AfterDawn: News

Time Warner, Fox unlikely to reach deal over programming

Time Warner Cable and Fox are unlikely to reach a deal, says News Corp. COO Chase Carey, meaning tens of millions of Time Warner subscribers will not receive Fox programming starting January 1st, missing such draws as the Sugar Bowl and popular shows such as Family Guy.

Fox is asking that the cable company pay $1 per subscriber per month for use of Fox and 14 other channels, a giant increase from current licensing fees.

"At this time, it looks like we will not reach an agreement and our channels may very well go off the air in Time Warner Cable systems at midnight tomorrow, December 31," says Carey. "We deeply regret that millions of Fox customers will be deprived of our programming, but we need to receive fair compensation from Time Warner Cable to go forward with them."



When asked about a binding arbitration deal that Time Warner wants to delay the blackout, Carey says: "Some may ask why Fox isn't providing an extension while negotiations continue--the fact is that we've been trying since the summer to negotiate a fair deal and that further extensions simply extend the period of time that Time Warner profits from our marquee programming without fairly compensating Fox for it."

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 30 Dec 2009 16:31

• Previous article

• Job ads seem to confirm XBL headed to Windows Mobile

• Next article

• HBO starts iPhone app

• 21 comments

• pirkster

  The world would be a better place if TimeWarner and Komcast actually had competition in the cable world.
  
  Many places, there's no choice. It's either them or a dish. Cable geographic monopolies.
  
  That's why have (and am *very* happy with) DirecTV.
  
  Pony up Time Warner, there's no free lunch.

  30.12.2009 16:46 #1

• tleewade

  just drop fox they will lose money.

  30.12.2009 16:55 #2

• hendrix04

  This makes it sound like they are loosing the fox OTA stations as well... How is fox forcing them to pay for a station they they can get for free by putting up an antenna?

  30.12.2009 17:03 #3

• beanos66

  Here in the UK Sky TV (Fox) tried this with Virginmedia(cable) and we lost quite a few channels for about a year. I don't know what agreement was eventually made to bring back the sky channels, but in that time I discovered usenet and now only watch about 5% of the sky programming that I used to.

  30.12.2009 17:49 #4

• xnonsuchx

  Originally posted by hendrix04: This makes it sound like they are loosing the fox OTA stations as well... How is fox forcing them to pay for a station they they can get for free by putting up an antenna?Cable providers often have to pay a re-broadcasting license fee for local channels too...but in some cities/states, I think the law REQUIRES them to carry local channels.

  30.12.2009 19:16 #5

• Blackloz

  Sounds Like Fee For Carriage to me.

  30.12.2009 19:20 #6

• NeoandGeo

  Originally posted by pirkster: The world would be a better place if TimeWarner and Komcast actually had competition in the cable world.
  
  Many places, there's no choice. It's either them or a dish. Cable geographic monopolies.
  
  That's why have (and am *very* happy with) DirecTV.
  
  Pony up Time Warner, there's no free lunch.There couldn't even be proper competition when programmers charge more and more per year to all cable/sat companies. Everyone is making money hand over fist, except for the consumer they are bleeding dry.

  30.12.2009 21:53 #7

• KillerBug

  I have Bright House here in Tampa, FL...and FOX is pulling the same crap down here. There is even a big football game coming up (the sugar bowl i think), and many fans have sued Fox just for threatening not to allow them to see it.
  
  This realy is a load. The cable companies do the legwork for Fox. Here in Tampa, Fox has a crummy, low power transmitter...I live less than 5 miles from the station, yet I get stations from 35 miles away in better clarity. The Tampa Bay area is spread out over at least 3 counties, most of which would not be able to recieve the Fox broadcast with rabit ears. If it were not for cable and satelite, they would have almost no viewers, and their advertising space would be worthless. If anything, Fox should have to pay the cable companies for saving them from needing to buy better broadcasting equipment.

  30.12.2009 23:29 #8

• cousinkix

  US Government beauracrats decide just how much a radio stations pays in music royalties. They also dictate how much these broadcasters must pay to stream their programming on line. The same should be done with these damned cable fees. Take it or leave it. These greedy fascist corporations fight amongst themselves; while the paying customers are getting the shaft...

