Approximately 13 minutes after the start of the Oscar telecast at 8:30pm ET, a crawl came across WABC that the deal with Cablevision was struck and that the signal was restored. Unfortunately for viewers, that announcement came almost three hours too late. Those that watch the awards show most likely made their plans prior to 6pm what they would do: buy an antenna, go to a friend's house, install a dish, or switch to FIOS. It is hard to imagine that Cablevision viewers were switching from their other show to WABC to see if it was back on. Can't see the Oscars; some may have left their home and gone to the movies to watch a nominated film or stayed home and rented one for the night.
And while publicly both sides will say that relationships between the two companies has returned to normal, I bet that lingering feelings remain. I would guess that one side will see it as a win-lose deal and will remember the next time. Interesting too that the FCC did not formally get involved.
And how does the repercussions of this deal affect the NBC Comcast merger plans? What happens when it is NBC's turn to negotiate with Cablevision, or FIOS? How can a deal be fairly struck when the potential NBC owner is another cable operator. I see that as a major problem, especially when it involves negotiations for a broadcast channel. And while that negotiation already occurs for cable networks, a broadcast network represents the majority of viewing across the country and should prescribe to different rules. Too much vertical ownership poses a major problem that the FCC must clearly address in the NBC Comcast merger discussion.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Sunday, March 7, 2010
ABC Turned Off For Cablevision Viewers
I hope no Cablevision customer was surprised when they woke this morning to find WABC turned off. Cablevision has the leverage on access to viewers and ABC has the determination to lie down for their license fee. The result, no agreement, and ABC's only response to turn off the signal they provide to Cablevision. "Just after the stroke of midnight Sunday, 3 million Cablevision viewers in the New York area saw their televisions turn into pumpkins. At least that was the case for those subscribers' ABC channel, which went dark because of an impasse by the cable operator and broadcaster to resolve a feud over transmission fees."
The question is, who looks worse, or perhaps, does either company look better. Most likely it is a lose-lose situation; for ABC and the viewer, not Cablevision. Cablevision figures that a significant number of their customers won't drop the service; they will simply wait it out. That was the learning with the Scripps negotiation and is consistent for this current one.
Most likely, negotiations are on again today, but I personally doubt that the situation will change unless it is ABC that walks away from the edge and accepts less than what they may be asking for. It's Sunday so I doubt the FCC will do anything to push either to a quick resolution that results in a signal being turned back on. Likely, Cablevision has already given its best offer and has no intention of offering more. Who will blink first? At the end of the day, my bet is that ABC rolls over first. Whether it is today, before the Oscars begin, or after is up to ABC.
The question is, who looks worse, or perhaps, does either company look better. Most likely it is a lose-lose situation; for ABC and the viewer, not Cablevision. Cablevision figures that a significant number of their customers won't drop the service; they will simply wait it out. That was the learning with the Scripps negotiation and is consistent for this current one.
Most likely, negotiations are on again today, but I personally doubt that the situation will change unless it is ABC that walks away from the edge and accepts less than what they may be asking for. It's Sunday so I doubt the FCC will do anything to push either to a quick resolution that results in a signal being turned back on. Likely, Cablevision has already given its best offer and has no intention of offering more. Who will blink first? At the end of the day, my bet is that ABC rolls over first. Whether it is today, before the Oscars begin, or after is up to ABC.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Will FCC Get Involved in Cablevision ABC Mess
It seems Senator John Kerry remains tired of these negotiations between broadcaster and cable company. "As Chairman of the Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, he just weighed in on Cablevision negotiations that could leave 3.1 million Cablevision customers without ABC's Oscars broadcast on Sunday. In a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski Kerry urges Genachowski to push both parties to keep WABC on air during negotiations."
Is it now time for the FCC to have an opinion on all negotiations regarding broadcasters and cable companies? Should government get involved or let competition determine outcome. As there are other means to get these signals, the best advice for the consumer could just be to switch providers.
