TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > TiVo TV Talk > Now Playing - TV Show Talk
TiVo Community
Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-26-2013, 02:32 PM   #1
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 33,739
Cablevision Sues Viacom Over Bundling of Little-Watched Channels

Typical Dolans. They sue content providers for exactly the same practice they've been using with their channels for years. Not to mention how they (and other cable/sat providers) force consumers into those same types of bundles.


http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.co...er=rss&emc=rss
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 02:42 PM   #2
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 36,996
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. But I don't expect anything to change. The article says the lawsuit is complaining that Cablevision is complaining that it has to carry 14 little-watched channels in order to get the right to carry the more popular stuff. Viacom has responded by saying that no carrier is required to purchase all their channels. They can purchase them individually, but the bundles are more cost effective, and are a win-win for everyone.

Two thoughts:

1. The per-subscriber-per-month cost of those 14 channels combined is probably less than the cost of one of the more popular channels, so forcing Viacom to unbundle isn't going to save anyone much money.

2. If Cablevision's suit is successful, Viacom would simply recoup its losses by charging more for the popular channels. So the chances of this resulting in savings for either Cablevision or consumers is virtually nil.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 03:16 PM   #3
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 33,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. But I don't expect anything to change. The article says the lawsuit is complaining that Cablevision is complaining that it has to carry 14 little-watched channels in order to get the right to carry the more popular stuff. Viacom has responded by saying that no carrier is required to purchase all their channels. They can purchase them individually, but the bundles are more cost effective, and are a win-win for everyone.

Two thoughts:

1. The per-subscriber-per-month cost of those 14 channels combined is probably less than the cost of one of the more popular channels, so forcing Viacom to unbundle isn't going to save anyone much money.

2. If Cablevision's suit is successful, Viacom would simply recoup its losses by charging more for the popular channels. So the chances of this resulting in savings for either Cablevision or consumers is virtually nil.
I don't see this helping the consumer one bit, despite CV saying it will. It will just give the consumer less choices for the same (or more) money.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 03:23 PM   #4
SnakeVargas
Registered User
 
SnakeVargas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Savage Village
Posts: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
2. If Cablevision's suit is successful, Viacom would simply recoup its losses by charging more for the popular channels. So the chances of this resulting in savings for either Cablevision or consumers is virtually nil.
Alternatively they could recoup their losses by eliminating the less popular channels. My assumption is some of these channels may operate at a loss without bundling to prop them up.
SnakeVargas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:52 PM   #5
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 36,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeVargas View Post
Alternatively they could recoup their losses by eliminating the less popular channels. My assumption is some of these channels may operate at a loss without bundling to prop them up.
I think if they operated at a loss, their parent companies would stop programming them or would change the format. I think that most of the lower-tier cable channels don't have a lot of costs for original content, plus they sell a lot of time to infomercials, plus they still get $0.05-0.25 per month per subscriber. A very conservative estimate of $0.05 per month from 50 million cable subscribers nets $2.5 million per month just in subscriber fees. Add in infomercials and other ad sales and they probably generate $5-10 million per month with very few costs for original programming.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Forum Jump




Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Advertisements

TiVo Community
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media

(C) 2013 Magenium Solutions - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVoŽ is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not owned or operated by TiVo Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:14 AM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |