SKOOBY Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Channels 4 and 23 return to Time Warner Cable Channel 4 and Channel 23 returned to Time Warner Cable around 7 this morning, several hours after the stations' owner and the cable company reached a national deal to end the 26-day standoff that kept them off the system here. The deal between LIN TV and Time Warner was hammered out at midnight after five or six days of round-the-clock-negotiations at the national level, according to Chris Musial, Channel 4's general manager. He didn't have any details and didn't expect any to emerge because a confidentiality clause is included in the deal. The standoff concluded the day before the November sweeps start, though Musial said he didn't think that was an impetus for the deal. http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/477544.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGimp Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Thank god now we can all sleep at night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Thank god now we can all sleep at night Damn and I had just convinced a bunch of friends to go to DTV maybe they will still go since HD content is what I sold them on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKOOBY Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Damn and I had just convinced a bunch of friends to go to DTV maybe they will still go since HD content is what I sold them on When they get the bill, they'll be looking for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Your welcome. What should I give thanks for? Two corporate entities, one more greedy than the next, who finally decided after a month that there is enough money for both of them. I can't decide who I should thank first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 When they get the bill, they'll be looking for you. usually cheaper than cable unless ya want to compare it to 22 channel cable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 BOOOOOOYA!!! me and my slingbox are back in business baby!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Your point of view is just that, a point of view. What many people forget (as pointed out by a previous poster) is that WIVB's signal can not reach Time Warner's full viewing audience. By Time Warner carrying WIVB, they increase WIVB's viewership, thus allowing WIVB to charge higher rates to their advertisers. That increased revenue because of this is payment enough in my opinion. Options that just are not there for cable channels. I have a friend that works at WIVB. WIVB was financially sound up to this point. Now, things are not going well for them. Many part time employees and news reporters have been laid off. Local advertisers are pulling their adds, or not paying their bills because they were charged based on how many customers their adds would reach. Without Time Warner, WIVB can not reach those customers. With each day that passes, according to my friend, WIVB's managers are becoming more and more frustrated with executives at Lin-TV. With the weak Buffalo market, WIVB may reach a point of no recovery financially. WIVB may cease to exist. If that happens, no one is to blame but Lin-TV. Currently, Direct TV, Dish Network, and Verizon FiOS are not paying for, or paying next to nothing to carry WIVB. When those carriage agreements expire (most within the next year), everyone that is jumping ship on Time Warner will have the same problem all over again. A problem you will not be able to do anything about because you either have too much money invested in equipment (Direct TV or Dish Network), or can not get out of your contract (Verizon). I have enjoyed posts on both sides of this topic. I'm responding to this one because I had a shockingly similar conversation with some far more astute than I tonight. I had heard that 4 was taking a beating financially, and that morale among the rank and file was wavering. My thought was that 4 needs TW more than TW needs 4 because without access to TW's system, 4 couldn't penetrate households during the critical sweeps periods. The conversation then turned to whether lesser networks such as HGTV, the Food Network, etc. should be paid or pay for access to cable and dish networks (I won't bore everyone with that). In any event, not like it matters anymore because the game will be seen on Sunday, but a few final thoughts: 1. One of the more recent rumors was that LIN wanted $.01/month per subscriber for BOTH 4 and 23. That request for 23 is absolutely asinine; it may be more reasonable for 4. 2. The fact this deal was finished the day before sweeps suggests that LIN caved. 3. The deal is probably (confidentiality makes this a tough one) based on advertising with a small amount of money changing hands. 4. One can wish that the folks at TW and LIN settled this one over a nice, tasty dinner at the Hamburg China King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 I have enjoyed posts on both sides of this topic. I'm responding to this one because I had a shockingly similar conversation with some far more astute than I tonight. I had heard that 4 was taking a beating financially, and that morale among the rank and file was wavering. My thought was that 4 needs TW more than TW needs 4 because without access to TW's system, 4 couldn't penetrate households during the critical sweeps periods. The conversation then turned to whether lesser networks such as HGTV, the Food Network, etc. should be paid or pay for access to cable and dish networks (I won't bore everyone with that). In any event, not like it matters anymore because the game will be seen on Sunday, but a few final thoughts: 1. One of the more recent rumors was that LIN wanted $.01/month per subscriber for BOTH 4 and 23. That request for 23 is absolutely asinine; it may be more reasonable for 4. 2. The fact this deal was finished the day before sweeps suggests that LIN caved. 3. The deal is probably (confidentiality makes this a tough one) based on advertising with a small amount of money changing hands. 4. One can wish that the folks at TW and LIN settled this one over a nice, tasty dinner at the Hamburg China King. #2 is the only one I fully disagree with. Lin was asking for about twenty fine cents for EACH of their channels, but they knew, going in, there was no way they would get that. My guess (as I stated earlier) is they probably were hoping for about 10-15 cents...a quarter for both would have closed the deal before they went off the system, IMO. Up until recently, all reports were that TW offered NOTHING. So, as the deal was made, and it is not a must-carry deal, Lin and TW negotiated a real deal...the way it should have been done from the start. As GG noted, there may have been other issues (multichannel carriage) at play, too. I won't know what actually went down, until one of my (ever dwindling) contacts gets to me with some rough detail. As for #3, advertising may well have been involved (that's pretty typical for these deals, and is expected from the get-go), but there will be enough money involved for Lin to offset their losses during the period they were off of TW. It is chump change for TW, but will make a difference to WIVB's bottom line. If I had to guess what went down (and I do), TW basically decided to not negotiate in good faith until Lin was desperate to make a deal more favorable to TW. As GG noted, they were also likely trying to show other stations (who have to negotiate with TW later) that they were willing to play hardball. TW was getting a lot of political pressure to start negotiating, from what I hear, and if they held out much longer, their leverage would decline. If this were ever forced to go to arbitration by local and state politicos, they would lose badly. So, in a way, TW probably won a better deal than they would have negotiated (if they were actually negotiating in good faith) a month ago. But, if you look at what both sides SAY they were asking for, then both sides won some, and lost some. It's a shame that TW screwed Buffalo Bills fans to soften up a business deal, and set the table for future negotiations. And make no mistake about it, that's what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 #2 is the only one I fully disagree with. Lin was asking for about twenty fine cents for EACH of their channels, but they knew, going in, there was no way they would get that. My guess (as I stated earlier) is they probably were hoping for about 10-15 cents...a quarter for both would have closed the deal before they went off the system, IMO. Up until recently, all reports were that TW offered NOTHING. So, as the deal was made, and it is not a must-carry deal, Lin and TW negotiated a real deal...the way it should have been done from the start. As GG noted, there may have been other issues (multichannel carriage) at play, too. I won't know what actually went down, until one of my (ever dwindling) contacts gets to me with some rough detail. As for #3, advertising may well have been involved (that's pretty typical for these deals, and is expected from the get-go), but there will be enough money involved for Lin to offset their losses during the period they were off of TW. It is chump change for TW, but will make a difference to WIVB's bottom line. If I had to guess what went down (and I do), TW basically decided to not negotiate in good faith until Lin was desperate to make a deal more favorable to TW. As GG noted, they were also likely trying to show other stations (who have to negotiate with TW later) that they were willing to play hardball. TW was getting a lot of political pressure to start negotiating, from what I hear, and if they held out much longer, their leverage would decline. If this were ever forced to go to arbitration by local and state politicos, they would lose badly. So, in a way, TW probably won a better deal than they would have negotiated (if they were actually negotiating in good faith) a month ago. But, if you look at what both sides SAY they were asking for, then both sides won some, and lost some. It's a shame that TW screwed Buffalo Bills fans to soften up a business deal, and set the table for future negotiations. And make no mistake about it, that's what they did. Good insight as usual; can't say I disagree with anything you're saying, although your point about TW's leverage seems to at least suggest that LIN moved more than TW ("caved" may have been excessive on my part). Any idea what TW lost (to date) in terms of its sub base? It's probably too early to tell, because the hard feelings will eat at the base for the next few months. The more I think about it, the more it seems 23 is a freebie or really, really close to it, and they just worked on a number for 4. 23's ratings (per Alan Pergament, who knows as much about ratings as do I about rocket science) were apparently worse than awful in the past month. I can't think of one show that airs on 23, aside from the 10p news with Lisa Flynn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 Good insight as usual; can't say I disagree with anything you're saying, although your point about TW's leverage seems to at least suggest that LIN moved more than TW ("caved" may have been excessive on my part). Any idea what TW lost (to date) in terms of its sub base? It's probably too early to tell, because the hard feelings will eat at the base for the next few months. The more I think about it, the more it seems 23 is a freebie or really, really close to it, and they just worked on a number for 4. 23's ratings (per Alan Pergament, who knows as much about ratings as do I about rocket science) were apparently worse than awful in the past month. I can't think of one show that airs on 23, aside from the 10p news with Lisa Flynn. By doing a deal for both stations, you get paid for one and you get the other carried...which is really what you are looking for. Some broadcasters try to do deals that gets carriage for any stations they might come to own, start, etc. That can get messy, as you might imagine. The ratings for 23, I'm sure aren't very good (although I haven't seen the Buffalo overnights in some time). But, I bet they are as high, or higher, than some cable nets that TW gladly pays decent money to carry. Other than during an NHL game, do you think VS gets any viewers? Does anyone actually watch BET? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKOOBY Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 BOOOOOOYA!!! me and my slingbox are back in business baby!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 It's a shame that TW screwed Buffalo Bills fans to soften up a business deal, and set the table for future negotiations. And make no mistake about it, that's what they did. That's a little harsh, -b. Don't forget that LIN owns multiple stations within TW's NY market. For example, WBNG in Binghamton. WBNG has had an HD signal since 2 Super Bowls ago. We still can't carry it. Maybe that will change now......hopefully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 By doing a deal for both stations, you get paid for one and you get the other carried...which is really what you are looking for. Some broadcasters try to do deals that gets carriage for any stations they might come to own, start, etc. That can get messy, as you might imagine. The ratings for 23, I'm sure aren't very good (although I haven't seen the Buffalo overnights in some time). But, I bet they are as high, or higher, than some cable nets that TW gladly pays decent money to carry. Other than during an NHL game, do you think VS gets any viewers? Does anyone actually watch BET? Totally agree. I think I phrased it very poorly in a prior post, but I heard that LIN wanted .01/day/sub for 4 and .01/day/sub for 23. If I'm TW, the demand for 23 is a non-starter and may have slowed the process. Your point re: fees for some of the "filler" TW carries is well-made. I could make a case for novelty programming on some nets (i.e., VS has a handful of home-market NHL games per year, Discovery has Deadliest Catch, etc.), but the point re: BET and similar nets is right on the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 BOOOOOOYA!!! me and my slingbox are back in business baby!! Of course, now that my slingbox is back up and running with channel 4, the Bills/Jets game is a national game. First Bills game televised in NC this year. Not that I'm complaining, because I get to watch in HD this week!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 That's a little harsh, -b. Don't forget that LIN owns multiple stations within TW's NY market. For example, WBNG in Binghamton. WBNG has had an HD signal since 2 Super Bowls ago. We still can't carry it. Maybe that will change now......hopefully. If I'm wrong on the details, it might be a little harsh. But, typically in these negotiations, if the negotiations are proceeding in good faith, a deal can be made to keep the station on the cable system. Because all the info I have suggests that TW was offering NOTHING in compensation for Lin stations, I believe it was a strategy employed by TW to hurt Lin (remember, the Lin station in Green Bay has some Packer games, too) and soften them up for when they finally decided to negotiate. GG's comments (he probably has more details about this than I do, but he isn't saying much) that TW was playing the bad guy, for a purpose...and the insinuation in several articles that TW is getting ready for negotiations with the other station groups, suggests a calculated strategy. In an active negotiation, where the sides are agreed in principle that there will be some compensation, and are just negotiating the price, I honestly believe they agree to keep the channel on, so as not to hurt the viewing public. That clearly didn't happen here. My guess is, that was orchestrated by TW, with full knowledge that it would cause many people to miss their favorite programs, including Bills' games. I will continue to believe that, in these situations, both parties are inevitably responsible, to some degree. So, let me try this: Lin pissed on the Buffalo Bills fans in WNY. Time Warner took a dump on them. Izzat better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 GG's comments (he probably has more details about this than I do, but he isn't saying much) that TW was playing the bad guy, for a purpose...and the insinuation in several articles that TW is getting ready for negotiations with the other station groups, suggests a calculated strategy. No comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 No comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I blame the Founding Fathers for not having the vision to envision television and not including a cap on the cost of cable television in the Constitution, even though having cable television or satellite television is a choice of the individual's decision for vision. Alliteration... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 When they get the bill, they'll be looking for you. I've referred several people at work over the past three months (nothing to do with WIVB/Linn), and they're all looking for me after seeing the bill -- to thank me and ask themselves why they didn't switch sooner. And half the people I've referred have since referred 1-2 people themselves. It's turning into quite the pyramid scheme... Except nothing trickles down to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts