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

DIRECTV has lost and got back Tribune stations due to retrans dispute

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by RAD, Mar 26, 2012.

  1. Mar 27, 2012 #61 of 862

    ThaPhenom Mentor

    Aug 21, 2006
    These network disputes became more prevalent when the national networks like Fox decided they wanted a piece of the retransmission pie. They raised their prices on local affiliates, and if the affiliates balked, they were dropped. Now the affiliates are trying to pass the increased cost on to the service provider when it comes time to renew, in this case, DirecTV. Don't think by switching providers you can avoid these disputes.
  2. Mar 27, 2012 #62 of 862

    sorrycharlie AllStar

    Jul 16, 2010
    I hope they can work out a deal with for CLTVHD as apart of the WGN issue.
  3. Mar 27, 2012 #63 of 862

    RAD Well-Known Member

    Aug 5, 2002
    Since your sig's location says Colorado are you hoping tha CLTVHD gets added as a national channel which doesn't make sense since it's a local Chicago area channel?
  4. Mar 27, 2012 #64 of 862
    Paul Secic

    Paul Secic Hall Of Fame

    Dec 16, 2003
    Don't worry, you'll survive.
  5. Mar 27, 2012 #65 of 862
    Paul Secic

    Paul Secic Hall Of Fame

    Dec 16, 2003
  6. Mar 27, 2012 #66 of 862

    fleckrj Icon

    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    You are right that DirecTV only cares about its bottom line and that DirecTV will pass any cost increase on to the customers; however, taking a stand to keep the cost down is in the best intererst of both DirecTV and the customer. No matter how you cut it, paying more for content will drive up the cost, and increasing rates will cause some customers to drop the service. Both of these have a negative impact on DirecTV's bottom line, so keeping the costs down is in the best interest of both DirecTV and the customer.

    I think it is easy to see why these get broken down to "good guy" and "bad guy" debates, although it might be more corectly characterized as "bad guy" / "worse guy". The content providers in LIL disputes are the ones picking the fights. I remember the days when FOX, the WB, and UPN affiliates were fighting for, and eventually were granted, "must carry", which forced cable and satellite companies to retransmit their signals if NBC, CBS, and ABC were offered. The "must carry" regulations also forced DirecTV to treat all locals from the same DMA the same (i.e., back in the SD only days when multiple catellite LNBs were rare, DirecTV could not put ABC, NBC, and CBS on the 101 satellite and the other locals from the same DMA on 110 or 119).

    As a result of the "must carry", FOX achieved pariety with the other three major networks, and CW, the remnants of WB and UPN, achieved significant market penetration. Now, some of the locals have turned around and demanded that they be paid for what they could not give away before. I think that is far worse than DirecTV trying to hold the line on costs.

    It is not just DirecTV that has carriage disputes. Our local Time Warner Cable had a dispute with Disney, and our local ABC station is an O&O, so it was included in the dispute.
  7. Mar 27, 2012 #67 of 862

    fleckrj Icon

    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    If there was enough demand for G4, it would have been resolved, but the balance between the demand and what G4 expected to be paid was too far in the direction of too little demand, so G4 was dropped. I am sure that DirecTV lost some subscribers over that decision, but it was too few to make it worth paying what it would have cost to keep G4.

    The Versus (now NBC Sports Network) dispute was long, but it did not start until after the Tour de France ended and was resolved before the start of the next Tour de France. At the time, the Tour was by far the most widely viewed event on Versus. DirecTV carried Universal Sports for the Vuelta de Espana while Versus was dark, so Comcast lost more from that outage than DirecTV did. Had there not been the dispute, the Vuelta would not have been on DirecTV that year.
  8. Mar 27, 2012 #68 of 862

    litzdog911 Well-Known Member

    Jun 23, 2004
    Mill Creek, WA
    Good luck finding a provider that's immune to this madness.
  9. Mar 27, 2012 #69 of 862

    Jtaylor1 Legend

    Jan 27, 2008
    Except that the east coast CW feed will be dropped. Only feed is going to be is from XETV Tijuana.
  10. Mar 27, 2012 #70 of 862

    alnielsen Godfather

    Dec 31, 2006
    ...- .....