Is it now time for the FCC to have an opinion on all negotiations regarding broadcasters and cable companies? Should government get involved or let competition determine outcome. As there are other means to get these signals, the best advice for the consumer could just be to switch providers.
Tivo Building Box to Work With Cable Companies
Tru2way, cable's architecture to assure the security of its programming, has not been well received by TV manufacturers. Notice that most new TV sets come with internet connects and not Cablecard slots. Well Tivo wants to play nice in the sandbox. "TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO) says it's building a tru2way version of its new interface for Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) and other cable operators, but it's also pitching major MSOs on using the company's new "Premiere" boxes -- unveiled Tuesday night -- as their primary DVR for cable subscribers." Quickly please!
I hate my Motorola DVR, but I need the cable box to get on demand. The Tivo interface, search features, and other differences makes it the best DVR box out there today. And it seems Tivo is finally modifying its strategy to gain new business. "While selling DVRs remains a core part of TiVo's business, (CEO Tom) Rogers said the company remains focused on generating revenue from the software for its user interface." The sooner Tivo software is added to my DVR box, the happier I will be.
The public has no idea what a Cablecard is and the cable companies do little to promote them. Tivo boxes need a card to access all the scrambled/digital channels. Ask a CSR about them and you get confusion; go online and you get little or no information, especially on the MSOs' own websites. It remains an uphill road but I am feeling hopeful.
Lastly, what great news to hear that Dish has lost yet again in their lawsuit with Tivo. You steal, you pay the price!
Thursday, March 4, 2010
ABC and Cablevision Both Get Ugly
Remember the good old days when TV was indeed free, once you bought the antenna and connected it to your roof. Walk through the neighborhood today and most antennas are gone, replaced either by more wires into the home or dishes on the roof. The result has been a unlimited increase in content for a monthly fee. And that same fee assured that the picture was clearer, never snowy, and full of HD detail. So how much is that worth, both to the cable company providing the signal and the viewer, paying to receive it today?
I contend that broadcast signals should be carved out from the subscription equation. They are the backbone of the TV landscape and offer a "basic" choice to those that do not seek more variety. And frankly those broadcasters also own cable nets so they are receiving compensation. In fact, broadcasters once used their weight with broadcast to help force in cable channels that a cable company may have been initially unwilling to launch.
I believe too that once the FCC forced broadcasters to switch their analog feed to a digital one, they opened up a Pandora's box. It actually led to more cable subscriptions rather than try to convert an analog antenna to digital. In fact, the next signal that broadcasters should send is an IP one. Allow the viewer to receive your network through the web. It will ultimately provide TV Anywhere and gain you more viewership to increase your ad revenue. A Comcast NBC merger by the way would definitely slow down the shift into this distribution platform.
But at the moment Cablevision and ABC are fighting over money for carriage and the loser will always be the cable customer; signals dropped temporarily, monthly bills raised, all to feed the pockets of both companies. So it is possible Cablevision customers would not see the Academy Awards on Sunday night. It is also possible that a last minute stay will keep it on. But what is true is that monies will get resolved and monthly bills will rise.
I contend that broadcast signals should be carved out from the subscription equation. They are the backbone of the TV landscape and offer a "basic" choice to those that do not seek more variety. And frankly those broadcasters also own cable nets so they are receiving compensation. In fact, broadcasters once used their weight with broadcast to help force in cable channels that a cable company may have been initially unwilling to launch.
I believe too that once the FCC forced broadcasters to switch their analog feed to a digital one, they opened up a Pandora's box. It actually led to more cable subscriptions rather than try to convert an analog antenna to digital. In fact, the next signal that broadcasters should send is an IP one. Allow the viewer to receive your network through the web. It will ultimately provide TV Anywhere and gain you more viewership to increase your ad revenue. A Comcast NBC merger by the way would definitely slow down the shift into this distribution platform.
