Subscribe
Negotiations between Scripps and Cablevision continue to drag on in the northeast as New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey Cablevision cable subscribers go without their HGTV and Food Network.
Progress has been incremental at best as Cablevision continues to refuse to accept paying the increased fees Scripps wants. Cablevision’s declaration that is expects to never carry Scripps programming again doesn’t help.
Meanwhile, Food Network president Brooke Johnson has been running from one news channel to another to talk about Scripps’ position on the dispute, and that “hundreds of thousands” of viewers have complained about the loss of their two networks, a number Cablevision disputes.
Pali Research analyst Richard Greenfield, who covers the cable industry, defended Cablevision, giving credit to the Dolan family that owns Cablevision for standing up to Scripps’ rate increase request.
Greenfield accused Comcast and Time Warner Cable of “essentially rolling over” in their negotiations with Scripps, agreeing to price hikes for their networks, an allusion to Time Warner Cable’s campaign to fight back against programmer price increases.
If those cable companies “had taken a far harder stance with Scripps, Cablevision’s pushback may actually have forced Scripps’ hand,” Greenfield wrote.
Still, most viewers could care less about the power plays between cable and the programmers. They just want their HGTV and Food Network back.
http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WCBS New York Cablevision Scripps Dispute 1-4-10.flvWCBS-TV New York ran these two reports during their 6pm and 11pm newscasts describing the battle between Scripps and Cablevision, and consumer reaction. (4 minutes)
http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WTNH New Haven Cablevision Dispute 1-7-10.flv
Same story, different city as WTNH-TV viewers in New Haven, Connecticut share their views on the dispute. (2 minutes)
http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNBC Brooke Johnson Cablevision Scripps Dispute 1-4-10.flv
Food Network president Brooke Johnson appeared on CNBC to take questions about the dispute and changing business model of cable TV and programmers. (5 minutes)
http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Fox Business News Scripps Dispute With Cablevision 1-10.flvJohnson also turned up on Fox Business News to discuss the dispute, how negotiations are going, and how viewers are reacting. (6 minutes)
http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Brooke Johnson Cablevision Dispute 1-4-10.flv
…And Johnson also appeared on Bloomberg News accusing Cablevision of paying themselves top dollar for AMC, a network they own, while refusing to negotiate over a price increase for the “more popular” HGTV and Food Network amounting “to pennies per subscriber.” (6 minutes)
Other stories of interest:
- Cablevision Throws Food TV, HGTV Off Its System
- Cablevision Spins Off Madison Square Garden, Appreciates 2nd Quarter Broadband Profits
- Protecting Your Turf: Cablevision Seeks to Provide Wi-Fi On Long Island/Metro North Railways
- HissyFitWatch: Cablevision Delivers Customers Cap Free Blazing Speeds; TWC Says Forget It
- Mediacom vs. Sinclair: Consumers Stuck In The Middle As Companies Fight For Your Money
Can you tell us where the numbers in that graph/jpg came from? I’ve seen the FN network numbers many times – currently 8c with an increase request to 25c. – and the HGTV current number at 13c also, but Scrips was only asking for between 15 and 20 cents for HGTV as the 13c number was just reset a couple of years ago. This would bring the TOTAL amount for both channels to 45c up from 21c, about a 100% increase. CV has been using the 200% number b/c that is what Scripps wants for FN, not HGTV or not for the total package. It’s only pennies difference per subscriber (as Scripps likes to say) but is millions difference in total (as CV likes to say).
SNL Kagan Research.
I think people need to learn to take a stand. Do you really want your cable bills to keep climbing? Yes we are talking about pennies here but 100% or 200% increase is just ridiculous for any channel. If they all did that, can you imagine how much your rate would be? Take a stand and learn how to cope. Not having FN or HGTV isn’t going to kill you. Besides, you can probably get the shows online if you look hard enough. I am glad Cablevision is doing this. Time Warner and Comcast should follow suit. However, at the same time, they should discount their customers bills for the missing channels not pocket it. That is just wrong.
