Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Remember How 'Franchise Reform' Was Going To Lower Cable Rates?
FCC laments higher TV prices, fails to mention own failed policies....
(old news - 02:24PM Friday Oct 31 2008)
tags: prices · Video · competition · business · Op/Ed · cable
With cable rate hike season festivities in full gear, the FCC issued their obligatory half-hearted complaint this week about skyrocketing cable rates. Usually such complaints are fielded, met with a few weeks worth of debate over whether cable TV channels should be sold "a la carte," and then quickly ignored. But the message is a little more resilient this year given the struggling economy, or at least so sayeth FCC spokesperson Mary Diamond, who's very concerned about you:
"Over the last decade, average cable rates have more than doubled. And now cable companies are charging consumers more but consumers are receiving less," said spokeswoman Mary Diamond, referring to cable moving some analog channels to more expensive digital-only tiers. "This is an unfortunate trend for families facing increasingly difficult economic times," Diamond said.
Of course FCC boss Kevin Martin spent much of the last few years working with phone company lobbyists to revamp the video franchise system, so AT&T and Verizon would have an easier time getting into the TV business. Unlike cable, the baby bells didn't want towns and cities to have the power to forced them to deploy services into rural America, or deliver the occasional municipal demand -- like free TV in the high school teacher's lounge. But if you remember, the primary selling point for these franchise reform bills by both the FCC and telco lobbyists was that they would be the gateway to lower TV prices. So how's that coming along, anyway?

Well, in the scattered few instances where States or the FCC were supposed to go back and investigate whether franchise reform actually did anything for consumers or their monthly bills, there's an unsurprising lack of followup. In instances where someone actually bothered to track franchise reform's impact on cable TV prices, data shows franchise reform simply resulted in higher rates, the death of public access TV (sorry Wayne, Garth), fewer community improvements, and spotty next-generation infrastructure upgrades

Despite the fact these bills have often resulted in phone companies raising rates too, phone company lobbying front groups like TV4US are still using higher-cable rates to push franchise reform laws in additional states. In reality, most of these bills are really aimed at stripping away State consumer protection laws, legalizing cherry picking and eroding eminent domain rights. They also provide the baby bells with one stop lobbying, by stripping authority from the nation's towns and cities and transferring it to the State. But lower TV prices? Nowhere in sight.

Cable providers are raising TV rates anywhere from 3-11%. Verizon raised the price of FiOSTV 12% earlier this year and will implement new hikes in early 2009. Hikes are not only being seen on programming packages, but across DVR and assorted other hardware and service fees. So while the FCC is busy lamenting higher cable prices, they might want to remember one of their primary policy pushes of the last five years repeatedly promised the exact opposite.

Related:
  1. Is BitTorrent Throttling a Network Neutrality Violation?
  2. Beating Cable in Customer Satisfaction Is No Achievement
  3. Tracking FiOS TV Bundle Price Changes
  4. Comcast, Time Warner Plan Broadband TV
  5. Cable Tries To Stuff The Internet Video Genie Back In The Bottle
  6. Time Warner Cable: Let's Not Talk About Net Neutrality
  7. Time Warner Cable Protests Planned
  8. The Metered Billing Fight Is About To Get Ugly
Forums » Remember How 'Franchise Reform' Was Going To Lower Cable Rates?
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

TWC is supposedly killing PEG

»www.the-signal.com/news/article/5253/
Since franchise reform doesn't require it.. it will disappear.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

FXWG
Premium
join:2000-08-15
Harpers Ferry, WV
clubs:

Re: TWC is supposedly killing PEG

said by en102 See Profile :

»www.the-signal.com/news/article/5253/
Since franchise reform doesn't require it.. it will disappear.
The article says that TWC will not have to support production of the channel. It does not say that TWC is going to get rid of the channel.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

hit the content owners then

if you notice that even in areas where cable fights fios its strictly the TV rates that see constant climbs while data and digital phone hold steady. part of this is things like Disney wanting even more money per customer to carry ESPN(one of the most costly basic cable channels). the the providers certainly are not innocent in this matter, but the fact TV goes up and internet doesnt says something. comcast is doubling speed from 6 to 12 and it stays 42.95. so some blame does lay with the content conglomerates.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable

Re: hit the content owners then

and the government has what say so to the media companies that own the channels? NONE. You are free to go else where for your TV needs and so are the cableTV providers. But lets face it, the government has no control over Disney ABC, Comcast Media, The Big Ten Network, ViaCom, Fox (except for local channels like Lin TV).

So what is going after Disney going to do? Not a damn thing except cost more money going to court when they're sued and the tax payers pay more.
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA

Re: hit the content owners then

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

and the government has what say so to the media companies that own the channels? NONE.
Untrue, the government has complete control over copyright law that all of the media companies depend on and the government can represent the people rather than corporations for a change and make bundling illegal anytime it wants to.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable

Re: hit the content owners then

just because the own the copy right doesnt mean the can just take the copyright away.

if the Feds ever took away copyrighting they would be sued beyond what the gov't could ever pay.

And just by taking the copyright away wouldn't make the bundling illegal.
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA


1 edit

Re: hit the content owners then

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

if the Feds ever took away copyrighting they would be sued beyond what the gov't could ever pay.
The government doesn't have to take copyright away, they just have to make it a condition of copyright that bundling is illegal. The Constitution gives Congress the power to make laws that promote the arts ands sciences (such as copyright) but it doesn't preclude Congress from making bundling cable channels illegal. BTW the government can even make it impossible to win a lawsuit against the government.

LiamJunket
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Ocean City, NJ
·Comcast

said by Kearnstd See Profile :

if you notice that even in areas where cable fights fios its strictly the TV rates that see constant climbs while data and digital phone hold steady. part of this is things like Disney wanting even more money per customer to carry ESPN(one of the most costly basic cable channels). the the providers certainly are not innocent in this matter, but the fact TV goes up and internet doesnt says something. comcast is doubling speed from 6 to 12 and it stays 42.95. so some blame does lay with the content conglomerates.
It is the iron control that the few major entertainment companies have on all forms of TV & Movies that keep these rates high. If the FCC wants to do something to bring down cable TV rates, that is where they should start.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast

Re: hit the content owners then

said by LiamJunket See Profile :

It is the iron control that the few major entertainment companies have on all forms of TV & Movies that keep these rates high. If the FCC wants to do something to bring down cable TV rates, that is where they should start.
absolutely agree. but I would also like them to look at why an HD DVR rental would increase $2/mo. - I have the same box I had last year and there is absolutely no reason I can think of to justify an increase except comcast wants more money.

MadMANN
Premium
join:2005-08-19
·Comcast

Re: hit the content owners then

said by nasadude See Profile :

absolutely agree. but I would also like them to look at why an HD DVR rental would increase $2/mo. - I have the same box I had last year and there is absolutely no reason I can think of to justify an increase except comcast wants more money.
Ok here's two:

1. The content providers citing the increased use of DVRs taking away ad revenue since customers can record their shows and fast forward through commercials.

2. Comcast not wanting to implement the content provider-suggested technology that prevents the FF feature from working on certain channels in exchange for lower rates for their content.

Does Comcast want more money? Sure. Don't we all? They also do not want to make less money providing the same content the majority scream about if taken away.

Do you remember Viacom vs. Dish Network? Guess who won?
beaups

join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH


1 edit
Agree. The content owners are the one's raping us and raising rates and dictating what tiers their channels fall on. BigTen and NFL networks come to mind. It'll get worse before it gets better.

I think the big problem in some of these cases IS the competition. hear me out....for example here in Columbus, Big10 network comes to town and wants ~$1.00/mo from EVERY subscriber on Time Warner's network. TW says no way (thankfully)...then WideOpenWest and other small guys see this as an opportunity and jump all over it advertising "Switch to us to get the Big10 network". TW is forced to cave in and ultimately those costs are passed on to us. The whole thing is a shame.

BF69

join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Re: hit the content owners then

said by beaups See Profile :

Agree. The content owners are the one's raping us and raising rates and dictating what tiers their channels fall on. BigTen and NFL networks come to mind. It'll get worse before it gets better.

I think the big problem in some of these cases IS the competition. hear me out....for example here in Columbus, Big10 network comes to town and wants ~$1.00/mo from EVERY subscriber on Time Warner's network. TW says no way (thankfully)...then WideOpenWest and other small guys see this as an opportunity and jump all over it advertising "Switch to us to get the Big10 network". TW is forced to cave in and ultimately those costs are passed on to us. The whole thing is a shame.
You do realize that Disney is charging nearly $5 for ESPN and ESPN2 yet you complain about 70 cents NFL Network wants.
beaups

join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH

Re: hit the content owners then

It was just an example. I don't know what ESPN USED to charge...so I can't claim it has anything to do with a rate-hike. But the Big10 ransom is NEW...

