, New England's Robert Kraft, and Philadelphia's Jeffrey Lurie, and the low-revenue guys like Buffalo's Ralph Wilson and Cincinnati's Mike Brown.

Then there is the Los Angeles project. The former NFL Commissioner, Paul Tagliabue, failed to put a team in Los Angeles in 1999, and his plans to get the league back into the area, the country's second biggest market, by 2009 never materialized.

The NFL Network needs to reach a deal with Time Warner which has a little more than a million subscribers in the New York City area because of a complicated deal involving the Federal Communications Commission and the cable TV operator. In July, the FCC approved Time Warner's acquisition, with Comcast, of the assets of a bankrupt Adelphia Communications Corporation. Since it had been carried on Adelphia, the NFL Network was part of this deal.

On August 1, Time Warner announced plans to drop the NFL Network from its newly acquired Adelphia cable systems. The NFL petitioned the FCC in an attempt to keep the network on the old Adelphia systems. And on August 3, the FCC ordered Time Warner to live up to the terms of the previous Adelphia deal at least for a month with the hope that the NFL and Time Warner could work out their differences. Instead, on September 15, Time Warner dropped the NFL Network from former Adelphia systems across the country.

While the NFL contends it is providing a worthwhile product, Time Warner complains the NFL is asking for too much money per subscriber to place the network on basic expanded cable.

The NFL did reach a deal to carry the network with the nation's third-largest cable system, Cox, but it will be available on a smaller, digital sports and information pay tier, and not basic expanded cable, which is not good news for Goodell and his owners. The nation's largest multiple systems operator, Comcast, has its own plans to move the NFL network to a sports tier in January. This doesn't please the NFL, which has filed suit against Comcast because it argues its deal with the Philadelphia-based MSO guaranteed the NFL Network would be part of a basic expanded package.

The CEO of Comcast, Brian Roberts, may be getting back at the NFL for failing to complete a deal that would have put those eight regular-season contests on his OLN (Versus) channel. The NFL and Comcast had a deal in place but the NFL backed out and decided to hold the games for its own network.

The NFL Network isn't Goodell's only problem. The new Giants-Jets Meadowlands stadium and development project could be stalled if the league doesn't free up some $300 million in loans to the Woody Johnson and Wellington Mara-Bob Tisch franchises. Just where that leaves the Meadowlands project is unknown, but the NFL has already backed out of stadium building in Los Angeles because the tab for getting the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum up to 21st-century standards could reach $1 billion.

The Los Angeles problem has been a major headache since Georgia Frontiere moved her Rams from Anaheim to St. Louis in 1995, and Al Davis left the L.A. Memorial Coliseum to return to Oakland the same year. Paul Tagliabue and his 31 owners virtually handed Los Angeles an expansion franchise that would start in 2002, but failed to convince local and state politicians to approve funding for a facility. Seven years later, the NFL still cannot get public funding in L.A., Pasadena, or Anaheim.

Meanwhile, San Francisco 49ers owner John York has announced he is exploring a move down Highway 101 to the South Bay area and Santa Clara. In 1997, San Francisco residents approved a spending package to build a new football facility at Candlestick Point, but nothing was ever done.

York's plans have not made Senator Feinstein very happy. A California democrat and a former mayor of San Francisco, Feinstein now sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and may introduce legislation that would require the NFL to sign off on any franchise relocation. The NFL actually has a rule on the book that requires threequarters of the owners to approve a move. The last time the NFL tried to stop an owner from moving was in 1980 when Davis took his Raiders from Oakland to Los Angeles. League owners don't want to be reminded of their decision Davis sued his fellow owners, won, and wound up in L.A.

The California problem extends to San Diego where Alex Spanos is negotiating with suburban San Diego cities to build a new Chargers stadium after San Diego city officials told him they could not meet his demands for a new facility.

Goodell and the NFL owners did not touch the revenue-sharing issue at their fall meetings in New Orleans a few weeks back, and they seem to be no closer to figuring out a solution.