But at the moment Cablevision and ABC are fighting over money for carriage and the loser will always be the cable customer; signals dropped temporarily, monthly bills raised, all to feed the pockets of both companies. So it is possible Cablevision customers would not see the Academy Awards on Sunday night. It is also possible that a last minute stay will keep it on. But what is true is that monies will get resolved and monthly bills will rise.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
ABC Cablevision Fight To Get Nasty
The contract negotiation between ABC and Cablevision is tuning nasty. Just months ago, Fox went through this same issue with Cablevision and only last minute negotiations saved them from being pulled off the air; Scripps Networks negotiations with Cablevision went from bad to worse and customers lost these networks for a couple weeks. Now it is ABC's turn. And they seem to be following the playbook. Open letters in newspapers, websites devoted to save the channel, and Facebook friends connecting under this same type of group. And Cablevision will hold the line till the very end until 12th hour negotiations on March 7 either save the channel or drop it from availability for Cablevision customers. Ultimately a no win scenario.
"The signal for ABC’s New York station, WABC, has been retransmitted, essentially free, by Cablevision for decades, but Cablevision said Tuesday that ABC now wanted $40 million a year, or about $1 a month for each subscriber." At the same time, ABC, and its owner Disney get tons of subscription revenue from its other networks - Disney, ESPN, Family, and others. But they are cable networks and ABC is broadcast. Both offered over the air and through cable lines, but a broadcast signal nonetheless. Does it or any broadcaster deserve a fee? This speaks to the heart of the argument.
It also points out the potential problem that faces the Comcast NBC merger. A distribution platform owning a broadcaster presents many problems of fair and equitable distribution; profit before public. It is the fundamental problem that should force the FCC to not approve the merger. Just imagine what might happen when it is NBC's turn to negotiate its "carriage" on Cablevision, Cox, or one of Comcast's rivals, Verizon, AT&T, et al. And what about pursuing new distribution platforms not beholden to a cable platform, like IP. Cablevision's negotiation with ABC is simply a precursor to the bigger problems that a Comcast NBC merger represents.
"The signal for ABC’s New York station, WABC, has been retransmitted, essentially free, by Cablevision for decades, but Cablevision said Tuesday that ABC now wanted $40 million a year, or about $1 a month for each subscriber." At the same time, ABC, and its owner Disney get tons of subscription revenue from its other networks - Disney, ESPN, Family, and others. But they are cable networks and ABC is broadcast. Both offered over the air and through cable lines, but a broadcast signal nonetheless. Does it or any broadcaster deserve a fee? This speaks to the heart of the argument.
It also points out the potential problem that faces the Comcast NBC merger. A distribution platform owning a broadcaster presents many problems of fair and equitable distribution; profit before public. It is the fundamental problem that should force the FCC to not approve the merger. Just imagine what might happen when it is NBC's turn to negotiate its "carriage" on Cablevision, Cox, or one of Comcast's rivals, Verizon, AT&T, et al. And what about pursuing new distribution platforms not beholden to a cable platform, like IP. Cablevision's negotiation with ABC is simply a precursor to the bigger problems that a Comcast NBC merger represents.
Viacom Programming To Leave Hulu
Viacom, he owner of Comedy Central, MTV and other networks, has decided not to renew its Comedy Central deal with Hulu. Despite its appeal and high usage on the Hulu platform, Comedy Central programming like The Daily Show, South Park, and others will cease being available as of March 9. I'm sure as other network deals expire they will not be renewed either. "Hulu said it was still talking to Comedy Central about “a number of opportunities.” A Comedy Central spokesman declined to say whether the channel would strike a distribution deal with one of Hulu’s competitors."
If I am to read between the lines, advertising revenue split between Comedy Central and Hulu was not enough to continue. It also has had the reverse effect of providing an alternative to cable, thus reducing cable subscription fees. The solution is obvious: a subscription model on Hulu so that Viacom captures a dual revenue stream. Hulu customers may not like that. The second is to do deals with cable companies that offer authentication to a cable subscription. Thus it would be more likely to keep Comedy Central on Fancast inside a walled garden and accessible only to Comcast customers.