    I can get WGN/Antenna TV over the air and I don't even watch it. CLTV I would have some interest in.
  11. Mar 27, 2012 #71 of 862

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    Jul 21, 2008
    WGN has a lot of sports on it. If they pull it will they also have to pull the WGN sports on WCIU games as well?
  12. Mar 27, 2012 #72 of 862

    Art7220 Godfather

    Feb 4, 2004

    >Good luck finding a provider that's immune to this madness.

    How 'bout two, Expressvu and Shaw Direct?
  13. Mar 27, 2012 #73 of 862

    moob Legend

    Nov 19, 2008
    Lmao. As if DirecTV isn't just as money-hungry and profit-driven.

    Full page ad in the LA Times today, which is also owned by Tribune.

    The only show I watch on the CW is Nikita, but I also watch their local news from time to time. It would suck a bit if they were gone.
  14. Mar 27, 2012 #74 of 862

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    We're in America discussing American satellite services. Good try.
  15. Mar 27, 2012 #75 of 862

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    Jul 21, 2008
    the CRTC has more power then the FCC
  16. Mar 27, 2012 #76 of 862

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    Apr 29, 2011
    Those of you threatening to leave, you won't be screaming next year when your rates go up. Right? LOL. This is exactly why they do go up, because of programmers demanding these types of rates yet you all know you will throw a fit over it.

    From what I'm hearing in the biz, Tribune wants more than 130% increase on their rates and DTV is saying no. As they should. DTV has also said they expect Tribune to keep the programming up. If it comes down, this will be Tribune's decision, not DTV's.


    In the end, this stuff normally gets worked out but it is great to see media consolidation working so well, isn't? The Tribune can run editorials and free advertising on their newspapers and television channels to say how big, bad and terrible DTV is without one second spent on the outrageous amount of money they are asking to keep carrying their programming.

    I would be surprised if the channel comes down at all, or if it does it won't last that long. Your rates will go up again, and I'm sure you are all pleased about that. Have to get your Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
  17. Mar 27, 2012 #77 of 862

    Araxen Icon

    Dec 18, 2005
    My rates go up regardless so I really don't care how much Directv pays. How much did my rates go down when they lost G4? They still went up! lol
  18. Mar 27, 2012 #78 of 862

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    May 30, 2007
    There are still escalators.
  19. Mar 27, 2012 #79 of 862

    Draconis New Member

    Mar 16, 2007
    Las Vegas, NV
    The whole bru-ha-ha with these local stations has always perplexed me and I agree with Eddie501. It is very much a case of having your cake and eating it too.

    The local stations broadcast their stations for free OTA and DIRECTV re-broadcasts their programming to their subscribers, in their markets. DIRECTV also expands their coverage area and provides locals to people who cannot get them OTA.

    Then DIRECTV has to pay THEM for expanding their coverage area?

    I have no issue with the $3 we pay DIRECTV for locals, considering that DIRECTV is broadcasting 2702 channels (at last count) to cover all the markets the $3 seems a little cheap.

    I do have an issue with these local providers double-dipping and charging the cable and satellite companies for expanding their coverage area.

    There is one thing I would REALLY like to see, I would like to see the FCC allowing all cable and satellite broadcasters to setup their own OTA array in the local markets with uplink. Then give the cable / satellite broadcaster’s permission to re-broadcast anything the OTA can get (as long as the broadcast remains within the market) and the local station owners get nada for it.

    Just my 2 cents.
  20. Mar 27, 2012 #80 of 862

    ericcooper1956@att.net AllStar

    Jul 18, 2011
    What about MLB EI games via any tribune outlets?

Share This Page