The league has not really talked much with its member clubs about revenue sharing, but the United States Senate is monitoring talks on the subject. Senator Schumer is pressuring Goodell and the owners to get a deal done. With the Democrats now in control of the Senate, the NFL might feel more inclined to get the deal done, particularly with Schumer wielding more influence as major strategist in the democrats' election day win.

Whether the New Orleans Saints owner, Tom Benson, remains in Louisiana is another difficult situation. New Orleans no longer has a corporate community that can buy high-end tickets for luxury boxes and club seats or buy marketing partnerships or sponsorships; a recipe for financial disaster.

But the most pressing problem for Goodell is to find a way to bring about a resolution in the Time Warner- Cablevision negotiations. Right now both the cable operators and the NFL owners are playing a game of hardball that could result in a good number of football fans having to follow the Denver-Kansas City tilt the old-fashioned way. On the radio.

http://www.nysun.com/article/43841
post #572 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathRay View Post

oh boy, if Oceanic Time Warner in Hawaii is the standard of what people are holding out for then the rest of the country has it bad!

i'll trade you the interactive pet adoption channel, the pizza hut ordering channel, and the multi-screen sport channel for all my locals in HD, DVR software that doesn't make me cry, and *any* new HD channel.

well I don't have any new HD channels to offer but I can trade you some of the three old ones that we've had for two years. Oh and Movie Trailers on Demand!

At least you actually see progress in content and delivery and not just on demand channels being rebadged and merged together to appear "new."
post #573 of 9095
bgooch, very well written piece you posted. Points out that things are far more complicated than may initially meet the eye.

Then again, I find amusement galore when 2 ultra-rich corporate mini-Enrons mix it up. Still, I do kinda go for TWC's point, those games bloody well should be on basic cable, not tied into another pay tier.
post #574 of 9095
This weekend I visited homes that had Cox and Comcast service. Not only is TWC programming line-up very inferior (while paying higher monthly rates), but the PQ and services (guide, etc.) are much worse than Cox or Comcast. Don't believe all the crap you read on these forums about TWC's technical quality. That's just a poor excuse to divert attention away from their woeful record on responding to customer demand for more and better programming.

Satellite is definitely not convenient for where I live, but I'm ready to give it a try. I'm curious about what kind of defection rate there is these days, especially with the NFL Network situation and with more and more people realizing what a joke TWC is compared to other providers. It must not be significant enough for Time Warner to care.
post #575 of 9095
>> It must not be significant enough for Time Warner to care. <<

Of course they don't care, as long as there is no competition !

Can't wait for Verizon to start providing TV service.
post #576 of 9095
I would assume that there are examples of where TWC has had competition and rates have gone down and service levels have increased?
post #577 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by toadfannc View Post

This weekend I visited homes that had Cox and Comcast service. Not only is TWC programming line-up very inferior (while paying higher monthly rates), but the PQ and services (guide, etc.) are much worse than Cox or Comcast. Don't believe all the crap you read on these forums about TWC's technical quality. That's just a poor excuse to divert attention away from their woeful record on responding to customer demand for more and better programming.

Satellite is definitely not convenient for where I live, but I'm ready to give it a try. I'm curious about what kind of defection rate there is these days, especially with the NFL Network situation and with more and more people realizing what a joke TWC is compared to other providers. It must not be significant enough for Time Warner to care.


Well TWC lost me as of last month.
No NFL Network
No CW network
No CBS HD
No ABC HD
No NBC HD
No FOX HD
No Food Network HD
No HGTV HD

And the list goes on and on.
See you later Time Warner.

I also switched my phone service to Sun Rocket for a flat 16.99 a month.
So far it works great and was very easy to setup.

I was spending near 200.00 a month with TWC. My bill this month for just internet was 29.00.
Maybe if enough people hit them in the pocketbook they will get with the program someday. I'm not holding my breath though.
post #578 of 9095
It's an odd thing. When my local system was Adelphia, everybody seemed to say that Adelphia was the worst possible cable company to have. Ever since they upgraded our local system 6 or 7 years ago, I have believed that Adelphia was fine at least here in central Maine. Still the criticism (local and national) continued right up until the day that Time Warner took over.

Now, I learn through the internet that in fact Time Warner is the worst possible cable company to have. ............ I wish people would get together and make up my mind!

Actually, the fine signal quality and service continue on our local system despite the change in the "brand name." I guess the technical quality and service are a local matter for each subscriber. ........ Bad area = bad problems. Good area = fewer problems.

So far, I have 13 HD channels. We don't have CBS, yet, but I can't say that I really want TWC to start paying the local channels to carry their signals. When the CBS channels (in this area) begin selling less advertising because of the decreased number of eyeballs, it won't be long until they DEMAND to be put on the local system.
post #579 of 9095
http://www.highdefforum.com/showthread.php?t=32185

Cox has added a handful of HD channels (MTVHD, ESPN2HD, etc.) in the past 6 months-- Comcast has added 9 new HD channels in the past year or so. TWC has added nothing.

How would you like to be a former Comcast or Adelphia customer who now has TWC? ESPN2HD-- gone, NFL Network-- gone, along with many, many others. Those people are even bigger losers than us long suffering TWC customers are. At least we're used to getting nothing. Check it out on this and other (http://www.hdtvoice.com and http://www.highdefforum.com among others) forums with posts from ex-Comcast/Adelphia subscribers. There's even a lawsuit in LA from customers who were forcibly switched to TWC and are now very pissed:

http://www.highdefforum.com/showthread.php?t=31859

Get ready to hear from the sychophants about TWC's "pragmatic" (translation: the highest rates for the worst channel line-up) attitude towards new programming. Or, how superior TWC is with technology. BS.
post #580 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by gparris View Post

I would assume that there are examples of where TWC has had competition and rates have gone down and service levels have increased?

Everest is laying cable in my area right now. Neighborhoods where Everest is live (in the same city, mind you) get a discount from TWC that isn't offered to us schlubs who have no choice in cable providers. They still get the same sucky service though - guess TWC can't offer two tiers of that.
post #581 of 9095
Quote:


Cox has added a handful of HD channels (MTVHD, ESPN2HD, etc.) in the past 6 months-- Comcast has added 9 new HD channels in the past year or so. TWC has added nothing.

Why ???
post #582 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricM407 View Post

They still get the same sucky service though - guess TWC can't offer two tiers of that.

Tiered suckage. Don't give them any ideas.
post #583 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cain View Post

Why ???

Why NO HD channel addtions? Ask TWC.

See my earlier post about what the TWC apologists will tell you.
post #584 of 9095
TWC just added three HD channels effective 11/1/06 in my market.
post #585 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverside_Guy View Post

TWC just added three HD channels effective 11/1/06 in my market.

I'm talking about national HD channels-- not local/regional ones that apply to one or 2 markets.
post #586 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by toadfannc View Post

I'm talking about national HD channels-- not local/regional ones that apply to one or 2 markets.

Well 2 of the channels he's talking about is Starz-HD and Cinemax-HD
(2 channels that corperate TWC already had access to.... just weren't added in NYC until this month)

The other channel he's refering to is MSG-HD, which is local, but important.
(another was also added this month... YES-HD)
post #587 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berk32 View Post

Well 2 of the channels he's talking about is Starz-HD and Cinemax-HD
(2 channels that corperate TWC already had access to.... just weren't added in NYC until this month)

The other channel he's refering to is MSG-HD, which is local, but important.
(another was also added this month... YES-HD)

Right- 2 locals, and 2 subscriptions (only available in 1 or 2 markets). I'm referring to HD channels available to all customers (ex. Discovery HD, TNT-HD) or in a suite (ESPNHD, InHD). Cox has added MTV-HD, ESPN2HD and others. Comcast has added even more-- not locally specific or subscription channels. Tell me ... what has TWC added in the last 3 years? Only Universal HD (over 2 years ago), and even that channel is not provided in many TWC markets-- and, it's by far the most worthless HD channel available. That is, unless you love 'Knight Rider', 'Quantam Leap', 'The Equalizer', and 'Medical Investigation' (all 6 episodes) re-runs.
post #588 of 9095
Television As Computer
Chris Kraeuter, 11.30.06, 10:00 AM ET

Burlingame, Calif. -

Time Warner Cable is expanding on Thursday a test program for bringing interactive applications like fantasy football stats and eBay bidding into televisions that could eventually reach all of its markets.

The expansion continues a movement toward funneling the information on the Internet into what, for many, is the center of life at home: the television.

"This has the means for enhancing viewing and making our lives more convenient," says Dan Levinson, head of marketing for BIAP Systems, the Plano, Texas-based software company that developed the applications for Time Warner Cable, a subsidiary of media conglomerate Time Warner.

Stamford, Conn.-based Time Warner Cable's "Instant News and More" service for its digital customers will eventually be available to all of its 13.5 million subscribers in 33 markets, mostly in New York, Texas, Ohio, the Carolinas and Southern California, up from the eight it previously served with the test program that began two years ago. A company spokesman declined to specify when all of its subscribers would be able to access the service.

Satellite providers like DirecTV and EchoStar Communications and cable companies like Time Warner Cable are witnessing their stronghold--premium broadcasting subscriptions--getting usurped by downloads and streaming content on the Internet.

BIAP's technology gets built into the cable company's infrastructure and gets automatically loaded into a subscriber's set-top box, where it's then accessed with a standard digital remote.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/30/cab...ble_print.html
post #589 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgooch View Post

Television As Computer
Chris Kraeuter, 11.30.06, 10:00 AM ET

Burlingame, Calif. -

Time Warner Cable is expanding on Thursday a test program for bringing interactive applications like fantasy football stats and eBay bidding into televisions that could eventually reach all of its markets.

The expansion continues a movement toward funneling the information on the Internet into what, for many, is the center of life at home: the television.

"This has the means for enhancing viewing and making our lives more convenient," says Dan Levinson, head of marketing for BIAP Systems, the Plano, Texas-based software company that developed the applications for Time Warner Cable, a subsidiary of media conglomerate Time Warner.

Stamford, Conn.-based Time Warner Cable's "Instant News and More" service for its digital customers will eventually be available to all of its 13.5 million subscribers in 33 markets, mostly in New York, Texas, Ohio, the Carolinas and Southern California, up from the eight it previously served with the test program that began two years ago. A company spokesman declined to specify when all of its subscribers would be able to access the service.

Satellite providers like DirecTV and EchoStar Communications and cable companies like Time Warner Cable are witnessing their stronghold--premium broadcasting subscriptions--getting usurped by downloads and streaming content on the Internet.

BIAP's technology gets built into the cable company's infrastructure and gets automatically loaded into a subscriber's set-top box, where it's then accessed with a standard digital remote.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/30/cab...ble_print.html

We have had this service for approximately 6 months and in my opinion it is completely useless. Why look up fantasy football stats on the tv when the computer/internet is quicker and easier to navigate? Also who wants to play solitaire using the tv remote? I wish TWC would simply add quality HD channels that offer a choice for the customer. The channels that TWC does not offer run the gamut from sport i.e. ESPN2HD, NFLHD to home (HGTVHD) to nature (National Geographic HD). I am sure these additions would be more useful to the people in my house and to the people I talk to.
post #590 of 9095
Just got the new pricing information in the mail today. Currently, INHD, INHD2, HDNET, HDNET Movies, and ESPNHD are in the HD Tier. The new pricing lists only four channels in the HD tier. Presumably INHD2 is being taken off. I wonder if TWC will bother complying with the law by informing customers it is removing INHD2?
post #591 of 9095
I agree with dlep the BIAP stuff is real junk. It slows down the channel surfing and I have had problems with my box rebooting if I try and use any of it. Oh and it is very slow and never up to date. Oh and it is not very local if you don't live in a large market. It does do a nice job giving us yesterday's weather. I knew TWC had to have their greedy little hands in this deal.
post #592 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc10forlife View Post

Just got the new pricing information in the mail today. Currently, INHD, INHD2, HDNET, HDNET Movies, and ESPNHD are in the HD Tier. The new pricing lists only four channels in the HD tier. Presumably INHD2 is being taken off. I wonder if TWC will bother complying with the law by informing customers it is removing INHD2?

