Charter droped cbs hdtv

Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay to
broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is free
ota. no more csi in hd for me

On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:

Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay to
broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is free
ota. no more csi in hd for me

Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their competition to
give them something for free that they can turn around and sell. What
Charter has been doing by selling it without paying anything for it is the
same as if I had free lunches delivered from a charity orginization to my
place of business and sold them. Great for me. Bad for the chraity, and
bad for the customer in the end since he could have gotten the free lunch
too.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm

Wes Newell wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:

Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay to
broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is free
ota. no more csi in hd for me

Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their competition to
give them something for free that they can turn around and sell. What
Charter has been doing by selling it without paying anything for it is the
same as if I had free lunches delivered from a charity orginization to my
place of business and sold them. Great for me. Bad for the chraity, and
bad for the customer in the end since he could have gotten the free lunch
too.


I also don't get abc in hd. I don't have and hd tuner in my tv set. But
i just ordered a Samsung DTB-H260F HDTV Terrestrial Receiver.

heres more info charter dropping cbs.
http://w.engadgethd.com/2007/01/03/c...mov-hd-signal/

Wes Newell wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:

Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay to
broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is free
ota. no more csi in hd for me

Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their competition to
give them something for free that they can turn around and sell. What
Charter has been doing by selling it without paying anything for it is the
same as if I had free lunches delivered from a charity orginization to my
place of business and sold them. Great for me. Bad for the chraity, and
bad for the customer in the end since he could have gotten the free lunch
too.


I beg to differ with you on this. The CBS station has been already been
paid by their advertisers. If they can reach more viewers by having
their signals available to cable viewers, then they can charge the
advertisers more. If the CBS station is available to fewer viewers,
then the advertisers will pay less. The CBS station is trying to double dip.

If a viewer can receive CBS OTA for free, more power to them. If they
can't, then it is to CBS's advantage to make the signal available to the
viewer without trying to double dip.

Wes Newell wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:


Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay to
broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is free
ota. no more csi in hd for me


Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their competition to
give them something for free that they can turn around and sell. What
Charter has been doing by selling it without paying anything for it is the
same as if I had free lunches delivered from a charity orginization to my
place of business and sold them. Great for me. Bad for the chraity, and
bad for the customer in the end since he could have gotten the free lunch
too.

To the OP, it is not CBS that is demanding money for the rebroadcast
rights from Charter. It is the owners of the station, KMOV CBS 4 (DT 56)
which appears to Belo Corporation, if the wikipedia entry on the station
is correct.

As for who is right here, that is complicated. The government has
granted KMOV a broadcast license for a valuable chunk of the spectrum
for a nominal fee in return for free broadcast rights. The broadcast
stations have relied on advertising revenue to make money. In the past,
the cable companies either paid no fee or a nominal monthly fee to carry
the station. What is now happening is that Sinclair has taken the lead
in demanding much higher fees from the cable companies for the rights to
carry the station signal. Other broadcast companies are following in
Sinclair's footsteps. Sinclair is in a major fight with Mediacom cable
right now with some 30? Sinclair stations on the verge of getting pulled
from those cable systems.

I think the requested fees have been running around 0.75 or a buck
per month for every single subscriber in the cable system. 75 cents does
not sound like much, but if this becomes the typical fee for the big
four in each market and say 40 cents for the CW, Univision, and other
smaller stations, you could be looking at a $4 to $5 increase in monthly
cable bills even for the most basic cable package. The leverage in this
case is with the station, so the cable companies will likely cave and
pass the costs on to their customers.

For anyone in a city where this is happening, the solution is to get a
TV antenna and digital ATSC tuner or HD TV. Of course, it is likely that
some of these stations are not at full power on their digital signal,
which will make getting these stations OTA challenging for those living
further from the broadcast towers. But if you have a HD or digital TV
with a built-in ATSC tuner, I think it is worth it to buy a simple $15
to $100 antenna so you are not totally dependent on the cable system or
satellite for TV. The Samsung DTB-H260F is a recently introduced set top
box ATSC tuner which is getting excellent marks for performance, but can
be hard to find.

Two good starting points for OTA info: www.antennaweb.org for where
your digital stations are and
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ISSUES/erecting_antenna.html for technical
info and background. FOr an antenna, in general, steer away from the
over priced antennas with built-in crappy amplifiers. Go for antennas
that look like antennas, not something out of a home decorating magazine.

Alan F

Wes Newell wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:

Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to
pay to broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that
is free ota. no more csi in hd for me

Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their
competition to give them something for free that they can turn around
and sell. What Charter has been doing by selling it without paying
anything for it is the same as if I had free lunches delivered from a
charity orginization to my place of business and sold them. Great for
me. Bad for the chraity, and bad for the customer in the end since he
could have gotten the free lunch too.

Sorry but totally wrong. The local affiliate is not in competition with
Charter. It is in competition with all the other things viewers can choose to
watch besides their station. Their revenues come from ads, period.

What they are in effect saying to viewers is "We would like you to watch our
local news instead of the other guys. We would also like you to watch CBS
instead of any other network (because that allows us to sell more ads).
However; we have just made a decision that will make it a LOT harder for a large
segment of our market to watch us".

They are shooting themselves in the foot and Charter knows it. They are calling
the affiliate's bluff and will likely prevail.

In article [email protected],
Alan F wrote:

Wes Newell wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:


Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay to
broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is free
ota. no more csi in hd for me


Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their competition to
give them something for free that they can turn around and sell. What
Charter has been doing by selling it without paying anything for it is the
same as if I had free lunches delivered from a charity orginization to my
place of business and sold them. Great for me. Bad for the chraity, and
bad for the customer in the end since he could have gotten the free lunch
too.

To the OP, it is not CBS that is demanding money for the rebroadcast
rights from Charter. It is the owners of the station, KMOV CBS 4 (DT 56)
which appears to Belo Corporation, if the wikipedia entry on the station
is correct.

As for who is right here, that is complicated. The government has
granted KMOV a broadcast license for a valuable chunk of the spectrum
for a nominal fee in return for free broadcast rights. The broadcast
stations have relied on advertising revenue to make money. In the past,
the cable companies either paid no fee or a nominal monthly fee to carry
the station. What is now happening is that Sinclair has taken the lead
in demanding much higher fees from the cable companies for the rights to
carry the station signal. Other broadcast companies are following in
Sinclair's footsteps. Sinclair is in a major fight with Mediacom cable
right now with some 30? Sinclair stations on the verge of getting pulled
from those cable systems.

I think the requested fees have been running around 0.75 or a buck
per month for every single subscriber in the cable system. 75 cents does
not sound like much, but if this becomes the typical fee for the big
four in each market and say 40 cents for the CW, Univision, and other
smaller stations, you could be looking at a $4 to $5 increase in monthly
cable bills even for the most basic cable package. The leverage in this
case is with the station, so the cable companies will likely cave and
pass the costs on to their customers.

For anyone in a city where this is happening, the solution is to get a
TV antenna and digital ATSC tuner or HD TV. Of course, it is likely that
some of these stations are not at full power on their digital signal,
which will make getting these stations OTA challenging for those living
further from the broadcast towers. But if you have a HD or digital TV
with a built-in ATSC tuner, I think it is worth it to buy a simple $15
to $100 antenna so you are not totally dependent on the cable system or
satellite for TV. The Samsung DTB-H260F is a recently introduced set top
box ATSC tuner which is getting excellent marks for performance, but can
be hard to find.

Two good starting points for OTA info: www.antennaweb.org for where
your digital stations are and
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ISSUES/erecting_antenna.html for technical
info and background. FOr an antenna, in general, steer away from the
over priced antennas with built-in crappy amplifiers. Go for antennas
that look like antennas, not something out of a home decorating magazine.

Alan F

If you've been reading here and in the dbstalk forums, it appears that
both Dish and Direct are going to be 'realigning' packages with the
bottom line being the rates will be going up.

Locally, we have Mediacom and you are right, Sinclair and they are
battling it out. I suspect that in the end the prices at Mediacom will
go up to reflect the soon to pay higher costs to them.

If Sinclair can do it, then surely the other content providers won't be
far behind. This does not bode well for us consumers.

Sorry but totally wrong. The local affiliate is not in competition with
Charter. It is in competition with all the other things viewers can choose
to watch besides their station. Their revenues come from ads, period.

What they are in effect saying to viewers is "We would like you to watch
our local news instead of the other guys. We would also like you to watch
CBS instead of any other network (because that allows us to sell more
ads). However; we have just made a decision that will make it a LOT harder
for a large segment of our market to watch us".

They are shooting themselves in the foot and Charter knows it. They are
calling the affiliate's bluff and will likely prevail.


Many people I know are dropping cable because:

1. They couldn't get several local HD signals on cable, for the same reason:
the local station wants money.
2. They had to set up antenna to get it. Once it's up,
3. They realized what they can get with a simple antenna, and
4. They don't need to pay to get most of they are watching.

Of course this only works if you're watching broadcasting network programs
most of the time. Many people had to sign up for cable to get broadcasting
programs because of the quality and trouble of getting these analog signal
OTA. Now with digital broadcasting, it's changed.

Unfortunately not for me because I do not watch broadcasting programs other
than some sports.

On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 16:29:08 -0500, wbertram wrote:



Wes Newell wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:

Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay to
broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is free
ota. no more csi in hd for me

Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their competition to
give them something for free that they can turn around and sell. What
Charter has been doing by selling it without paying anything for it is the
same as if I had free lunches delivered from a charity orginization to my
place of business and sold them. Great for me. Bad for the chraity, and
bad for the customer in the end since he could have gotten the free lunch
too.


I beg to differ with you on this. The CBS station has been already been
paid by their advertisers. If they can reach more viewers by having
their signals available to cable viewers, then they can charge the
advertisers more. If the CBS station is available to fewer viewers,
then the advertisers will pay less. The CBS station is trying to double dip.

You can disagree all you want that doesn't change the facts. You say CBS
is trying to double dip. I say Charter is trying to resale someone
elses content without paying for it. Do you think the local station gets
the broadcast for free from CBS? Do you think the producers just give the
shows to CBS? And I suppose you think that all the actors don't get paid
either? yes, there are lots of cost, and Charter needs to pay their share
if they want to broadcast it just as they'd have to pay for peanuts if
they wanted to give you all a pack of peanuts a month. Which IMO, is about
all a month's worth of cable would be worth.:-)

If a viewer can receive CBS OTA for free, more power to them.


Thanks, I receive all the networks plus some independents free ota.

If they can't, then it is to CBS's advantage to make the signal
available to the viewer without trying to double dip.

So, you think Charter should benefit from the fruits of the labors and
capitol investments made by the local station, without themselves having
to spend a dime? Charter pays for HBO, and all the other cable channels.
Please explain in reasonable terms why they should not have to pay one
company for providing content when they pay all the rest. I think you are
just a little misguided.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm

On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 21:44:09 +0000, Rick Brandt wrote:

Wes Newell wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:35:47 -0600, wrote:

Charter dropped Cbs hdtv here in st. Louis. cbs wants charter to pay
to broadcast it. and charter don't want to pay for channel that is
free ota. no more csi in hd for me

Why don't you hook up an OTA antenna?

My perspective on this is simple. Charter is pay TV. They charge their
customers to use their service. Why would they expect their competition
to give them something for free that they can turn around and sell.
What Charter has been doing by selling it without paying anything for
it is the same as if I had free lunches delivered from a charity
orginization to my place of business and sold them. Great for me. Bad
for the chraity, and bad for the customer in the end since he could
have gotten the free lunch too.

Sorry but totally wrong. The local affiliate is not in competition with
Charter.

You think not? If everyone goes to cable and/or sat, they have no market
at all. IOW's they go out of business, or they are left to the whelms of
the cable co. No, I'm not wrong.:-)

It is in competition with all the other things viewers can choose to
watch besides their station. Their revenues come from ads, period.

Right, and that is the competition you just said there was none of.:-)

What they are in effect saying to viewers is "We would like you to watch
our local news instead of the other guys. We would also like you to
watch CBS instead of any other network (because that allows us to sell
more ads). However; we have just made a decision that will make it a LOT
harder for a large segment of our market to watch us".

That's right. Like any busines does, they try to get the upper hand on the
competiiton. The local stations don't want you going to cable. They want
you OTA. This keeps you as viewers. So what they are fighting for is you
or rather your vewing hours.

They are shooting themselves in the foot and Charter knows it. They are
calling the affiliate's bluff and will likely prevail.

Prevail in what? They'll either pay a certain amount per customer or lose
the local feed. When that happens, don't blame the local station, blame
Charter for trying to get something for nothing.

I wonder why all the fuss over this. Everyone that has cable or sat tells
me how wonderful it is. If it's so damn wonderful, why do you need the
local feeds?:-)

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm