DIRECTV Says it Would Consider Cutting Out Locals to Avoid ‘Driving Business Off a Cliff’

[Taco]

https://cordcuttersnews.com/directv-say ... f-a-cliff/

[km1125]

Just reading the title, I was thinking "are they nuts?", but reading the article it certainly makes sense.

There should be no retransmission fees for any broadcast channels unless those 'redistributors' are allowed to modify the content in some way (by inserting ads or some other mods). Should be the same for cable as well. Those redistributors are actually increasing the reach of the broadcasters and making it easier for viewers to select them. They should be GLAD they are on those lineups!

[MWmetalhead]

The argument broadcast telecasters have made is by bundling retransmission of their programming with cable-only networks, the cable companies' lineup becomes a much better value proposition to subscribers, and therefore, broadcast TV companies should be able to share in that revenue stream.

The other facet of their argument is by placing their channels side-by-side with cable-only channels as part of cable TV packages, viewership of their channels is heavily diluted, thus diminishing exposure for advertising.

Both arguments have a lot of merit, in my opinion. It also is worth noting broadcast TV outlets cannot retransmit cable network programming without permission, so the same should also hold true when the shoe is on the other foot.

That being said - the FCC has tilted the deck too heavily in favor of the broadcast media companies:

1. Greatly restricting retransmission of adjacent market broadcast networks is unfair. The market exclusivity retransmission rules need to be loosened. As an example, the fact eastern Calhoun County and far eastern Ionia County cable subscribers are deprived of Lansing / Jackson market stations on cable, satellite and streaming services is absurd.

2. Broadcasters should be prohibited from forcing cable companies to rebroadcast multiple diginets as a condition of allowing them to rebroadcast mass appeal network affiliate signals.

2. The must-carry rules need to be reformed. A full power signal that airs nothing but informercials, home shopping or other paid programming, say, 75%+ of the time should not be afforded the ability to exercise "must carry." On the other hand, Class A or LPTV signals that can be seen over the air in a majority (by population) of a cable system's service area *should* be given the right to exercise "must carry," subject to a maximum of two programming streams per broadcast station.

[Taco]

I haven't had DirecTV in many years. But are locals included with the packages? If so, consumers should be able to opt out i they want. That is if they aren't interested in locals or if they are able to receive them via an antenna. But yeah, the blackouts are getting out of hand.

[MWmetalhead]

All of their packages include the local channels.

[rugratsonline]

When locals were introduced on DirecTV in the late 1990s and early 2000s, I believe at first you had to pay extra for them.

[MasterB]

The argument broadcast telecasters have made is by bundling retransmission of their programming with cable-only networks, the cable companies' lineup becomes a much better value proposition to subscribers, and therefore, broadcast TV companies should be able to share in that revenue stream.

The other facet of their argument is by placing their channels side-by-side with cable-only channels as part of cable TV packages, viewership of their channels is heavily diluted, thus diminishing exposure for advertising.

Both arguments have a lot of merit, in my opinion. It also is worth noting broadcast TV outlets cannot retransmit cable network programming without permission, so the same should also hold true when the shoe is on the other foot.

That being said - the FCC has tilted the deck too heavily in favor of the broadcast media companies:

1. Greatly restricting retransmission of adjacent market broadcast networks is unfair. The market exclusivity retransmission rules need to be loosened. As an example, the fact eastern Calhoun County and far eastern Ionia County cable subscribers are deprived of Lansing / Jackson market stations on cable, satellite and streaming services is absurd.

2. Broadcasters should be prohibited from forcing cable companies to rebroadcast multiple diginets as a condition of allowing them to rebroadcast mass appeal network affiliate signals.

2. The must-carry rules need to be reformed. A full power signal that airs nothing but informercials, home shopping or other paid programming, say, 75%+ of the time should not be afforded the ability to exercise "must carry." On the other hand, Class A or LPTV signals that can be seen over the air in a majority (by population) of a cable system's service area *should* be given the right to exercise "must carry," subject to a maximum of two programming streams per broadcast station.

I agree with 1 wish that happened with Suckyvision oh, I mean Cablevision when Wood TV went dark for a whole year from Jan 97 to Jan 98 to get NBC from South Bend or Lansing I got Wood TV with rabbit ears. Even the crappy rabbit ears in my bedroom did get NBC out from Lansing it was pretty fizzy but could get a picture, only place to get a picture as all the other TVs was fizzy with sound only. Got a better rabbit ears and got NBC10 Lansing with better picture quality a month before Suckvision and LIN finally agreed to a new deal those 2 didn't like each other at all.