TWC in Appleton, WI has informed me that we will lose INHD2 on January 1, 2007. So now that we lose an HD channel it will be interesting to see what, if anything, replaces it. If the loss of the channel frees up some bandwidth to add a different HD channel then at least we didn't have a net loss. However, I find it appalling that TWC is losing HD programming, albeit many repeated programs on INHD2, when just about every provider is adding HD programming.
post #593 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlep View Post

TWC in Appleton, WI has informed me that we will lose INHD2 on January 1, 2007. So now that we lose an HD channel it will be interesting to see what, if anything, replaces it. If the loss of the channel frees up some bandwidth to add a different HD channel then at least we didn't have a net loss. However, I find it appalling that TWC is losing HD programming, albeit many repeated programs on INHD2, when just about every provider is adding HD programming.

I got the same letter from TWC San Antonio yesterday. I would assume that nothing is replacing INHD2 or they would have been touting a new channel coming soon in the letter. They'll just use the bandwidth for another highly needed shopping or foreign language channel
post #594 of 9095
In the interest of caring about its customers I am sure TWC will cut the rate in the tier that INHD2 is in by 16% since in our area it is part of six pay channels. So my bill will go down $1.11 a month right after the pigs fly over my house!
post #595 of 9095
That "Instant News..." sure sounds like it's part of the whole OCAP thing. As I understand it, their new STB software, being referred to as "Mystro," is needing deployment first. That software should also allow for SDV which should eliminate any bandwidth issues.

Honestly as I read folks from around the country and their issues with poor images, I wonder why I see pretty pristine images, I mean I don't seem to have a lot of the issues others seem to routinely have. I then read about how my local system, serving a huge metro area, has as much if not more bandwidth than almost all other domestic markets. Frankly, I'd rather the way it is right now than having some of the more marginal HD channels available at the expense of image quality.

As for InHD2, it is NOT TWC or any other MSO that is dropping it. It's gone from the source. TWC had nothing to do with it. What IS going to be interesting is that it WAS on a pay tier. On 1/1/07 we will see a reduction of 20% on that pay tier. If TWC left it that way, I gotta think there's be something of a revolt, the customers saying "add another channel or drop the rates." Personally I see a lot of interest in ESPN2 HD, even though I'm not particularly interested, there is a list of others I'd rather see first. BUT that tier does have ESPN HD, so logic tells me they are negotiating to put both ESPN HD channels on that tier.
post #596 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverside_Guy View Post


As for InHD2, it is NOT TWC or any other MSO that is dropping it. It's gone from the source. TWC had nothing to do with it.

INHD2 is owned by Comcast, Time Warner, and Cox. So MSOs did have a little something to do with it.
post #597 of 9095
www.indemand.com still has not posted a press release re inHD2 being "merged" into inHD1....or what, if anything will replace it.

However, since inHD1/2 are currently carried by a shared MPEG2 stream on a C-Band transponder for distro to cable headends,
I would predict that they will simply REPLACE inHD2 with "SOMETHING ELSE", rather than leaving half the transponder capacity unused....
post #598 of 9095
Quote:
Originally Posted by holl_ands View Post

www.indemand.com still has not posted a press release re inHD2 being "merged" into inHD1....or what, if anything will replace it.

However, since inHD1/2 are currently carried by a shared MPEG2 stream on a C-Band transponder for distro to cable headends,
I would predict that they will simply REPLACE inHD2 with "SOMETHING ELSE", rather than leaving half the transponder capacity unused....

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...lts&text=inhd2
post #599 of 9095
It might free up enough bandwidth so that, say, Time-Warner can now find a permanent place for Universal HD (for which they do have a carriage agreement, but not every TWC system carries it).
post #600 of 9095
Here in the Kansas City market, we have already lost INHD2. So now we all have on this tier is INHD, HDNET, HDNET Movies, ESPNHD, and Universal HD. It looks like they added Cinemax HD to the premium tier but since we'd have to pay more to get it, I don't consider that a fair replacement for losing INHD2.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Time Warner Cable HDTV