  31.12.2009 01:01 #9

• jemaric

  good ,i'm tired of fox bullsh!T propaganda

  31.12.2009 01:10 #10

• fgamer

  I'm no fan of Time Warner Cable, but I will say FOX is being greedy as hell in demanding a damn $1 price for their stations that already benefit greatly from advertisement for being broadcast to millions of Time Warner Cables customers. (but fox uses the economy as a reason why they need the hike..maybe they should stop spending so much money buying up all the online places like Myspace etc.)
  
  I would hope Time Warner sticks to their guns and show FOX that this type of bull aint gonna fly..both sides will use the customers as a pawn, but overall this is CLEARLY FOX's fault. I won't miss FOX's joke of TV programming anyways (except the NFL..but I watch that OTA anyways :)). And people just hook up the rabbit antennas to your TV if you got a digital/HD TV. I hope FOX loses badly in this. Heck you don't see NBC pulling this crap.. Rupert Murdoch go have a stroke already!!

  31.12.2009 04:56 #11

• tin23uk

  iv never really understood this cable model of consumer pays out the ass to have 90 channels of pure crap, then the channel makes millions from advertising space that wouldnt be sellable if it werent for the consumer watching it in the first place. 20 mins of commercials per hour really is ridiculous, and they wonder why everyone is illegally downloading their tv shows these days.

  31.12.2009 07:01 #12

• SProdigy

  Didn't Time Warner go "to the wire" last year with someone else, like Viacom (CBS/USA/MTV)? Seems to me like TW likes to pinch pennies; we don't see many of those AOL discs in the mail anymore!

  31.12.2009 12:12 #13

• pirkster

  Originally posted by fgamer: I'm no fan of Time Warner Cable, but I will say FOX is being greedy as hell in demanding a damn $1 price for their stations that already benefit greatly from advertisement for being broadcast to millions of Time Warner Cables customers. (but fox uses the economy as a reason why they need the hike..maybe they should stop spending so much money buying up all the online places like Myspace etc.)
  
  I would hope Time Warner sticks to their guns and show FOX that this type of bull aint gonna fly..both sides will use the customers as a pawn, but overall this is CLEARLY FOX's fault. I won't miss FOX's joke of TV programming anyways (except the NFL..but I watch that OTA anyways :)). And people just hook up the rabbit antennas to your TV if you got a digital/HD TV. I hope FOX loses badly in this. Heck you don't see NBC pulling this crap.. Rupert Murdoch go have a stroke already!!Pfft...
  
  It's Fox's product, not TimeWarners. Fox can demand whatever they want for their fair share of revenue they generate FOR the companies that carry their product. That's not "greed."
  
  True greed is what TimeWarner and Komcast do, charge you more while carving more channels out of your lineup.
  
  You think TimeWarner and Komcast will lower prices if they broadcast without the Fox channels? Think again... That's all you need to know to spot who's at fault here.

  31.12.2009 13:30 #14

• headhunt1

  I just received a 16% increase in TWC billing for channels I never ever watch. Greed. Fox supplies an alternative in viewing but we can all just watch BassMasters and be happy.

  31.12.2009 15:40 #15

• fgamer

  Originally posted by pirkster: Originally posted by fgamer: I'm no fan of Time Warner Cable, but I will say FOX is being greedy as hell in demanding a damn $1 price for their stations that already benefit greatly from advertisement for being broadcast to millions of Time Warner Cables customers. (but fox uses the economy as a reason why they need the hike..maybe they should stop spending so much money buying up all the online places like Myspace etc.)
  
  I would hope Time Warner sticks to their guns and show FOX that this type of bull aint gonna fly..both sides will use the customers as a pawn, but overall this is CLEARLY FOX's fault. I won't miss FOX's joke of TV programming anyways (except the NFL..but I watch that OTA anyways :)). And people just hook up the rabbit antennas to your TV if you got a digital/HD TV. I hope FOX loses badly in this. Heck you don't see NBC pulling this crap.. Rupert Murdoch go have a stroke already!!Pfft...
  
  It's Fox's product, not TimeWarners. Fox can demand whatever they want for their fair share of revenue they generate FOR the companies that carry their product. That's not "greed."
  
  True greed is what TimeWarner and Komcast do, charge you more while carving more channels out of your lineup.
  
  You think TimeWarner and Komcast will lower prices if they broadcast without the Fox channels? Think again... That's all you need to know to spot who's at fault here.OK, you say it's not greed what's to say that they don't pull this again and say..better yet our channels are worth $2 per customer? It's ridiculous and I don't see how this is Time Warners fault because they want a nearly 300% increase.lol that's crazy!! It don't matter if it's there's, Time Warner agreed to give them an increase but not by that substantial number so they did their part, FOX is being greedy and using the customers as pawns and using the economic state as an excuse (they are not struggling at all,lol) . If this goes through I assure you you can expect a whole lot of other major networks jumping on board of the >raise my price< bandwagon as well...and who loses in the end? The customers. So keep defending those pigs at FOX. And just for the record I'm not hating on FOX because they want an increase, I'm hating on them because they want an ridiculous increase that will help pinch the pockets of people who are already struggling at a time like this. But it's funny to see FOX still has a few suckers..meaning you!!

  31.12.2009 17:19 #16

• grathan

  I'm gaining respect for Time Warner. Did they end up bending to Cartoon network's extortion attempt? Who needs football on Thrusday.

  31.12.2009 22:14 #17

• KillerBug

  Originally posted by SProdigy: Didn't Time Warner go "to the wire" last year with someone else, like Viacom (CBS/USA/MTV)? Seems to me like TW likes to pinch pennies; we don't see many of those AOL discs in the mail anymore!Thank god...think of all the landfills full of old AOL discs!
  
  I'm all with time warner on this one...if fox wants to charge this much then they deserve to loose the ad revenues.

  31.12.2009 23:08 #18

• defgod

  I have Time Warner and it's 9:35 am 01/01/2010. I still have the local Fox channel and the other Fox networks. When was this supposed to take effect?

  1.1.2010 09:39 #19

• Mozilfox

  Fox can kiss my as_! Along with Hannity and O'Reilly. They can all go to hell.

  1.1.2010 15:59 #20

• Clownzill

  Quote:Originally posted by pirkster: Originally posted by fgamer: I'm no fan of Time Warner Cable, but I will say FOX is being greedy as hell in demanding a damn $1 price for their stations that already benefit greatly from advertisement for being broadcast to millions of Time Warner Cables customers. (but fox uses the economy as a reason why they need the hike..maybe they should stop spending so much money buying up all the online places like Myspace etc.)
  
  I would hope Time Warner sticks to their guns and show FOX that this type of bull aint gonna fly..both sides will use the customers as a pawn, but overall this is CLEARLY FOX's fault. I won't miss FOX's joke of TV programming anyways (except the NFL..but I watch that OTA anyways :)). And people just hook up the rabbit antennas to your TV if you got a digital/HD TV. I hope FOX loses badly in this. Heck you don't see NBC pulling this crap.. Rupert Murdoch go have a stroke already!!Pfft...
  
  It's Fox's product, not TimeWarners. Fox can demand whatever they want for their fair share of revenue they generate FOR the companies that carry their product. That's not "greed."
  
  True greed is what TimeWarner and Komcast do, charge you more while carving more channels out of your lineup.
  
  You think TimeWarner and Komcast will lower prices if they broadcast without the Fox channels? Think again... That's all you need to know to spot who's at fault here.OK, you say it's not greed what's to say that they don't pull this again and say..better yet our channels are worth $2 per customer? It's ridiculous and I don't see how this is Time Warners fault because they want a nearly 300% increase.lol that's crazy!! It don't matter if it's there's, Time Warner agreed to give them an increase but not by that substantial number so they did their part, FOX is being greedy and using the customers as pawns and using the economic state as an excuse (they are not struggling at all,lol) . If this goes through I assure you you can expect a whole lot of other major networks jumping on board of the >raise my price< bandwagon as well...and who loses in the end? The customers. So keep defending those pigs at FOX. And just for the record I'm not hating on FOX because they want an increase, I'm hating on them because they want an ridiculous increase that will help pinch the pockets of people who are already struggling at a time like this. But it's funny to see FOX still has a few suckers..meaning you!!His point is that Fox has the right to charge whatever they want for the product that they produce. Watching Fox programming is a PRIVILEGE and not a RIGHT. Don't get me wrong, I think Fox is being extremely greedy and they are shafting their customers but as a private corporation they have the right to do that with THEIR PRODUCT. The customer also has the right to look towards other media outlets for their programming (or stop watching cable TV all together) which is what they should do if their upset with this situation.

  3.1.2010 13:55 #21