[opendtv] Re: Broadcasters, Cable Spar over Retrans

  • From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:39:40 -0500

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

> The issue here is retransmission consent, a legislated requirement
> that ONLY applies to broadcasters.

Retransmission consent does not force MVPDs to send that channel to every 
subscriber. It merely says that the MVPDs have to agree with the local 
broadcaster on terms to allow the MVPD to carry the content. And anything that 
constitutes terms of an agreement is fair game, be that placement of the 
channel or kickbacks from the subscription fee, as far as I'm concerned.

None of this diminishes the fact that MVPDs have a simple strategy they can 
use, to keep the cost self-regulating. It requires nothing from the FCC, or 
from Congress, for the MVPDs to allow natural market controls to work. We don't 
need ANY new government mandates to keep MVPD prices in check, Craig.

> THERE WAS NO NEED to withhold content for non broadcast networks -
> they were already getting subscriber fees. You mention the HGTV/Food
> Network flap. There are two interesting facts here.

But Scripps DID withhold their content, as I recall, and even transmitted it 
FOTA for a period. That was my point. Even though this non-network dispute was 
unusual, it ended up being no different from the much, much more common network 
TV disputes. The content owner sees that his content is being sold at too low a 
price, compared with other competing channels, and this content owner demands 
more. Totally predictable, and highly controllable by any MVPD, if the MVPD 
goes to more a la carte.

You do not need to shift the blame elsewhere, Craig, for this lack of market 
self-regulation. 

> The other major non broadcast deal involved the Fox News Networks.
> Fox actually PAID hundreds of millions to the cable companies to gain
> carriage for the Fox News Channel. When the channel became a success,
> they used that success to negotiate subscriber fees and to gain
> carriage for the Fox Business Network. They did not need to withhold
> content to cut these new deals.

So? There are many cases where the TV network renegotiates a deal with an MVPD, 
without resulting in withheld content. In fact, most of these negotiations do 
not result in any service disruption. We have seen that disruption can occur, 
though, for both network TV and cable-only channels.

> They fully anticipate that the public is going to say enough and that
> the congloms will move to paid Internet distribution to cut them out.

Which is silly. Unless the FCC establishes strict neutrality mandates, which I 
assume you oppose, there's no reason in the world to believe that that ISPs 
would behave any differently from MVPDs.

Bert

 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 06-2011