Stations VS Broadcasters

[Killer_Man_]

Once again, a broadcaster bully is threatening Time Warner Cable customers with a blackout – holding your shows hostage to boost their bottom line. http://corp-mail.timewarnercable.com/TWC/Portal/templates/TWCSkyCareEmail/images/greyLine.jpg Recently, you may have seen a message from a local TV station about negotiations between Time Warner Cable and Sinclair Broadcasting – a corporate holding company that owns television stations across the country. And, just like us, you probably thought: not another broadcaster blackout threat!

At Time Warner Cable, we think it's wrong to put viewers in the middle of business negotiations. We know you're tired of these public contract disputes – and so are we. Even though its current contract doesn't expire until New Year's Eve, Sinclair has already threatened to pull-the-plug on your shows and they're trying to blame Time Warner Cable for the blackout. In fact, it's Sinclair's decision to take their local stations off our lineup.

Time Warner Cable negotiates hundreds of contracts a year. We're working hard to negotiate new deals and we are fully committed to reaching an agreement without any blackout. But, broadcasters like Sinclair keep demanding higher and higher fees for their stations – driving up the cost of TV for consumers like you.

You should know this is not the first time Sinclair has used blackout threats to force television service providers to pay higher programming fees. Last year, they had a similar dispute with another cable company. Eventually, every TV provider, including DIRECTV, DISH Network, AT&T U-verse and Verizon FiOS, could be threatened with broadcaster blackouts – so switching is not a solution.

As we start the holiday season, these tactics are especially unfair to viewers. But we won't rollover – and we ask for your support. Let's get tough, and together we can try to hold down the cost of cable television.

Visit RollOverOrGetTough.com (http://corp-mail.timewarnercable.com/Portal/view.aspx?uh=101149218868279508&a=Click&s=213837&m=213839&t=859187&b=71102&l=14889) to learn which local stations are threatened by a blackout – and what we're doing to try to hold down TV prices.
So I got this e-mail from Time Warner... Mind you I use Road Runner and we use Dish Network cause it was and still is cheaper for the 'channel package' that we wanted...

Either way, have any of you heard of this or affected by this?

To be honest, I think they are both being stupid and greedy. Time Warner threatens to raise cost on everything(including Road Runner) even though it boasts about making great profits and Sinclair(My local stations) wants more money for the shows and for Time Warner to rebroadcast it to their customers.

I use Dish Network so I won't be at lost but I do remember Time Warner telling their customers that ALL broadcasters are losing them(Even though they are not, like they are lying to keep people.).

So what are your views on it?

I think that both are just being juvenile about it... Especially Time Warner.

If I had my way about it, I'd be using U-Verse but the land lord won't let us dig to get the 'so called cables' that they need in cause they have to dig under the concrete to do it... Because U-Verse is cheaper especially internet wise.

[deathofcheese]

Sinclair feels that they should be entitled to a bigger piece of the pie than TWC has negotiated for them and they feel that it's their right to put their foot down and demand it. Unfortunately, this leads to TWC customers not getting what Sinclair is broadcasting while TWC scrambles to do something without giving up much of its income while publicly promising that they are very strongly against passing the cost onto the customers. Without knowing more about what each party gets and what it is that they're fighting over, I can't really say which is the evil side, although I'm sure they're both not angels.

Just what is Sinclair, anyways? Any worthwhile channels? The only thing that the website will show me is that there isn't a channel change in my area.

Oh wait, it's right in your email - local stations. Well so what? Just hook a TV up to an antenna or something and problem solved. Probably Sinclair can't keep its viewership up by competing against cable and satellite and this has led to a drop in advertiser revenue which they want TWC to pick up the slack for. Whatever.

[Stupidthing0]

I know about TWC but not so much about Sinclair... all this sounds like people wanting way more money than they need - and of course its the consumer who suffers as always.

stupid effing people. -_-

[chefTENGU]

This shit happens from time to time. Usually, though, it's the big cable network providers (like Viacom) that demand more money to renew their contract with TWC, Comcast, or whomever.

The one thing I do like about TWC is that they encourage their customers to share their opinions and vote whether to accept the spendier package, or risk losing some of their channels.

"Getting tough" as TWC puts it often works out for the consumers. We ended up losing a lot of ESPN's family of networks for a while (though I never noticed since I don't watch them anyway) recently, but the networks eventually buckled and renewed their contract at their previous price.

[Killer_Man_]

Sinclair feels that they should be entitled to a bigger piece of the pie than TWC has negotiated for them and they feel that it's their right to put their foot down and demand it. Unfortunately, this leads to TWC customers not getting what Sinclair is broadcasting while TWC scrambles to do something without giving up much of its income while publicly promising that they are very strongly against passing the cost onto the customers. Without knowing more about what each party gets and what it is that they're fighting over, I can't really say which is the evil side, although I'm sure they're both not angels.

Just what is Sinclair, anyways? Any worthwhile channels? The only thing that the website will show me is that there isn't a channel change in my area.

Oh wait, it's right in your email - local stations. Well so what? Just hook a TV up to an antenna or something and problem solved. Probably Sinclair can't keep its viewership up by competing against cable and satellite and this has led to a drop in advertiser revenue which they want TWC to pick up the slack for. Whatever.


It doesn't bother me at all because I have Dish Network. They both are full of lies and deceit though. Supposely Sinclair is this while TWC is that.

Everyone watches the local stations for A: News B: Simpsons, family guy and etc. Because Channel 24 usually shows it, espeically the local sports teams.

This shit happens from time to time. Usually, though, it's the big cable network providers (like Viacom) that demand more money to renew their contract with TWC, Comcast, or whomever.

The one thing I do like about TWC is that they encourage their customers to share their opinions and vote whether to accept the spendier package, or risk losing some of their channels.

"Getting tough" as TWC puts it often works out for the consumers. We ended up losing a lot of ESPN's family of networks for a while (though I never noticed since I don't watch them anyway) recently, but the networks eventually buckled and renewed their contract at their previous price.

Yes but I highly doubt that TWC would really 'lose' money on things and I highly doubt Sinclair would 'lose' money on things.

They both are just being greedy.