30 years ago Cablvision & Wood didn't agree until about a week before SB28, went dark for a couple of weeks in Jan 96 Cablevision found a loop pole why they got Wood TV back on the air just in time for SB30 I didn't have Suckyvision for those 2 times, Cablevision always seem to get an agreement in place when the Super Bowl was about to happen. I fall of 97 Suckvision & LIN thought there would be no deal. It was about the local weather channel which became WXSP I think LIN blinked first they thought they made a point along with Suckyvision.

I also very much agree with you on number 3 which I thought WZPX when it was nothing but paid programming from 98 to 08 most of the day shouldn't have been must carry on Pay TV even when they had The WB on 22-hour delay PAX/I Suck Network I thought was a waste of space. Cablevision for the first year WZPX was only aired from 6PM to 1AM then went back to TV Guide Channel.

[Jason Kragt]

Whatever happened to satellite receivers that integrated both broadcast and satellite antennas? Are those types of receivers still offered? Back when HD was still somewhat new, I had a Dish Network receiver that seamlessly integrated OTA digital stations with satellite channels--even their program guides. You couldn't tell the difference. You could even record OTA channels to the satellite receiver DVR.

And you got the broadcast subchannels too.

If the satellite providers would then offer packages without locals, that would allow those of us with antennas to still receive everything on one box while bypassing the retransmission fees.

At a minimum, the satellite providers should bring back packages without local channels. It may be inconvenient to switch inputs between satellite and OTA, but no more inconvenient than it is to switch input to a streaming service. We just have to accept that watching TV will never be as easy as it used to be.

Why did the satellite providers drop packages without local channels in the first place? Was it a concession to the local channels so that they would play nice? If so, then it is well past time to bring those packages back. Nobody is playing nice.

[radioandtventhusiast]

I think Dish has a way to integrate OTA antennas with their recievers. Hooking that up will allow you to get the OTA feed on the guide and allow you to record. Dish has encouraged antenna usage in recent years, as carriage disputes are getting out of hand.

[sinklair]

2 real simple options:

1. Drop all local stations and see cable/satellite companies die a quick death.

2. Or unbundle channels and let them set their own rates. You’d probably lose several very unpopular channels. Channels like ESPN which charge a much higher premium than any local station would likely reduce their retrans rates. And local stations would not just keep charging more if competitors have lower rates.

It’s simple supply and demand. Viewers will bail if stations overcharge and don’t provide valuable programming.

It’s not that stations retrans is broken — it’s cable and satellite companies have refused to change their business models. If cable companies gave viewers more control over channel selection and cost, they’d be doing just fine. Streaming services have figured this out and are exploiting the unpopularity and higher cost of their cable competitors.

[HD74]

Is it really that inconvenient to hit input, tv? I'm concerned about society, Gee Whiz! You should just have an antenna hooked up to your TV as part of a preparedness plan. What if things go out? All your local stations have disaster plans to stay on air. And, it's just plain F R E E free!

[Jason Kragt]

Is it really that inconvenient to hit input, tv?

A little bit, yes. Putting the input button prominently on the remote helps.

Don't get me wrong, I think streaming services are great too. I just find it humorous how in the past all you had to do was turn the TV on and you were good to go. Now in order to watch anything you have to find the correct remote control, turn on the TV, turn on the receiver, set the input properly, scroll to the streaming service with the rights to the show you want to watch, wait for the streaming service to load, login, wait, skip past the list of highlighted shows the streaming service wants you to watch, realize that you picked the wrong streaming service, start again, load the other streaming service, wait, skip past the list of shows that streaming service wants you to watch, find your show, figure out which episode you left off at, start the show, skip past the preview of the show the streaming service really wants you to watch, and then watch the show.

I've done that more times than I will admit!

[Taco]

I've heard some rumblings that DirecTV is considering replacing the local channels with a national feed of those networks.

[Jason Kragt]

I've heard some rumblings that DirecTV is considering replacing the local channels with a national feed of those networks.

It will never happen. Broadcasters own the FCC.

[sinklair]

Are you kidding? Big tech owns the FCC. Look at all the regulations faced by TV and radio stations versus practically zero regulations on Google, Meta, etc.