Jump to content

Welcome to DBSTalk

Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
Guest Message by DevFuse


Cox Cable vs. Directv and others?

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   jborchel



  • Registered
  • 174 posts
Joined: Oct 07, 2005

Posted 13 August 2010 - 12:16 PM

Has this situation been taken care of yet. I know that the FCC ruled that Cox must offer the San Digo Padre games to other cable and satellite companies for broadcast but there were additional steps that had to be taken. Has this happened yet? Crucial series in San Francisco starting tonight and I'm afraid I won't be able to get it on MLB.
Edit/Delete Message

...Ads Help To Support This Site...



    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,027 posts
Joined: Jan 20, 2003

Posted 14 August 2010 - 06:22 AM

It is a two-step process, and unlikely to be resolved in the short term.

To review, federal law for a very long time required any channel distribued to cable systems via a sat to be made available to any competitor. In Philadelphia and San Diego, the local cable companies found a "loophole", by building ground based distribution for their sports channels, and thus denying them to competition.

The FCC voted to close that loophole, but that is only step one. Now these cable companies must negioate "in good faith" with DirecTV, DISH, AT&T, and Verizon. Now what does "good faith" mean? Eventually they will either reach a deal, or the matter will end up back at the FCC as it tries to figure out if Cox and Comcast are being "fair". That is step two.

San Diego is complicated by the fact that the market is pretty small. The "exclusive" Padres area (where no other teams are considered in-market) is just San Diego and the surrounding unpopulated desert. Thus not nearly the priority that Philly is.

#3 OFFLINE   jborchel



  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 174 posts
Joined: Oct 07, 2005

Posted 14 August 2010 - 08:25 AM

Thanks for the detail. What puzzles me is that in San Diego Cox has a limited geographical area that they service and have no intention of building infrastructure in my area which is remote in the desert. Semms like they could work with Directv and others to blackout only those zip codes that they are physically installed/available in.

The other problem is that talking to one of the influences at Cox would be impossible. However, I once knew the founder of Cox through a golf activity. I wonder if he is still alive.


Protected By... spam firewall...And...