Home » Multimedia » Recent Articles:

Time Warner Cable Wants You To Help Fight “Unfair” Programming Prices, But Won’t Let You Choose Your Own Channels

Phillip Dampier November 25, 2009 Editorial & Site News, Video 28 Comments
Phillip "But I Don't Want to Pay for The Golf Channel" Dampier

Phillip "But I Don't Even Want The Golf Channel" Dampier

Time Warner Cable unveiled a new website this afternoon, RollOverOrGetTough, asking customers whether they want the company to “roll over” and pay the prices cable programmers demand or “get tough” and threaten to drop channels that demand too much.

This, of course, is rich coming from the company that loves to raise your rates every year, overcharge you for your broadband service with experimental usage caps and “consumption billing,” and has had a long history of owning and/or controlling many of those ‘greedy cable networks.’  Oh, and they won’t give you the choice of paying for just the channels you want to watch, either.

Want to send a message to the cable network bad-boys that demand too much?  Give your customers the right to opt out.

rolloverThe cable industry has fought a long-running battle with cable programming networks over the fees they pay on a per-subscriber basis to carry those channels.  The revenue earned by those networks helps them acquire programming that is attractive to potential viewers, and the advertisers that follow.  Back in the 1970s and 1980s, most cable subscribers spent their time watching local broadcasters, “superstations” — imported TV stations from cities like New York, Chicago, Atlanta, and Los Angeles, and premium movie channels.  The basic cable networks back then didn’t run off-network TV shows.  Most ran cheaply produced documentaries, talk shows, imported shows from overseas, limited interest cultural programming, or music videos.  Sports programming rarely involved major teams, or major sporting events for that matter.

By the early 1990s, virtually every basic cable network was either owned outright or in part by one of the major national cable or broadcasting companies.  NBC and ABC dabbled in cable themselves, while CBS steered clear after being burned by a terrible experience with CBS Cable in the early 80s.  Launched as a cultural network devoted to opera, theater, and dance, it shut down a year after launching, having attracted minuscule audiences.

The lesson learned — create or buy programming viewers will actually want to watch.  That takes money, and the fees charged to cable operators for cable networks began rising rapidly.  Suddenly, off-network TV shows viewers used to watch on WPIX, WGN, WWOR, KTLA, or WTBS suddenly started showing up on basic cable instead.  The biggest turning point came when sports networks like ESPN started bidding for, and winning the rights to televise major league sporting events.  Nothing costs more than sports, and broadcast and cable networks have been bidding up prices ever since.

As basic cable networks became popular with viewers, their ability to make demands on cable operators grew exponentially.  Suddenly, certain cable networks demanded they be given low channel numbers, that cable companies had to also carry affiliated spin-off cable networks if they wanted access to their primary service, and that programming must always be carried on basic cable — not on some digital cable tier or other similar extra-cost tier.

For years, cable operators didn’t care too much as they just passed the increases on to customers.  Where could viewers go except to the cable company?  I recall the sticker shock customers had when basic cable first exceeded $20 a month, then $30.  Today it’s headed for $60 a month in many areas.  Cable companies attempted to placate angry customers by adding several new channels to the lineup just prior to the rate hike letter, telling them they were now receiving greater value than ever from their cable company.  The following year, those new channels wanted more money, too.

The “500 channel universe” that sounded promising a decade ago is now a nuisance for many subscribers, irritated they are paying for hundreds of channels they never watch.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WIVB Buffalo Report on TWC Campaign 11-25-09.flv[/flv]

WIVB-TV Buffalo reported on Time Warner Cable’s fight against programming prices, but itself (along with sister station WNLO-TV) was thrown off Time Warner Cable’s cable lineup over a contract dispute for most of October, 2008.  LIN TV Corporation, owner of both stations, had reportedly demanded 25 cents per month per subscriber for permission to carry the stations on cable. (1 minute)

In a difficult economy, justifying a $150-200 cable bill for television, broadband, and phone service is harder than ever.  Consumers want new options.  Satellite television provided limited competition, and a few large phone companies are set to deliver a bit more.  But some subscribers have decided paying this kind of money for television every month is outrageous, and they have finally jumped off the merry-go-round.  Some younger people are never getting on, relying entirely on their broadband service to watch television programs and movies on demand.

Time Warner Cable’s attempt to enlist customers in their sudden war on programming rate increases is likely to be seen by many as a classic pot to kettle cable quandary.  The company that still wants to force Internet Overcharging schemes on their broadband subscribers and is now raising rates in many areas has some chutzpah asking customers to fight for them:

No one likes paying more. You don’t. We don’t. Yet, every time our contracts with TV program providers come up for renewal, that’s what we face. Price increases. Big ones. Up to 300% more. Sometimes we can avoid passing them on to you. Sometimes we can’t. Sometimes, a network will threaten to take your shows away if we don’t roll over. Whenever that’s happened in the past, we’d make the best deal we could and hope that would be the end of it. But it never was. So no more. The networks shouldn’t be in the driver’s seat on what you watch and how much you pay. You’re our customers, so help us decide what to do. Let us know if you want us to Roll Over, or Get Tough. We’re just one company, but there are millions of you. Together, we just might be able to make a difference in what America pays for its favorite entertainment.

[flv width=”408″ height=”296″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/TWC The NFL Wants You To Pay Ad.mp4[/flv]

Time Warner Cable ran this ad in its dispute with the NFL Network over carrying the channel on cable lineups.  Warning: Loud Audio (30 seconds)

To be sure, cable companies are confronted by some pretty bad offenders during contract renewals.  Some demand several dollars a month per subscriber, whether you watch the channel or not:

NFL Network: This one has been kept off Time Warner Cable for years because they want an enormous amount of money and demand to be carried on the basic cable lineup, where they can expose every subscriber to their monthly programming fee.  TWC has repeatedly said no because a significant part of any rate increase will come from just this single network.

Sports Networks: In general, the biggest price hikers are sports channels.  ESPN and its sister channels demand several dollars a month for every subscriber.  Single sporting event channels, particularly YES, the Yankees network are also often very expensive.  Regional sports channels are obscenely expensive, and many cable systems finally forced them into their own sports tier, where those who want them pay for them.

Fox/News Corporation: Fox News Channel in particular commands mind-boggling subscription fees, usually more than every other news channel combined.  Many systems also got stuck carrying and paying for Fox Business News, a ratings dog attracting fewer than 20,000 viewers nationwide at any one time.  Time Warner Cable faces expiring contracts for many Fox channels, and the renewal of them (at characteristically higher rates) will likely involve a brutal battle over what subscribers will be stuck paying for FX, Fuel, Speed, Fox Soccer, and several regional sports networks.  That’s before the cable operator also has to conduct negotiations over how much Fox-owned local stations are going to demand in return for carriage on Time Warner’s lineup.

The nastiest battles are often fought with local television stations, especially when they are collectively owned by a single company.  Sinclair Broadcasting, which owns several Fox and other network affiliated stations, is known for playing hardball with cable companies.  Other station owners known for being willing to yank their stations off cable if the company won’t pay their price include: Gray Television, Journal Communications, Meredith Corporation, Nexstar Broadcasting Group, and LIN TV Corporation.  Typically these battles pit cable and broadcasters against one another with viewers in the middle, wondering if their local station will still be on their cable lineup in the morning.

In the end, cable companies tend to cave in or negotiate slightly better deals to get the local stations back on.

[flv width=”320″ height=”260″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KXMC Bismarck KNDX Yanked from Cable 4-2-09.flv[/flv]

KXMC-TV in Minot, North Dakota reported that North Dakota Fox affiliate KNDX-TV was out in the cold after Midcontinent Communications yanked the channel off during a contract dispute.  (4/2/2009 – 1 minute)

It’s no surprise that everyone wants a piece of cable’s action.  Nor are we surprised by a number of comments left on news sites reporting this story that Time Warner Cable’s new campaign has often been met with derision by subscribers, who absolutely loathe the company for its past pricing practices.  In the cities where the company tried to engineer a tripling in price of broadband service — to $150 a month for the same level of service customers used to enjoy for $50 a month, I wouldn’t hold my breath.  Customers aren’t likely to hold hands with a company that wants to “save you a few dollars” off your cable bill while emptying your bank account for your broadband service.

If and when Time Warner Cable wants to permanently bury any notion of Internet Overcharging schemes, drop us a line.  Perhaps then consumers will join a programming price revolt run by a company that’s got our back, instead of our wallet.

Canadian Mobile Data Wars: Rogers May Be Forced to Pull Down “Most Reliable” Ads – Telus’ Goats Jump for Joy

Phillip Dampier November 25, 2009 Bell (Canada), Canada, Competition, Rogers, Telus, Video, Wireless Broadband 1 Comment
Telus' goats jump for joy with the company victorious over Rogers' "misleading" claims about network reliability

Telus' goats jump for joy as the company wins a favorable ruling in the B.C. courts over Rogers' "misleading" claims about network reliability

Ad wars over wireless data don’t just happen in the States.  Canadian providers have also been at each other over ad claims that just don’t tell consumers the whole story.  That’s the conclusion of a judge in British Columbia, who ruled that Rogers Communications’ wireless ads touting the provider as Canada’s “most reliable” are misleading.

In a court ruling Tuesday, the judge ruled in favor of a complaint lodged by Telus Communications that argued their wireless network was just as good as what Rogers had to offer.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Rogers Stick Internet Fastest Network Ad.flv[/flv]

Rogers “Prove It – Foot Print” Ad touts “Canada’s fastest mobile network.” (30 seconds)

What is really at issue, once again, is the differences between two different wireless network standards.  Rogers beat Telus and Bell in upgrading its network to “High Speed Packet Access” technology, which has been marketed with more familiarity to consumers as “3G.”  Once Rogers launched the service, up went advertising promoting Rogers as the “fastest” and “most reliable” Canadian mobile provider.  Last month, Rogers was forced to drop the “fastest” claim, but has maintained it runs the most “reliable” network in the country.

Now that Telus upgraded their network, they wanted to know what justification Rogers had to claim that.  Telus eventually sued.

Justice Christopher Grauer found Telus had cause.

“The only basis Rogers ever had for making that representation was the comparison between its HSPA network and its competitors’ first-generation EVDO networks,” Grauer wrote in his decision. “Rogers’ representation nevertheless continues to be made. In these circumstances, I conclude that is misleading.”

“What is clear from the evidence before me is that the present network technology is at least equivalent between Rogers and Telus,” the judge wrote.

“The technological advantage that allowed Rogers to represent that it has Canada’s most reliable network has disappeared.”

“I conclude … that the balance of convenience favors the granting of an order restraining Rogers from continuing to represent, without appropriate qualification, that it provides ‘Canada’s most reliable network’.”

The case has some slight similarities to the Verizon-AT&T spat, if you took AT&T’s position in the case.  Rogers, in this case, promoted its 3G network before the others had networks of their own, and used language that suggested that 3G access provided enhanced reliability.  Once the competition also upgraded, Rogers simply added new fine print in their advertising touting that 3G was better than the older network standards their competitors had relied on up until earlier this month.

Rogers claims they are “perplexed” by the decision because they still believe they have the most reliable network.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Rogers Most Reliable Dropped Call Ad.flv[/flv]

Rogers, “Canada’s most reliable network” doesn’t drop calls in elevators, according to this ad. (30 seconds)

TelusThere is no “good guy” in this story, however.  Once Bell upgraded their network on November 4th, they promptly began running commercials claiming they have Canada’s best network themselves.

Telus has the cutest… ads that is.  Nobody does cute quite like Telus.  Since 2001, the company has relied mostly on critters to sell their goods.  Among them: pot-bellied pigs, bunnies, tree frogs, monkeys, lizards, ducks, fish, hedgehogs, parrots, meerkats, and perhaps to celebrate their western Canadian roots, lots and lots of goats.

Watch the petting zoo, and some other Canadian wireless ads below:

… Continue Reading

Aol. – Rearranging the Deck Chairs on the Titanic?

Phillip Dampier November 24, 2009 Editorial & Site News, Video 5 Comments
You won't have this logo to kick around any longer.

You won't have this logo to kick around any longer.

AOL (the forgettable part of Time Warner) is desperately trying to rebrand itself in an effort to stay… relevant.  The shortened namesake of America Online, which began life as QuantumLink in 1985, peaked with 30 million subscribers before merging with Time Warner in 2001.  It was all downhill from there.  The once-enormous Internet Service Provider has now become far lesser known as a content producer and distributor, although the company still has almost six million legacy dial-up account users paying between $9.99 and $25.90 a month for access.  They discontinued broadband service several years ago, which was a shame because it offered an Internet access alternative to whatever one’s phone or cable provider had on offer.

This week, with details finalized for December’s AOL severance from Time Warner, the “all-new” Aol. was previewed with a new image branding campaign.

Aol.  It's capital "A" and lowercase "ol" with a period.  It's hip to be square.

Aol. It's capital "A" and lowercase "ol" with a period.

Yup… that’s it.  There’s now a period in there.  The old triangle, which never meant anything to me either, is gone for good.  Instead, a simple sans-serif logo with a period replaces it, designed to blend into one of hundreds of background images the service will introduce to its new look this December.

“Our new identity is uniquely dynamic. Our business is focused on creating world-class experiences for consumers and AOL is centered on creative and talented people – employees, partners, and advertisers. We have a clear strategy that we are passionate about and we plan on standing behind the AOL brand as we take the company into the next decade,” said Tim Armstrong, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of AOL.

Unfortunately for all concerned, there are going to be a lot fewer employees doing the work to create that “world-class” experience.  More than 2,500 employees, one-third of the company’s workforce, will be offered buyouts to get out.

The Associated Press reports on AOL’s plans to shed 2500 workers.  (1 minute)

The company is showcasing the all-new pretty wrapping paper for its December relaunch.

“Historically brand identity has been monolithic and controlling, little more than stamping a company name on a product.  AOL is a 21st century media company, with an ambitious vision for the future and new focus on creativity and expression, this required the new brand identity to be open and generous, to invite conversation and collaboration, and to feel credible, but also aspirational. We’re delighted to have worked so closely with the AOL leadership team to create something bold and exciting that sets AOL apart,” said Karl Heiselman, CEO of Wolff Olins.

The question is, do most consumers actually associate AOL with a 21st century media company, or a distant memory of dial-up access days gone by?  Aspiring to be the next best thing when your company formerly was the ISP tens of millions of Americans said goodbye to when broadband service arrived is a challenge.  The Internet is filled with yesterday’s sensations whose glory days are long since passed.  Just ask Yahoo!, AltaVista, Ask Jeeves, Napster, or GeoCities.

[flv width=”640″ height=”405″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/aol_brand-H.264.flv[/flv]

A video reel showcasing some of AOL’s new branding.  (1 minute)

Luke Wilson’s Mailbag – Three More Ads from AT&T Mobility Do Damage Control, and Now Apple Has Its Say

Phillip Dampier November 23, 2009 AT&T, Competition, Video, Wireless Broadband 11 Comments
Luke Wilson's blizzard of postcards

Luke Wilson's blizzard of postcards

Luke Wilson is back for three more AT&T ads hitting back Verizon Wireless for its 3G map ads, and Apple has come running to AT&T’s defense with two new ads of its own.

The theme?  AT&T’s GSM network lets subscribers talk and browse the web at the same time.  Verizon Wireless’ CDMA network does not.  For that matter, neither does Sprint, which also uses CDMA, but as a non-combatant gets a pass for this round.

Mobile phone networks in the United States primarily use GSM (AT&T, T-Mobile) or CDMA (Verizon Wireless, Sprint, MetroPCS, U.S. Cellular, Cricket) technology.  Because of the way the two standards developed, GSM can permit a customer to talk while also concurrently using mobile data services.  CDMA users must choose one or the other.

The new round of ads exploit that difference.  How important that distinction is depends on how you use your phone.  If you frequently use your AT&T phone to web browse while also speaking to someone on that phone, you would likely find Verizon Wireless’ limitation irritating.  If you don’t, you won’t care.

More importantly, it’s a moot point if you find yourself in one of AT&T’s older EDGE network areas, which predominate outside of major cities.  The EDGE standard doesn’t let you talk and browse at the same time either.

Broadband Reports notes “it seems like AT&T might just be better served by not talking anymore, and just focusing on getting tower sites and backhaul links upgraded. How many upgraded cell sites would Luke Wilson’s salary have paid for? How many backhaul links could have been upgraded with the money spent suing Verizon? Fixing the capacity and coverage issues that have been plaguing AT&T would do more than any ad campaign.”

Apple’s “me too” ads promote the same concurrent use of phone and data applications on the iPhone, but also ignore the pesky fact that those stuck in AT&T’s vast EDGE network will discover it’s a distinction without a difference.

Watch all five ads below.

… Continue Reading

New Zealand ISP Exempts YouTube From Usage Allowance Annoyance Until January 2010

Phillip Dampier November 23, 2009 Broadband Speed, Competition, Data Caps, Video 1 Comment

orconAnnoying usage caps, allowances, and consumption billing irritate broadband users in those places where Internet Overcharging is established.  But the demand by consumers for unlimited broadband is so strong, some ISPs are giving way, looking for competitive edges that can win them new customers and keep the ones they already have happy.

Orcon, a DSL provider serving New Zealand, has announced it is exempting visits to YouTube from its data allowance until the end of January 2010.

“YouTube is one of the hottest properties on the web – with an almost endless supply of content. It makes up a big chunk of our customer-base’s usage every month. With the school holidays looming and the festive season in full swing we’re expecting a big uptake from our customers,” said Orcon chief executive Scott Bartlett.  “Streaming and downloading can rapidly chew through gigabytes of data so these holidays mums and dads can rest assured their data cap won’t take a beating. It is also a great opportunity for families to make and share their own holiday home movies with friends and family around the world.”

Orcon presently exempts several domestic websites, including TV New Zealand, from its usage allowance.  YouTube is one of the first international sites Orcon has exempted.

Orcon services its customers over the telephone network using ADSL and, in selected areas, ADSL2+ which provides service theoretically up to 24Mbps.

For Orcon customers, any streaming video exemption is good news, considering the ISP’s tiny usage allowances.

Orcon charges prices that would shock Americans:

Orcon’s Purple Plan provides a variable download speed (often 8Mbps or less downstream) and 128kbps upstream service with a 1GB monthly usage allowance for $29US a month.  Each additional gigabyte costs $1.50.  Their Platinum Plan doesn’t provide additional speed, just a bigger usage allowance.  For 20GB of usage per month, prepare to spend $95 per month.  Domestic long distance and local calling is also included in the Platinum Plan.  Orcon’s new ADSL2+ network is even more pricey, but can deliver faster speeds (12-15Mbps seem to be real world ranges for downstream).  The usage allowance is slightly higher on the ADSL2+ network, but not by much.  The highest allowance available tops out at 25GB.

[flv width=”640″ height=”405″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Orcon Broadband Iggy Pop Ad 11-16-09.flv[/flv]

<

p style=”text-align: center;”>Orcon Broadband ran an advertising campaign to find eight New Zealanders to help Iggy Pop re-record ‘The Passenger’ live via Orcon Broadband.  This is the result. (November 16, 2009 – 2 minutes)

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!