1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the new DBSTalk community platform. We have recently migrated to a community platform called Xenfono and hope you will find this change to your liking. There are some differences, but for the most part, if you just post and read, that will all be the same. If you have questions, please post them in the Forum Support area. Thanks!

Rethinking Retrans

Discussion in 'Legislative and Regulatory Issues' started by Nick, Jul 19, 2010.

Tags:
  1. Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Gold Club

    21,810
    180
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    From SkyReport's SkyLog
     
  2. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    They lost access to programming when they first bought Cable or satellite (which does not carry all the local channels), and they increased their costs when they chose to go with pay tv services, rather than free, OTA TV.

    Someone should introduce most Congressmen to the concept of an "antenna".:D
     
  3. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    44,885
    860
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Retrans consent is a law ... if the reps want to change a law they need to write and pass a bill. Perhaps Mr Israel and Mr King missed that episode of Schoolhouse Rock?
     
  4. Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    It floors me.

    Companies are expected to produce better-than-inflation revenue and profit numbers for their shareholders. So when media companies such as the channel providers and the multichannel distributors raise their rates, it is a "travesty". :rolleyes:

    We've been down this philosophical discussion before. The network affiliates aren't asking for much (as of yet), and there are plenty of other channels that are receiving much more money than these terrestrial broadcasters, yet the proverbial shotgun is now pointed directly at the affiliates and the retransmission agreements as being "the problem". This is not a problem the terrestrial broadcasters created.

    I'm fairly certain that if "retransmission consent" is gutted that the rates of your local cable company won't decline.
     
  5. Terry K

    Terry K Legend

    231
    0
    Sep 13, 2006
    Nexstar. Need I say more? They provide substandard programming (they refuse to do HD since they think SD is good enough outside of the network stuff) and they extort cash from cable operators. Enough already. Put these jokers out of business and let the free market teach them they have to compete for viewers and not use a monopoly position.
     
  6. BenJF3

    BenJF3 Godfather

    308
    0
    Sep 12, 2008
    Ala Carte = Problem Solved (or at the very least Tier based offerings)
     
  7. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    44,885
    860
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    A la carte is breaking packages into smaller packages or individual channels, not allowing customers access to local affiliates with no payment or limited payment to said affiliates.

    A la carte within locals (where one could theoretically choose to buy their local ABC and not their local FOX) just reinforces the idea that stations can charge cable/satellite customers for receiving their free OTA feeds. We need to break that concept - not reinforce it.

    Required carriage of all local channels on an equal basis with either no payment or a statutory license similar to the distants license is the solution to the retransmission consent problem of stations overcharging and refusing carriage of their feeds.
     
  8. BenJF3

    BenJF3 Godfather

    308
    0
    Sep 12, 2008
    Your talking about locals only, I'm talking about carriage in general. My stance on locals is they should be freely available to all MSO's as they are freely available OTA. No compensation required other than number of subs which would indicate penetration and thus allow for ratings to derive advertising rates. Programmers got too entrenched and sports costs got completely out of control under the current system (probably so much so that there is no going back). However, free market would dictate what channels survive and which fail. It would be nice to this the heard and consolidate programming.
     
  9. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    As long as the Cable networks are willing to provide their programming for free to any local station that wants to carry it, I'm sure most broadcasters would be happy to reciprocate, and allow Cable systems to profit from re-broadcasting their programming.
     

Share This Page