Sure it doesn’t kill you if it’s not a channel YOU don’t want or watch. I hate the fact I’m paying a lot of extra money for sports channels, and all the other crap that really jacks up my cable bill because they cost $1 per subscriber or more in bundles.. something which I have no say in either.
I personally enjoy HGTV as it’s one of the few channels I do actually watch, out of maybe 6 on over 100-150 channels.
What this gets back to is the cable industry refusing to allow us Ala Carte options, I’ll pay the $1-4 per channel if I can pick and choose exactly the channels I want, or *maybe* very small bundles of like channels. This would solve the problem immediately if they operated like the Apple iTunes store, let HGTV set their price and let consumers decide, the distributor (the cable co.) could then take a percentage off the per channel price plus their monthly cable fee from their cable customers.
Even if I did watch those channels religiously, I still wouldn’t care. I have seen most of those shows online anyway for free, Food Network that is. Most of the shows I watch, I download because I don’t like watching commercials. The wife and I have been talking about totally ditching cable since one of her shows canceled.
I’d love to ditch my cable TV and would do so in a heartbeat.. however cable TV is a required minimum bundle in order to get ‘unlimited’ 1mbit cable internet for a handy sum of $92/mo. The only competition is a outdated telco providing 1mbit DSL for about $80/mo with even worse performance.
Even if I could get a higher performance cable internet package which they already offer UNBUNDLED @ $80/mo for 10mbit or so, I’d be a happy customer and not a ticked off one as it would give me choice to find a TV content supplier than I want, not a forced bundle.
/rant off
SNL Kagan Research? That’s where I’ve been getting my numbers from too. Here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/business/media/07cable.html
Scripps would like about 25 cents a month for each subscriber receiving the Food Network. It is seeking a smaller increase for HGTV, which currently earns 13 cents on average.
And here:
http://forums.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=947753
Scripps is seeking about 24 cents per subscriber per month for Food (three times its current rate of 8 cents, according to SNL Kagan) and 15 cents to 20 cents a month for HGTV (a boost from its current 13 cents rate, according to Kagan)
Though I did find an article that had something similar to your 41c number.
I suppose it doesn’t matter, was just hoping they weren’t asking for so much so we’ld get the channels back and not have to pay so much money in doing so. After all this, Jim Dolan is probably going to charge us double whatever Scripps charges him.
A La Carte pricing would solve the problem, naturally. Cable vision uses the POPULAR Food Network to essentially subsidize the unpopular parts of its basic packages, including the channels it owns and pays itself for. Shouldn’t a content provider be entitled to be paid based on its popularity? On consumer desire for its programming?
Let’s not forget that cable is still essentially a monopoly. My only choice is to switch to a non-cable alternative, like satellite, and that’s what I AM doing.
I’ve heard both sides of the argument here, and it’s clear to me that Scripps is in the right.
Oh, and ‘watching it on the internet anyway” is only going to work as long as SOMEONE is paying to produce that programming. If it’s not profitable, they won’t.
A La Carte the way the providers would do it is much like a car. Buy a
whole car and it cost X much now buy it as a kit. A $1 door handle becomes
a $20 door handle. True A La Carte should mean if a person subcsribes
to 2 channels their cable bill should be about $5 a month with a service
charge included. Here is how I see any provider providing you with
A La Carte. The channels would not be $1 but most likely $20 each
just like that door handle.. then figure in the new set top boxes that people
here said they would need to scramble everything you do not want.
Then add in the huge A La Carte fee. The price you pay because of their
computers extra work needed to make sure you only get your two
channels. They are not going to loose what you pay now. Maybe those
two channels would cost you as much or more then a basic package.
I do not have cable TV per say. Someone else does I only tap into the coax
with a splitter for the internet. The providers said you would get 100 channels
and by God you do.. 99 percent junk filler the reason you only watch 2. Is it
right or just no but what matters is what they think and do. They could care
less about me.
This is nothing more than pure greed. well lets stop this crap now. and give us back out food and Hgtv.