or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › NFL Network vs. Cable holdouts - The 8 game dilemma.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NFL Network vs. Cable holdouts - The 8 game dilemma. - Page 5  

post #121 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by toadfannc View Post

They want to be able to yank the NFL Network immediately from their "new" customers that were absorbed from Adelphia and Comcast ... instead of giving the 30 days notice mandated by the FCC.

What's great is TW wants to pull NFLN immediately and on the opposite side (I'm in a market that just got rebranded to Comcast) they will take their sweet time to switch to Comcast programming (w/NFLN).

It's heart-warming how veraciously they're "protecting the consumer"
post #122 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by toadfannc View Post

And, why are they going to court? Oh yeah, I remember. They want to be able to yank the NFL Network immediately from their "new" customers that were absorbed from Adelphia and Comcast ... instead of giving the 30 days notice mandated by the FCC.

you're forgetting, they are doing it to protect the customers! If people start getting used to being given channels that everyone else has, then it will just be more disappointing for them when they found out that this is just a one off.
post #123 of 1586
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by toadfannc View Post

3. Do you really think this is going to be resolved? Please ... TWC will dig in their heels, like a spoiled child and not budge. They could care less how pissed their subs are, and how many eventually leave.

Perhaps this is one for the United Nations to resolve.....
Then perhaps not.
post #124 of 1586
FCC Denies Time Warner Request to Delay NFL Network Return

Aug. 7 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Federal Communications Commission denied Time Warner Cable's request for a delay in reinstating the NFL Network on some recently acquired cable systems.

Time Warner Cable, the second-largest U.S. cable operator, asked the FCC to stay a decision reached by the commission last week that ordered the Time Warner Inc. unit to reinstate the NFL Network on cable systems it acquired from Adelphia Communications Corp. and Comcast Corp., No. 1 in the U.S.

Time Warner had removed the NFL Network from cable systems on Aug. 1, saying negotiations over terms for carriage failed. The FCC found that New York-based Time Warner hadn't given subscribers the required 30-day notice of a change and ordered the company to immediately reinstate the channel. Today the FCC said it would stand by its order.

``Time Warner's subscribers have paid their bills for August with the expectation that they will be able to view the NFL Network,'' wrote the FCC, adding that if the order is delayed, ``those expectations would be thwarted.''

Time Warner said on Aug. 4 that it had reinstated NFL Network, which plans to show 54 preseason games and eight regular-season primetime games this season.

Shares of Time Warner, the world's largest media company, fell 20 cents to $16.36 at 10:50 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. They declined 5 percent this year before today.
post #125 of 1586
Time Warner Must Keep Running NFL, Says FCC
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 8/7/2006 12:55:00 AM


The FCC says Time Warner must continue to air the NFL Network while the commission considers a complaint from the network that Time Warner did not give it sufficient notice before pulling the network off systems it just acquired in its deal to split up Bankrupt Adelphia with Comcast.

The Commission Monday denied Time Warner's petition to stay its decision to force carriage, as well as its request to reconsider the Media Bureau decision, or refer it to the full commission. The FCC has concluded buth that the NFL is likely to win on the merits and becuase it says that the network has made a case that it could suffer irreparable harm if viewers didn't get to see the pre-season games it has in profusion--over 50.

Time Warner could now likely take the commission to court, though it has made no decision. It said last week it would explore all avenues of appeal, and the FCC avenue has now been closed.

The dispute is over price and placement on Time Warner systems of the NFL Network. The Network wants to be on expanded basic, while Time Warner wants to place it on a sports tier. As part of basic, it could raise the rate of the tier by a dollar for everyone who wants the tier, not just those sports fans who can't get enough NFL.

"Time Warner Cable continues to believe that the FCC has misconstrued the notice rules and has ordered a remedy that is in clear violation of the First Amendment," the company said in response. "The FCC's action has resulted in exascerbating, not avoiding, consumer confusion."

"We are reviewing the decision and considering our options," said spokesman Mark Harrad.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/art...=Breaking+News
post #126 of 1586
"We are reviewing the decision and considering our options," said spokesman Mark Harrad.


Wold this be the same as screw the customer?
post #127 of 1586
when a massive cable company has to use the first amendment as a defense to not provide a service, that's just pitiful.

What next for TWC? - "the CEO's mom, said the FCC are not being nice and we shouldn't have to play with NFL if we don't want to! Nah nah nah."
post #128 of 1586
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VisionOn View Post

when a massive cable company has to use the first amendment as a defense to not provide a service, that's just pitiful.

What next for TWC? - "the CEO's mom, said the FCC are not being nice and we shouldn't have to play with NFL if we don't want to! Nah nah nah."

I tend to be a little left of center and even I can see the logic of not having the federal government dictate what programming a broadcaster or cable company should have to have, or can't have, etc.

First Amendment is a typical defense in similar legal situations.
post #129 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

I tend to be a little left of center and even I can see the logic of not having the federal government dictate what programming a broadcaster or cable company should have to have, or can't have, etc.

First Amendment is a typical defense in similar legal situations.


All the Feds are saying is that TWC can't take away a channel from customers that was present without 30 days notice. After the 30 days they can take it away. They aren't forcing them to carry the channel forever just a certain amount of time so consumers can make a decision.
post #130 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

I tend to be a little left of center and even I can see the logic of not having the federal government dictate what programming a broadcaster or cable company should have to have, or can't have, etc.

First Amendment is a typical defense in similar legal situations.

I disagree. 30-day notice is a reasonable consumer protection and is hardly "dictating" what programming a cable company must carry. Think of it as a "contract" that renews month to month. In exchange for my monthly bill the cable company agrees to deliver a package of channels. If the cable company doesn't want to deliver that package of channels in next months "contract" they are free to do so, but I am also free to seek another provider that will sell me an acceptable package of channels.
post #131 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

I tend to be a little left of center and even I can see the logic of not having the federal government dictate what programming a broadcaster or cable company should have to have, or can't have, etc.

First Amendment is a typical defense in similar legal situations.

It's kind of hard to disagree, especially in terms of an individual cable channel. However, cable operators tend to be seen more as public utilities than as members of "the press." In fact, they tend to be seen as monopolies, even though there are other choices such as satellite, FiOS, or just sticking with the antenna.

Anyway, if you'd like to read the FCC's full order, it's here (in .pdf).
post #132 of 1586
TV Notebook
FCC Rejects Time Warner's NFL Appeal
By Ted Hearn Multichannel News 8/7/2006

The Federal Communications Commission Monday reaffirmed last Thursday's ruling that Time Warner Cable had to carry NFL Network for 30 days on systems just acquired from Comcast and Adelphia Communications.

Last Friday, Time Warner threatened to take the FCC to court if the agency didn't back down and allow it to drop NFL Network. Following the release of the FCC's second decision, Time Warner did not commit to a court fight over the need to provide consumers a 30-day notice before deleting a channel.

"Time Warner Cable continues to believe that the FCC has misconstrued the notice rules and has ordered a remedy that is in clear violation of the First Amendment. The FCC's action has resulted in exacerbating, not avoiding, consumer confusion, Time Warner spokesman Mark Harrad said. "We are reviewing the decision and considering our options."

Time Warner and NFL Network have never had a carriage agreement, but the network had deals with Comcast and Adelphia systems that Time Warner obtained July 31 when the $16.9 billion Adelphia transaction closed.

Time Warner dropped NFL Network on those systems Aug. 1. Claiming that it gave Time Warner the necessary 30 days to issue the proper consumer notices, NFL Network complained to the FCC within hours that it had been illegally removed by Time Warner.

The second FCC ruling was again issued by Media Bureau chief Donna Gregg, an appointee of FCC chairman Kevin Martin. Time Warner may ask the five FCC commissioners to overturn Gregg's rulings as an alternative to an immediate court challenge, which Time Warner has said would involve important First Amendment issues.

Time Warner and the National Football League have been haggling over terms of carriage, with the network seeking an expanded-basic position but Time Warner hoping to start a sports tier with NFL Network as a key driver of mini-tier penetration.

We plan to continue discussions with Time Warner about the long-term carriage of NFL Network. In the meantime, we are pleased that NFL fans will continue to have access to our 'insider' coverage of NFL training camps and the preseason as a result of this ruling, the NFL said in a statement.

In her 15-page order, Gregg said Time Warner's treatment of NFL Network was disappointing because FCC members and outside parties had expressed serious concern about the impact that the Adelphia transactions would have on unaffiliated programmers.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.as...leid=CA6360259
post #133 of 1586
The FCC did the right thing IMO.

30 days gives people the time they need to invest in other alternatives while getting what they paid for, as stated above. It could also give TW the opportunity to tighten up and hammer out a deal.
post #134 of 1586
I think we are all forgetting a major point here.

The FCC just days ago approved the massive takeover of Adelphia by TWC and Comcast and the concurrent swap of millions of cable customers by the two giants.

They agreed to binding arbitration in the case of disputes involving independent networks (that is, not owned by each other) and especially sports networks.

This move was an aorrgoant, direct in your face insult to the four FCC mmissioners who approved the Adelphia deal, and to the Aderphia (or Comcast) subs who were suddeny without a channel they had enjoyed.

I hope this might give the FCC at least a little pause as it rushes to allow media congolmerates to control even more stations/networks/subscribers.
post #135 of 1586
I have the NFL Network thru Knology, still cant get any word on if they will add the HD channel yet.

Im holding out hope that its coming. Only because in my area Knology is always first, before Comcast and TWC to add available HD programming.
post #136 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredfa View Post

I think we are all forgetting a major point here.

The FCC just days ago approved the massive takeover of Adelphia by TWC and Comcast and the concurrent swap of millions of cable customers by the two giants.

They agreed to binding arbitration in the case of disputes involving independent networks (that is, not owned by each other) and especially sports networks.

This move was an aorrgoant, direct in your face insult to the four FCC mmissioners who approved the Adelphia deal, and to the Aderphia (or Comcast) subs who were suddeny without a channel they had enjoyed.

I hope this might give the FCC at least a little pause as it rushes to allow media congolmerates to control even more stations/networks/subscribers.

Exactly, it's a "thanks for all your help, now go sit at the back of the bus and get out of my way".

And to cut it off to subs who have already paid for it, depending on their billing period, is beyond belief--I don't suppose TW is going to give those subs a credit are they..??
post #137 of 1586
Everyone shares in the blame. TWC, NFL, every other operator who created their own channel (MSG/YES/SNY here in New York) as well as every single fan. We put up with it, we go to the games and we buy $200 worth of food and stuff every time you go. They know they have us and if we don't go, someone else will. Unless every single person decided to go to the windows and yell "I'm not going to take it anymore", they will win. We get caught in the middle but we're enablers at the same time.

The only fair way to get this done is to allow multiple operators in the same market. No more forced monopolies. NJ and a few other states have the right idea by clearing the way for Verizon to offer their FIOS service. Now there will be true competition for service. Don't like TWC? Fine.. here's another choice!

And I also agree that eventually the NFL will withhold more games to charge more for their network. They already said they will make the deal more attractive to NBC by switching games. This is a precursor to them screwing their own partners. I'd be pissed if I was NBC and all of a sudden the best matchups are being pulled from my multibillion dollar deal.

There is no more loyalty except to the mighty dollar. Let's all stand in the parking lot and listen to the sound of an empty stadium. Pay the $20 for parking and bring all the food and beer for a weekly tailgate. At least you can stuff your friends in the trunk like it was a drive in movie and still only pay one price for the car... for now.
post #138 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasondean View Post

NJ and a few other states have the right idea by clearing the way for Verizon to offer their FIOS service. Now there will be true competition for service. Don't like TWC? Fine.. here's another choice!

ahh, I had a dream about that. Someday, someday ...
post #139 of 1586
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/08/sp...tml?ref=sports

Much of this article has been stated before, but there's some interesting data:


"Time Warner quickly received 7,843 consumer complaints and 88 requests to be disconnected. The N.F.L. fielded another 22,000 complaints. Team owners must view the response as a dandy plebiscite on their channel."

=

That's a lot of complaints in a short ime period !
post #140 of 1586
Thread Starter 
From a pure business strategy standpoint, I think TWC did the right thing. They escalated the impasse to a front burner status, forcing the press to cover it as news, which will lead to the opposing positions to be revealed to the general public.

What's sad is that the debate here has little to do with the real business issues and conduct of the parties. Opinions are aligned by virtue of whether or not the poster is a football fan or not. VERY SAD.
post #141 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

What's sad is that the debate here has little to do with the real business issues and conduct of the parties. Opinions are aligned by virtue of whether or not the poster is a football fan or not. VERY SAD.

Sorry, you're wrong. I have zero interest in watching the NFL Network or any other dedicated sporting channel and I'm still on their side.
post #142 of 1586
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VisionOn View Post

Sorry, you're wrong. I have zero interest in watching the NFL Network or any other dedicated sporting channel and I'm still on their side.

Basically the sides are thus:

NFL says if you carry our channel, you have to put on basic and everybody pays.

TWC says we want to give our subscribers a choice by offering your channel as an option.

It's not TWC refusing to carry the channel, but after all, IT IS THEIR STORE, and they should have a say so in how they merchandise it.

Does it not occur to you all that a subscriber that defects to DirecTV is ripe for buying NFL Sunday Ticket ??? Would the NFL not then prefer more homes with satellite access than cable access ??? Just food for thought.
post #143 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

Basically the sides are thus:

NFL says if you carry our channel, you have to put on basic and everybody pays.

TWC says we want to give our subscribers a choice by offering your channel as an option.

First off ... I am an NFL fan, so I am biased.

I really believe that the channel positioning is a smoke screen. If that was the case, then why is the Golf Channel, Speed Channel, etc. on basic digital ... and, not on a sports only tier? For that matter ... why should I have to pay for CMT when I don't like country music? Why can't there be a music only tier?

It's all about money. The NFL wants it on basic digital ... just as whoever owns the Golf Channel and CMT do-- because there are more in-place subscribers. Why should they be relegated to a sports tier, when the NFL Network is not on sports only tiers on any other system. All satellite and cable providers (Comcast, Cox, yada yada yada) have the NFL Network on their basic digital tiers ... why should TWC be the exception?
post #144 of 1586
Here is my biggest issue...WE (TWC subs) will begin missing nationally broadcast NFL games as soon as the NFL network begins broadcasting them. I don't have line of sight to satellite...so I have no way to see the games. To me, that bites...
post #145 of 1586
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by toadfannc View Post

First off ... I am an NFL fan, so I am biased.

I really believe that the channel positioning is a smoke screen. If that was the case, then why is the Golf Channel, Speed Channel, etc. on basic digital ... and, not on a sports only tier? For that matter ... why should I have to pay for CMT when I don't like country music? Why can't there be a music only tier?

It's all about money. The NFL wants it on basic digital ... just as whoever owns the Golf Channel and CMT do-- because there are more in-place subscribers. Why should they be relegated to a sports tier, when the NFL Network is not on sports only tiers on any other system. All satellite and cable providers (Comcast, Cox, yada yada yada) have the NFL Network on their basic digital tiers ... why should TWC be the exception?

The channels you mention probably cost the cable operator a dime if on basic and maybe a quarter on a tier. If NFLN was 25 cents or less, it would qualify to be on basic. The fact that they want nearly a dollar is the issue.

I think that that any channel desiring more than 50 cents/sub/month ought not to be part of a basic service package, but assigned to an optional tier. Otherwise, basic cable bills will continue to spiral out of control.
post #146 of 1586
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCsoftball7 View Post

Here is my biggest issue...WE (TWC subs) will begin missing nationally broadcast NFL games as soon as the NFL network begins broadcasting them. I don't have line of sight to satellite...so I have no way to see the games. To me, that bites...

I suggest that you petition the NFL Network to allow TWC to carry the channel as an option for those who want it.

If the NFL really really really believed their product was that much in demand, they'd allow it to be marketed as an optional service. Fact is they know the truth.
post #147 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

If the NFL really really really believed their product was that much in demand, they'd allow it to be marketed as an optional service. Fact is they know the truth.

I believe that once the full public understands that they are missing actual NFL games because their cable company isnt carrying the channel, that demand will only increase from week to week.
post #148 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

I suggest that you petition the NFL Network to allow TWC to carry the channel as an option for those who want it.

If the NFL really really really believed their product was that much in demand, they'd allow it to be marketed as an optional service. Fact is they know the truth.


Which truth? That you're a TWC apologist? That truth? Pathetic.
post #149 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by posg View Post

I suggest that you petition the NFL Network to allow TWC to carry the channel as an option for those who want it.

If the NFL really really really believed their product was that much in demand, they'd allow it to be marketed as an optional service. Fact is they know the truth.

Again ... this (the petition web site) is a TWC smokescreen. They know that the NFL is not going to consider being put on a sports tier. Why would they? No other satellite or cable provider is allowed to do that. Why is TWC asking for something that no other provider has demanded?
post #150 of 1586
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyehill View Post

Which truth? That you're a TWC apologist? That truth? Pathetic.

Yep ... our friend is definitely a TWC sychophant/apologist/cheerleader ... maybe even an employee.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › NFL Network vs. Cable holdouts - The 8 game dilemma.