Consider this a turning point for Hulu and one that seriously will impact their model. Content companies like the two stream model of subscription and advertising. Free does not fly in today's marketplace and ultimately the consumer will lose.
If I am to read between the lines, advertising revenue split between Comedy Central and Hulu was not enough to continue. It also has had the reverse effect of providing an alternative to cable, thus reducing cable subscription fees. The solution is obvious: a subscription model on Hulu so that Viacom captures a dual revenue stream. Hulu customers may not like that. The second is to do deals with cable companies that offer authentication to a cable subscription. Thus it would be more likely to keep Comedy Central on Fancast inside a walled garden and accessible only to Comcast customers.
Consider this a turning point for Hulu and one that seriously will impact their model. Content companies like the two stream model of subscription and advertising. Free does not fly in today's marketplace and ultimately the consumer will lose.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
ABC Could Pull Plug Off Cablevision
Just months after losing Scripps programming during contract discussions and almost seeing FOX pulled, another network is threatening the same path. In this case it is a broadcaster, WABC in New York, but the target remains the same, Cablevision. "ABC says that it may pull its WABC-TV New York signal from Cablevision at 12:01 a.m. on March 7 unless the cable operator agrees to pay for the channel in a retransmission-consent dispute. Broadcasters are increasingly pushing for cash in their retransmission-consent negotiations for their channels given the size of their audiences relative to cable networks that receive higher per-sub fees." I get the need for fees for cable networks, but I would like to think that broadcast signals are a different story. It is essentially over-the-air signals being captured and aired on cable. While not entirely technically true, the fact is that broadcast should remain "free" TV.
And trust me when I say that ABC won't suffer. In fact all the major broadcasters also own cable networks as well as additional digital offshoots of their broadcast signal. For ABC, Disney, Family ESPN and others can certainly support ABC's bottom line.
Eventually these broadcast, now digital, signals will become IP delivered signals, free to the TV over a broadband or wireless connection. It is this unlimited access to the world that means that their should not be a fee for carriage; otherwise, count ABC as simply another cable network. And isn't that the concern the FCC has with the NBCUniversal Comcast merger. The worry that Comcast will turn the NBC broadcast signal into another cable network.
But I may be too late to this argument. Broadcast television has already been receiving fees for carriage. And once the genie is out of the bottle, it is hard to plug it back up. Still, for our sake, the consumer and viewer, it is worth a try by the FCC. Otherwise you might as well turn them all into cable networks!
And trust me when I say that ABC won't suffer. In fact all the major broadcasters also own cable networks as well as additional digital offshoots of their broadcast signal. For ABC, Disney, Family ESPN and others can certainly support ABC's bottom line.
Eventually these broadcast, now digital, signals will become IP delivered signals, free to the TV over a broadband or wireless connection. It is this unlimited access to the world that means that their should not be a fee for carriage; otherwise, count ABC as simply another cable network. And isn't that the concern the FCC has with the NBCUniversal Comcast merger. The worry that Comcast will turn the NBC broadcast signal into another cable network.
But I may be too late to this argument. Broadcast television has already been receiving fees for carriage. And once the genie is out of the bottle, it is hard to plug it back up. Still, for our sake, the consumer and viewer, it is worth a try by the FCC. Otherwise you might as well turn them all into cable networks!
SAG and AFTRA To Work Together
The writers strike just 2 short years ago is an ancient memory for some; others, it was lost wages and acrimonious negotiations. The actors union lost its clout and was unable to push its own agenda. Well the actor's current contract expires in June of next year and new learnings have been made. SAG and AFTRA recognize they are more powerful working together then individually. "The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, or Aftra, said its national board of directors had approved plans to negotiate jointly with the Screen Actors Guild toward its next prime-time television contract." My only hope is that it results in an agreement with the producers and not another strike in Hollywood!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
