This has been going on for years in New York between Time Warner cable and Cablevision. Every couple of years the same dispute arises. Time Warner wants Cablevision to pay more money to them for carrying the New York Knicks which Cablevision owns. The first few times this happened, they settled at the midnight deadline. But then they didn't settle and Cablevision was off the air for three or four days until they settled. This past year they were off the air for over 20 days. The governor got involved the state Senate got involved but still no solution. Strangely enough this was the year of Linsanity and the pressure to view the New York Knicks amazing run and Cablevision's loss of a tremendous amount of advertising revenue finally pressured both sides to reach an agreement.
I'm afraid that now this sparring between program producer and program delivered is the new normal.
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Mark <markraudonis@yahoo.com> wrote:
I think Viacom will blink.
mark
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, John Moore <bigfish@...> wrote:
>
> OTish" Direct TV and Viacom Programming disruption?
> I know traditionally in the Television/ Motion Picture business it is the distributors that generally seem to make a profit more so than the producers. Both can prosper but it seems the distributors have the upper hand. Right now there are negotiation problems between Viacom and Direct TV. The result is Direct TV pulled the plug on 26 Viacom channels until they can work out the fee hike Viacom wants per subscriber. I'm curious what others think about this situation as it could and does effect the availability of our products to be seen by some 20 million Direct TV subscribers. Both sides are taking stabs at the other. I don't really have a side other than it seems to me that Viacom as the media supplier and the entity that hires production companies to produce programming has a bigger influence on my employment than does Direct TV. I figure that Direct TV and other suppliers of Satellite services have to pay the government for use of the
> spectrum they use because the public "owns" the airwaves but I think the public good is not being served here. I felt the same way when after the merger of XM and Sirus Sat radio that then decided to pass on royalty costs that they had to pay after losing a long court battle. As the battle has grown this week Viacom pulled a lot of it's programming off the internet so people have lost any access to the shows. I'm curious how others view this and how it relates to the programming we provide. I'd hate to have this have been a premiere week for one of my shows. I'm sure this would have a damaging effect on the ratings. I'm not, "Mad As Hell" yet, but should I be? ;-)
>
> John Moore
>
> Barking Trout Productions
>
> Studio City, CA
>
> bigfish@...
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
_____________________________________________
Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment