Disney pulls ABC from Cablevision......

[mf1973]

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think It is likely the FCC might step in on this....

 

[Joshua_me]

I was just about to post this....

_________________________


Oscar party crash: No deal in Cablevision-ABC feud



Mar 7, 2:28 AM (ET)

By CRISTIAN SALAZAR

NEW YORK (AP) - ABC's parent company switched off its signal to Cablevision's 3.1 million customers in New York at midnight Saturday in a dispute over payments that escalated just hours before the start of the Academy Awards.

In dueling statements dispatched early Sunday, the two companies blamed each other for the stalemate in negotiations over fees.

"Cablevision has once again betrayed its subscribers," said Charissa Gilmore, a spokeswoman for the Walt Disney Co. and ABC Television Group, in a statement. "Cablevision pocketed almost $8 billion last year, and now customers aren't getting what they pay for ... again."

Cablevision Systems Corp. said the stall in negotiations should be blamed on Disney CEO Bob Iger. "It is now painfully clear to millions of New York area households that Disney CEO Bob Iger will hold his own ABC viewers hostage in order to extract $40 million in new fees from Cablevision," said Charles Schueler, a Cablevision executive vice president, in a statement.

The signal can still be pulled from the air for free with an antenna and a new TV or digital converter box.

Cablevision has argued that Disney is seeking an additional $40 million a year in new fees, even though the company pays more than $200 million a year to Disney.

Disney counters by arguing that Cablevision charges customers $18 per month for basic broadcast signals but does not pass on any payment for ABC to Disney.

The dispute is similar to a standoff at the end of last year between News Corp. and Time Warner Cable over how much Fox television station signals were worth. That tussle, which threatened the college football bowl season and new episodes of "The Simpsons," was resolved without a signal interruption.

Cablevision also feuded with Scripps Networks Interactive Inc. in a January dispute that temporarily forced the Food Network and HGTV off the service. Neither side provided terms of an agreement that restored the channels after three weeks.

Disney and Cablevision have been airing dueling advertisements about the ongoing dispute for the past week. Also, lawmakers in Washington have chimed in, suggesting the Federal Communications Commission step in.

The company's previous contract with Cablevision expired more than two years ago, but it was extended month by month as talks continued.

Under previous arrangements, Disney was paid for cable channels such as ESPN and Disney Channel, but gave its ABC broadcast signal away for free, a situation that most broadcasters are now trying to change.

"We can no longer sit back and allow Cablevision to use our shows for free while they continue to charge their customers for them," WABC-TV president and general manager Rebecca Campbell said in a statement.

Schueler suggested that disgruntled viewers should blame Disney's top executive if the station goes dark.

"There is one man who is going to decide whether New York gets to see the Oscars, and that's Disney President and CEO Bob Iger," he said in a statement late Friday. "We call on Bob Iger to stop holding his own viewers hostage, end his threats to pull the plug on ABC at midnight and instead work with us to reach a fair agreement."

WABC-TV is the most watched TV station in the country, said Disney, which is based in Burbank, Calif.

 

[starwood]

I'm so sick of them playing games. We lost HGTV and food network for 3 weeks in January and now ABC so we won't be able to see the Oscar's tonight. If I could convince DH to switch to FIOS I would. I dropped our package down a notch when they were playing with HGTV and was just about to reinstate it when they pulled this. Cablevision has a monopoly in our town as far as cable goes. We can't switch to Comcast or Time Warner.

 

[disneyholic family]

wow!!
i wouldn't care about the oscars, but what about LOST?????????????

i guess you could watch it on the internet, but it's not exactly the same as watching it on TV....

so is this the only cable company available in that area?

 

[auroralark]

I'm so glad we switched to FIOS last month. We also still had cable after the huge stormstorm hit last week. Cablevision keeps claiming that it is the network's fault, but I don't believe them. They just kept raising rates. Our cable bill was ridiculous - one of the many reasons we switched. Give me a break.

 

[starwood]

wow!!
i wouldn't care about the oscars, but what about LOST?????????????

i guess you could watch it on the internet, but it's not exactly the same as watching it on TV....

so is this the only cable company available in that area?

Yes - Cablevision has a monopoly here. That is what I object to the most. There are a lot of people around here that can't switch to satellite because they are in apartments and they aren't wired for FIOS.

 

[mrzrich]

Fox pulled the same stunt with Time Warner right before the Bowl games and American Idol. Its not the cable companies that you should be mad at here. The networks are asking for $$$ per cable customer. If the cable companies give in then our rates will go up. Threatening to switch providers is only letting the networks win. If the cable companies give in for fear of losing you, our rates will go up.

 

[starwood]

My cablevision rates went up in December (Paying more for the box rentals) and I didn't have anything to show for it. Then I lost HGTV and Food Network for 3 weeks. Now I'm losing ABC. We didn't get any credit for the loss of these stations on our bills. We lost all the voom channels about 6 months ago with no lower bills. They aren't paying for these channels while they are off the air (they don't pay anything to broadcast ABC but we pay for it in our basic broadcast package).

 

[mf1973]

My take on this is that it is more the networks/ABC's fault. Cablevision, on a national scale, is much smaller than the Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T in regards to the total population that they can reach (not necessarily total subscriber base today).

However, the population and demographic that Cablevision does have 'control' over on their system in the areas they serve is 'coveted'. (Can't find the right word, i don't mean to say that other areas of the country are not important) They cover the NYC suburbia area (North NJ, LI, etc.) Essentially a lot of people in and around NYC - the media capital, and very important market.

Cablevision, knows they have this 'coveted' population so they are negotiating hard. A lot of these networks, in my opinion, probably did not have this type of push-back, and usually just dictate demands to their distributors. Cablevision is known to be a very tough negotiator and I have personal experience negotiating with them on a business level, so I can attest to that.

Personally, as a Cablevision customer, I am glad they pushed back on HGTV, FOOD, and now ABC. Trying to keep the rates in check.

ABC's counter-argument is that Cablevision ostensibly takes a free product (from ABC), then charges their customer's for it. I would say cablevision does have costs for distributing the 'free' OTA networks on their systems, however, it is debatable if the charge for basic cable is fair. However, if Cablevision suddenly said that they would reduce their basic cable charges by $1 or whatever (to deflate ABC/Disney's argument), I doubt ABC would just drop this.

 

[starwood]

However - my objection is cablevision raises rates, doesn't give us anything more for it. They raised fees on the cable boxes in December. I have the same old garbage boxes I've had since we signed up. Where is that additional money going? Not to giving us any additional programming. We are losing programming. I can still watch over 100 spanish channels. Give me a choice in what channels I want to receive and adjust my bill accordingly. Don't have a monopoly in my area and tell me if you want cable you have to go with Cablevision.

 

[Kimberle]

I'm in CT & have Cablevision.

I only "lost" the NYC ABC channel. I still have the CT ABC channel.

I'm with CB on these disputes. I don't need 2 ABC stations. I really don't care if NY ABC ever comes back. NY ABC better adjust their advertising rates as they have xxx many less homes now.

 

[doconeill]

Cablevision will argue that the reason they are raising rates is because the networks want more money.

Now that the same companies own most of the broadcast stations AND the cable networks, they are using their increased leverage to force cable companies to suddenly pay for the broadcast stations that have traditionally been free, and threaten to withdraw the cable networks. Imagine if your cable company lost not only ABC, but all the ESPN channels as well.

Cable operators are not blameless, either. They continue to increase the costs on the "basic" service they are required to provide by law, for channels they haven't paid for. They'll argue that its because of the change in equipment from analog to digital, etc., but they were making free money for some time on that.

And now, we have mergers of the network corps and the cable systems themselves. You won't find NBC arguing with Comcast now, but imagine what negotiations with Disney will be like next time.

Re-regulation may be in the future.

Cable companies used to be authorized monopolies, but regulated. De-regulated allowed competition, but it is EXPENSIVE for a new provider to move in. Verizon deployment is slow, but progressing...but I also understand that Cablevision (and others) negotiated monopolistic positions with apartment buildings, etc. although the legality is questionable.

Ironically, cable television started out as "CATV" - "Community Antenna TV" - where a large antenna was installed ans shared among the community by cable when individual antennas weren't sufficient in remote areas.

 

[starwood]

The rate increase was on the cable box rentals not the program packages. To me that means their costs for the boxes increased. They shouldn't try to hide a rate increase on programming in the cable box rentals.

 

[*NikkiBell*]

I'm not following this debate too much because we have Comcast (thank God), but my boyfriend has Cablevision and my brother works for them. Sean lost ABC-7 last night at midnight. Quite honestly, I'm tired of Cablevision's inability to keep the programming customers are paying for. It happened with HGTV and Food Network and now it is happening with ABC-7. You don't see other companies having these problems, why are they?

 

[Joshua_me]

Of course, in NYC you can get crystal clear digital reception 'through the air', assuming you have a small antenna and a digital TV or converter box.

That's what I'd do, but I understand that for some folks, mostly senior citizens, just pulling the TV out from the wall is a big deal and something that they cannot do themselves.

That's that group of people that this is the most unfair to...

I'm so tired of all this unbridled greed.

 

[disneyholic family]

i don't understand why the cable companies should be paying ABC or any other network for their broadcasts..
it should be the other way around...ABC should have to pay the cable companies for the right to be able to broadcast over their cables...

the networks need the cable companies to be able to broadcast and earn advertising revenue..
without the cable companies, they reach far fewer viewers and so the advertising value goes down...

the relationship seems backwards...ABC should be paying the cable companies for the use of the cable to broadcast...

 

[doconeill]

the relationship seems backwards...ABC should be paying the cable companies for the use of the cable to broadcast...

I'd actually argue that it should be zero-sum...the networks and stations already receive their revenue from advertisements, and that revenue is based on viewership. If the network pulls a station off cable, then they lose a great percentage of their viewers, and their advertisers should be the ones screaming.

 

[a1tinkfans]

My take on this is that it is more the networks/ABC's fault. Cablevision, on a national scale, is much smaller than the Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T in regards to the total population that they can reach (not necessarily total subscriber base today).

However, the population and demographic that Cablevision does have 'control' over on their system in the areas they serve is 'coveted'. (Can't find the right word, i don't mean to say that other areas of the country are not important) They cover the NYC suburbia area (North NJ, LI, etc.) Essentially a lot of people in and around NYC - the media capital, and very important market.

Cablevision, knows they have this 'coveted' population so they are negotiating hard. A lot of these networks, in my opinion, probably did not have this type of push-back, and usually just dictate demands to their distributors. Cablevision is known to be a very tough negotiator and I have personal experience negotiating with them on a business level, so I can attest to that.

Personally, as a Cablevision customer, I am glad they pushed back on HGTV, FOOD, and now ABC. Trying to keep the rates in check.

ABC's counter-argument is that Cablevision ostensibly takes a free product (from ABC), then charges their customer's for it. I would say cablevision does have costs for distributing the 'free' OTA networks on their systems, however, it is debatable if the charge for basic cable is fair. However, if Cablevision suddenly said that they would reduce their basic cable charges by $1 or whatever (to deflate ABC/Disney's argument), I doubt ABC would just drop this.

Cable has not raised those rates for the alleged "free" channels in over 7 years despite what people may think. No one is forced to pay cable, use the internet, Hulu etc...One CHOOSES to purchase cable.....And no I do not work for cable!
I am disgusted with ABC, and I think that everyone, lets face it...is in it for the money, the profit...so be reasonable and resolve this issue FAST, ABC is playing beyond hardball negotiations and trying to make up for all their "losses", sorry but it appears that Disney is a BIG part of that lost revenue"
all the other stations were able to work it out except ABC, just maddening ..they could have kept it on the air and STILL tried to resolve it....but they are GREEDY in their pursuit of More of our $$ cause thats what it boils down too, they get their increase and We pay it...SHAME on ABC, I say!!

 

[__disneygirl]

I am so upset about this. I am obsessive about movies and in the movie business myself, I have been counting down the days until the Oscars and then this happens mere hours before they air!? Thank God for the internet, The Oscars can be streamed live at 8pm Eastern time at Oscars.go.com for those of you who want to watch but don't get ABC cause of this ridiculous crap.

I keep reading that they are disputing it still, as we speak, and it may come back right before the Oscars actually air. I hope that happens. I don't want to watch it on my computer... what if the stream freezes, or skips, plus it's not TV quality.

 

[J&K'sPrincessMommy]

This just bothers me to no end. I feel like we just got HGTV and Food back, and now this on Oscar night ...