That said, if Big10 was WORTH $1.00 then Espn is worth $50

BF69

join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Re: hit the content owners then

said by beaups See Profile :

It was just an example. I don't know what ESPN USED to charge...so I can't claim it has anything to do with a rate-hike. But the Big10 ransom is NEW...

That said, if Big10 was WORTH $1.00 then Espn is worth $50
If ESPN and ESPN were moved to sports tier all you non sports customers would see a 10% rate reduction.

kpfx

join:2005-10-28
Kerrville, TX
·RoadRunner Cable

To be honest.... with the NFL channel being so specialized its only worth that $0.70 for 3 months out of the year when they run the (very few) exclusive games that have been pulled from the other networks that previously did.

So for the remaining 9 months of the year you're paying for a totally useless channel that does nothing but replay old games from 4 years ago and regurgitates the same sports stats that I can get online from a million other sources... the cost we pay for the time the channel is actually relevant is closer to $2.80/mo for the 3 months.

That's way too expensive for one football channel... and not worth passing on to all cable customers regardless if they're football fans or not.

PhonePower
Premium
join:2007-07-20
Winnetka, CA
I'm a football fan, but you can't even compare ESPN to the NFL network. You can sell ads on ESPN, NFL network... not so much.

anon14

@direcpc.com

BS competition does not lower prices never has,everything goes up in price.The only thing that will lower prices is regulation from the government to keep all these jackassses from wasting money on failed projects such as BPL.wimax,and whitespace will be the latest failed projects.stop wasting money on this shit and spend it on tech that works,and wire the whole country.there prob. has been enough money wasted to already have that,and then work on higher speed for all

VegasMan
Are We There Yet?

join:2002-11-17
Schaumburg, IL
·AT&T Midwest

Re: hit the content owners then

said by anon14 :

BS competition does not lower prices never has,everything goes up in price.The only thing that will lower prices is regulation from the government to keep all these jackassses from wasting money on failed projects such as BPL.wimax,and whitespace will be the latest failed projects.stop wasting money on this shit and spend it on tech that works,and wire the whole country.there prob. has been enough money wasted to already have that,and then work on higher speed for all
Good thing Verizon didn't listen to you there would be a hell of a lot of people without FIOS.
Hell most of the country would still be on Dial-up.

If the companies don't try these new technologies then how are they to know if they are bad or not? I remember when there was bitching about the cost of Fiber years ago. It's too brittle it will break easy stay with copper it's proven reliable.
--
In need of a Vegas vacation.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

said by Kearnstd See Profile :

the fact TV goes up and internet doesnt says something.
Because VIDEO subs subsidize HSI via higher rates.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee

needforspeed59
Cruise Ship Just Passing Through

join:2001-05-02
Glendale, AZ

Leave to Beaver (the Government)

Or, Government Knows Best. It is like a retarded old sitcom when the government meddles and fixed things. It usually results in untended consequences. Just wait until they get a hold of your health care!
--
Great success! High five!

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest


1 edit

Re: Leave to Beaver (the Government)

said by needforspeed59 See Profile :

Just wait until they get a hold of your health care!
let's review why your comment is misguided:

the "industry is more 'efficient' than government" folk have brought us the destruction of the U.S. economy, stock market, and a deep recession.

but apparently government will REALLY mess things up.


Nick
Purveyor of common sense
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2000-10-29
Smithtown, NY
clubs:

Re: Leave to Beaver (the Government)

Umm, you can already see this in healthcare...

I just renewed my benefits for next year and I have to pay 100$ more for the "same" coverage where the only thing remaining "the same" is the name. They reduced coverage for things like emergency room from 100% to 90%. And I get to pay more for this privilege.
--
Stupidity, like hydrogen, is one of the basic building blocks of the Universe.

Misc
itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Camp Hill, PA

said by morbo See Profile :

said by needforspeed59 See Profile :

Just wait until they get a hold of your health care!
let's review why your comment is misguided:

the "industry is more 'efficient' than government" folk have brought us the destruction of the U.S. economy, stock market, and a deep recession.

but apparently government will REALLY mess things up.

If you consider the CRA (Democratic idea) FORCED banks to loan $$ to people that had no way to afford it and that SOx (another government reg) has messed many businesses up, etc. Yeah, I'd say the government F's plenty up.

Do you really trust the government - the butt of most jokes (and true) to really look out for your best interest?

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest

Re: Leave to Beaver (the Government)

i trust myself to look out for my best interests. i think people that blame government for all our problems are selectively blind. the example i gave shows that private enterprise has fucked up plenty good. sure, government makes mistakes too, but credit default swaps, etc. were private enterprise dream that is imploding our economy. our financial entities are a complete joke and basically insolvent. the system is being held together with kite string. to blame this crisis (the bubble and implosion) on the tiny percentage of folk that received loans that were "forced" by government is ignorant. don't look at the scape goat (the poor people). follow the money trail to find the answers.

Nick
Purveyor of common sense
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2000-10-29
Smithtown, NY
clubs:

Re: Leave to Beaver (the Government)

Short sighted greed got us where were are now.

Greed is good, it makes companies try to out-do one another. The issue we run into is that "management" no longer wants to steer private industry for long term benefits, they just want the quick buck because if they don't produce something huge every 3 months the "street" drops them.
--
Stupidity, like hydrogen, is one of the basic building blocks of the Universe.

Misc

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

said by itguy05 See Profile :

If you consider the CRA (Democratic idea) FORCED banks to loan $$ to people that had no way to afford it
That's not accurate at all. The policy encouraged banks to be more flexible in the "sub-prime" market... It didn't require them to make bad loans, nor did it require them to push and market products based on the belief that real estate would just keep going up and up. That was fallacy, and people did speak out against it, but the profits short term looked so good... screw the after-effects. Until it collapsed, of course...

--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME


1 edit
As a Canadian living in Los Angeles... I actually prefer Govt managed paid for through taxes health care. Its a much more efficient system. You also don't have to sell everything to have the privilege to be pumped up with over priced prescription drugs.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

DaveNJ
No Fear

join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
·Comcast
·Patriot Media
·Cingular Wireless


Hint: When you are healthy government health care sounds great, when you are sick, its the worse then ever created. Oh look how that social security is doing. Remember if its you money you can take the risk, when its the government they wouldnt let you take that risk.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

Re: Leave to Beaver (the Government)

said by DaveNJ See Profile :

Hint: When you are healthy government health care sounds great, when you are sick, its the worse then ever created. Oh look how that social security is doing. Remember if its you money you can take the risk, when its the government they wouldnt let you take that risk.
And the private health care sounds great until the cost bankrupts you, and the health situation costs you your job and then your health insurance is terminated.

Then that "Govt. Plan" starts to look pretty damn good.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

DaveNJ
No Fear

join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
·Comcast
·Patriot Media
·Cingular Wireless

Re: Leave to Beaver (the Government)

said by KrK See Profile :

said by DaveNJ See Profile :

Hint: When you are healthy government health care sounds great, when you are sick, its the worse then ever created. Oh look how that social security is doing. Remember if its you money you can take the risk, when its the government they wouldnt let you take that risk.
And the private health care sounds great until the cost bankrupts you, and the health situation costs you your job and then your health insurance is terminated.

Then that "Govt. Plan" starts to look pretty damn good.
There is already charity care, and medicare. So if your bankrupt there is always something.
--
“Say no to fear. Don’t let anxiety crush your life. Live life free and unfettered.”

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Camp Hill, PA

said by needforspeed59 See Profile :

Or, Government Knows Best. It is like a retarded old sitcom when the government meddles and fixed things. It usually results in untended consequences. Just wait until they get a hold of your health care!
You ain't seen nothing until the Grand Socialist, err, Obama gets elected. Kiss your wallet, freedoms, and anything else good bye.

VegasMan
Are We There Yet?

join:2002-11-17
Schaumburg, IL
·AT&T Midwest

said by needforspeed59 See Profile :

Just wait until they get a hold of your health care!
Uh they did that already. Does HMO ring a bell.
--
In need of a Vegas vacation.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:

"franchise reform" lies


"franchise reform brings lower prices" lies brought to you by telco.

FUD on how a la carte will destroy tv brought to you by cableco.

ninjatutle
Premium

join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA

Re: "franchise reform" lies

Just imagin how higher the Comcast cable bills would be without FiosTV or Uverse

Their greed will catch up with them.
majortom1029

join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY

hmm

What these bills that helped verizon do fios did was just raise rates.

Evrizon sees it as if customers will pay that much for service why should we be left out of the profits. So they raise their rates also.

BF69

join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Re: hmm

said by majortom1029 See Profile :

What these bills that helped verizon do fios did was just raise rates.

Evrizon sees it as if customers will pay that much for service why should we be left out of the profits. So they raise their rates also.
If you think that rates would have stayed the same or gone down had u-verse or Fios not been allowed in those areas you are smoking some wild crack. Odds are rates would have gone up even MORE.
cornelius785

join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA

cherry picking

will you people stop complaing about cherry picking? i bet you people would still be complaining if the picking of towns was completely random. companies that don't make sound decisions could be in a lot of hurt. does it really make sense to deploy fiber in a sparsely populated town? how about a town where the utilities are underground or behind houses (like where i live)? does it make sense to spend a lot of effort deploying fiber in a town where there are lots of apartment buildings knowing full well that it isn't known what the easiest/cheapest/fastest way to wire such a building is? sometimes i wonder if people have any concept of reality, basic concepts in running a business, or don't hate everything that isn't their way on this site.

DaveNJ
No Fear

join:1999-09-01
New Jersey

remenber those people who said this would cure all

I remember being attacked because i was pro-franchise, saying that Verizon or any other company would not deliver. The answer is shared central office.
itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Camp Hill, PA

For the last time, competition does not work...

Say it with me - "COMPETITION DOES NOT WORK."

Think about it. I want to get into XYZ industry. I look around and the going rate for my service is $100 by the established player. I poke around at their financials and find out that gives them decent returns.

As a businessperson, why would I price myself at $75, make 3/4 as much on my return as my competitor? Why would I do that?

If nothing else, I'm going to start at $75 and raise my rates to what the other guy is charging. That way I can make those profits and be a good businessperson.

If you truly think competition brings about lower rates, you're crazy. Basic economic theory states that in order to maximize profit (the goal of EVERY FOR PROFIT BUSINESS) you charge as much as the market will bear.

See 9 replies to this post
mrvid

join:2007-06-19
Levittown, NY


2 edits

Verizon's big chance to prove competition really works

It's going to be interesting to see if Verizon will join the TV rates raising bandwagon. I wouldn't mind but they already charge enough, I feel,for many of the channels & packages they have added.

With the 100 HD channels, they basically packaged them as the Extreme HD package so their making more for that.

With the NHL Center Ice package, they rightfully charge separately for the package as not everyone wants to see all those hockey games.

In a case where the raised price is justified, I can see raising rates, whether its TV, internet or phone but it seems, to me anyway, that they are charging a fair price for all the services they currently offer. Consider too, that if they are fair with their pricing, not only may they win over the FCC & the government, but customers as well. Like the FCC & the government, we just want a fair and reasonable deal for services.
HiDesert

join:2008-08-17

Content providers and channel bundling

The issue is companies like Disney bundling channels. For example, they will increase the cost of lifetime channel or threaten to pull an ABC affiliate (many owned by Disney) or pull ESPN if a cable or Satelite does not want to pay the increased carriage of lifetime. So many channels that may not be that great are tied by other channels through bundling. Yes this could be called extortion. Disney has been known to even pull a ABC network from markets from cable companies not wanting to pay high increases in carriages. Bundling channels and carriage extortion should be regulated and not allowed.. period. Each channel should float or die on its own merit. And sports channels, viewed by a minority should be allowed to be dropped. Channels like ESPN have some of the highest's carriages and for the most part are subsidized by many who never watch them. Its almost impossible to sub to a tier without them.. unless you opt for the most basic tier which has almost nothing.

jake dog

@cox.net

Show them where the money is

Cancel cable.
Cancel fios.
Cancel sattelite.

Put the antenna back on your house. Digital has shown me the light!

Free HD TV over the air. No I'm not a luddite. Just tired of paying to watch commercials. I'm done with it! Don't miss it at all.
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale

join:2003-09-29

Force them to compete

People like competition, so why bother with franchising laws? Do a la carte and make channels compete with one another.

Then again, that requires the FCC to also own up to it's part to play in the current situation, as well as Congress. Then again, they're also in the back pockets of the satellite and cable industry so really it's all just rhetoric anyways until some real changes are made to better the consumer's choices.
--
Moore/Alexander 2008

Conservatives love religious-like aphorisms so here's one: "Freedom isn't free. It's Made in China."
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY

screw franchise reform...

the internet will reform those rates... down to $0
Forums » Remember How 'Franchise Reform' Was Going To Lower Cable Rates?


Saturday, 04-Jul 14:41:30 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9.5 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.