1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Chase Carey Warns Of Battle As Fox Wants Cable Ops To Pay For Net

Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by say-what, Oct 21, 2009.

  1. say-what

    say-what Active Member

    Dec 14, 2006
    New Orleans
  2. Cholly

    Cholly Old Guys Rule! DBSTalk Club

    Mar 22, 2004
    I'd hope the FCC would have something to say about this. If Fox wants to charge for all their cable channels, all well and good. However, since cable companies are required to carry local broadcast stations, it seems that Fox shouldn't be allowed to charge for carriage.
  3. longrider

    longrider Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    Apr 21, 2007
    Elizabeth, CO
    My understanding of that was that a local channel could either invoke must carry OR demand payment. If payment was demanded then the sat/cable operators were free to not carry them.
  4. Ray_Clum

    Ray_Clum Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    Hence, the retransmission consent battle say-what quoted. Cable wants to have all locals, but doesn't want to pay. The station wants to be paid. Consumer gets screwed in the end...
  5. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    Jun 6, 2009
    And once again I say local stations should not be able to charge such fees. There should be no fees either way, but if anything the locals should have to pay to be carried since they are able to reach a larger audience of people including those who do not have OTA antennas.
  6. olguy

    olguy Hall Of Fame

    Jan 9, 2006
    Just a thought based on nothing but guesswork. Could it be broadcasters are worried about revenue losses as advertisers begin to realize an increasing number of viewers have a magic box with a magic button? In our case we've had DVRs for ten years. If forced to watch a commercial on a live broadcast (which I try to avoid like the plague) I hit the mute button so at least I don't hear the blather.
  7. Lee L

    Lee L Hall Of Fame

    Aug 15, 2002
    Makes me glad we have 2 HR20s with built in OTA tuners.
  8. n3ntj

    n3ntj Hall Of Fame

    Dec 18, 2006
    I think your guesswork is right on the mark. With local advertising drying up, some of the local stations are looking for new ways of adding revenue. It may backfire on them, however, if they demand payment from cable and satellite cos.
  9. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    Jan 18, 2007
    There are two initiatives going on here. The first has been the ongoing [strike]battles[/strike] negotiations with local station owners. The second is the networks themselves seeking revenue from satellite and cable companies. We are going to see efforts to support both operations from fees collected from us.

    At that point, maybe more will join me in saying that ABC, CBS, Fox, MyNetworkTV, NBC, PBS, and The CW should become "cable" channels where we just pay for them just like we do for USA or FX. Let them dump their affiliates and let us dump our locals. Otherwise, we're soon going to be paying an extra $20 a month for locals.
  10. Herdfan

    Herdfan Well-Known Member

    Mar 18, 2006
    But why should we as satellite customers be held hostage for our locals, and face it, there have been some nasty battles, while cable gets to carry the same channel for free.

    For me, its more about being held hostage than having to pay.
  11. Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    Nov 15, 2005
    I expect any affiliate that wants to charge will charge everyone. Not just cable or satellite.

    There are already affiliates that charge for carriage. Mostly they charge reasonable fees, some just enough to cover the cost of getting the signal to the carriers.

    Others have tried to charge lots of monies... They often just don't get carried until they wake up. :)

    And this will get interesting as more people might switch to OTA--thereby Fox might not get the money they hope for. :)


Share This Page