So When Is The Tipping Point ?

[tiggerfan]

I'm not one of those 'we lost Channel X and so U Verse must get it back or else' types.

But IF they do lose some of the other channels (say Food for example) and not get back Hallmark, it could eventually reach a tipping point where many of us do start shopping around.

Just as a matter of speculation I have done some research and it does look like Comcast/Dish/Direct are getting close enough to UV pricing to wipe out much of the advantage of the cheaper UV pricing.

So what point would it be when you would look at moving ?

And to where ?

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

I hope you are aware of all the channels that were removed from the Dish channel lineup last week.  Also, other channels were removed earlier in the year.

[tiggerfan]

Like I said, I'm not rushing off

But if AT&T loses more channels due to smaller size/customer base then they could have issues in future

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

If AT&T has issues as a result of removing 2 channels from it's lineup, Dish Network should be placed in intensive care.

[tiggerfan]

LOL on Dish

I was not referring to just HMC and HMMC but the possibility of the loss of Food/et al

Just speculating here, not sure why you seem so defensive of HM

[CTJon]

Sure there is a tipping point.  Inertia is tough and in this world there is no guarentee that in 6 months where you go will lose the same or similar channels.  I would certainly hurt losing DIY, Food, etc. but would it cause me to change - perhaps over time.  I honestly think all media providers will lose stations for, hopefully, not longer than a few days or weeks. 

On the other side it is a great effort to go from U-verse to ??? - losing all recorded programs, having to learn a new channel lineup and how to use a new DVR.  This can be compounded by those that require a contract.  

We all have a limit but until I reach it I can't say exactly where it will be.

[dhascall ACE - Professor]

FWIW I do not recall Comcast losing any channels in my market, in the 15 years that I had them.  I don't care at all about Hallmark or HMC but Food, DIY and others are a bit more critical, especially to the wife.  If they go, we may have to look at CC again.  So these channels may be your tippers.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

tiggerfan wrote:

LOL on Dish

I was not referring to just HMC and HMMC but the possibility of the loss of Food/et al

Just speculating here, not sure why you seem so defensive of HM

---

Defensive? Hardly!  I personally do not care about the Hallmark channels. 

It's simply hard to understand the messages posted on forum that express how the loss of those 2 channels indicates a dire future for U-verse.  This situation is no different from what other TV providers deal with.  All the major providers have removed channels from their lineups due to a negotiations dispute.  I believe this is the first time this has occurred with U-verse.  It has happened to other providers more than once, but people seems to have short memories or be unaware that this happens.

[terann]

I love Uverse too. But I think you are missing the point of the OP.

I was with Comcast since inception and I don't remember ever getting as many postcards about the potential loss of channels as I have in the 8 months I've had UV.

I also don't care about Hallmark (nor did I care about AMC) but I do like HGTV. Again, not a deal-breaker but I have taken notice.

BUT what will happen when it's time to negotiate Syfy, Discovery, TNT, USA, BBC? Or Nickelodeon, Disney?

I understand everything you are saying but nevertheless, it still makes me feel uneasy. If the small number of subscribers with UV is adversely affecting negotiations, it does not bode well for the future.

It doesn't help that no one from AT&T ever comments on this forum. I actually came to this forum originally to find out from AT&T what was going on with channel negotiations. While I like to read user comments, I really want official comments straight from AT&T. The fact that they won't do that also makes me feel uneasy.

Keep in mind that my comments are from a *fan* of UV. I hated Comcast. But all the same, I feel very uneasy about all of the negotiations going on.

My tipping point? Syfy, BBC, & TNT for me. Nick & Disney for my daughter. Husband would be happy going back to the rabbit-ears and saving money. LOL!

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

terann wrote:

BUT what will happen when it's time to negotiate Syfy, Discovery, TNT, USA, BBC? Or Nickelodeon, Disney?

---

AT&T U-verse has already negotiated carriage agreements with Syfy, Discovery, TNT, USA, BBC, Nickelodeon, and Disney.  That is the reason that those channels are in the lineup. 

[terann]

I realize that but won't there be a time when those agreements expire and have to be re-negotiated?

[flhthemi]

---

tiggerfan wrote:

I'm not one of those 'we lost Channel X and so U Verse must get it back or else' types.

But IF they do lose some of the other channels (say Food for example) and not get back Hallmark, it could eventually reach a tipping point where many of us do start shopping around.

Just as a matter of speculation I have done some research and it does look like Comcast/Dish/Direct are getting close enough to UV pricing to wipe out much of the advantage of the cheaper UV pricing.

So what point would it be when you would look at moving ?

And to where ?

---

When I feel the price has become unreasonable.

Humm...where would I go?? I would probably go back to over the air TV and just use my FreeAgent Theater+ to view Netflix movies and other things I want to see on the TV. We don't really NEED any of these companies to watch TV. We just want it all

[terann]

---

flhthemi wrote:

---

tiggerfan wrote:

I'm not one of those 'we lost Channel X and so U Verse must get it back or else' types.

But IF they do lose some of the other channels (say Food for example) and not get back Hallmark, it could eventually reach a tipping point where many of us do start shopping around.

Just as a matter of speculation I have done some research and it does look like Comcast/Dish/Direct are getting close enough to UV pricing to wipe out much of the advantage of the cheaper UV pricing.

So what point would it be when you would look at moving ?

And to where ?

---

When I feel the price has become unreasonable.

Humm...where would I go?? I would probably go back to over the air TV and just use my FreeAgent Theater+ to view Netflix movies and other things I want to see on the TV. We don't really NEED any of these companies to watch TV. We just want it all

---

Funny, I was thinking the same thing. When I actually look at the guide and count the number of channels actually watched on a regular basis, it does seem ridiculous to pay that kind of money. I certainly wouldn't go from UV back to Comcast. Maybe my husband is right (omg, don't tell him I said that!) and rabbit-ears (plus Netflix) is the way to go.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

terann wrote:

I realize that but won't there be a time when those agreements expire and have to be re-negotiated?

---

Yes, all carriage agreements expire and have to be renegotiated.

The TV channels are like professional athletes.  Once a player's contract expires and it's time to negotiate a new deal, he tries to get more money than he received in his last contract.  In most situations the renegotiations go off without a hitch.  Sometimes the negotiations become contentious and go down to the wire before a new agreement is worked out.  Once in while the parties are too far apart and no deal can be reached, so the player and team part ways.

[johnnybebad]

---

terann wrote:

I love Uverse too. But I think you are missing the point of the OP.

I was with Comcast since inception and I don't remember ever getting as many postcards about the potential loss of channels as I have in the 8 months I've had UV.

I also don't care about Hallmark (nor did I care about AMC) but I do like HGTV. Again, not a deal-breaker but I have taken notice.

BUT what will happen when it's time to negotiate Syfy, Discovery, TNT, USA, BBC? Or Nickelodeon, Disney?

I understand everything you are saying but nevertheless, it still makes me feel uneasy. If the small number of subscribers with UV is adversely affecting negotiations, it does not bode well for the future.

It doesn't help that no one from AT&T ever comments on this forum. I actually came to this forum originally to find out from AT&T what was going on with channel negotiations. While I like to read user comments, I really want official comments straight from AT&T. The fact that they won't do that also makes me feel uneasy.

Keep in mind that my comments are from a *fan* of UV. I hated Comcast. But all the same, I feel very uneasy about all of the negotiations going on.

My tipping point? Syfy, BBC, & TNT for me. Nick & Disney for my daughter. Husband would be happy going back to the rabbit-ears and saving money. LOL!

---

Not to mention that they still don't carry NBA TV, MLB Net, MLB EI, NHL Center Ice,Universal Sports, sub-channels,

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

johnnybebad wrote:

Not to mention that they still don't carry NBA TV, MLB Net, MLB EI, NHL Center Ice,Universal Sports, sub-channels,

---

Universal Sports IS a sub-channel.

[terann]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

---

terann wrote:

I realize that but won't there be a time when those agreements expire and have to be re-negotiated?

---

Yes, all carriage agreements expire and have to be renegotiated.

The TV channels are like professional athletes.  Once a player's contract expires and it's time to negotiate a new deal, he tries to get more money than he received in his last contract.  In most situations the renegotiations go off without a hitch.  Sometimes the negotiations become contentious and go down to the wire before a new agreement is worked out.  Once in while the parties are too far apart and no deal can be reached, so the player and team part ways.

---

O-kaaay...not sure what your point is in regards to my OP? Negotiate or re-negotiate (are you quibbling about the words?), the intent is still the same--to come up with a contract, agreeable to both parties.

Not trying to pick a fight. Just don't understand.

For the reasons stated in my OP, I still feel uneasy about UV.

[dhascall ACE - Professor]

TG - I agree with Teran.  The OP is not talking just about Hallmark.  They are basically saying what channels would UV have to lose to start driving people away.  Obviously the Hallmark's aren't it but IMO some of the next bunch (Food, DIY and so on) could have more of an impact.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

dhascall wrote:

TG - I agree with Teran.  The OP is not talking just about Hallmark.  They are basically saying what channels would UV have to lose to start driving people away.  Obviously the Hallmark's aren't it but IMO some of the next bunch (Food, DIY and so on) could have more of an impact.

---

Losing channels is always a concern for any TV provider. 

In the time that you have had U-verse, how many expired carriage agreements have been successfully renegotiated?  How many channels have been removed from the lineup due to the failure to negotiate a new carriage agreement with the content provider?

[terann]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

---

dhascall wrote:

TG - I agree with Teran.  The OP is not talking just about Hallmark.  They are basically saying what channels would UV have to lose to start driving people away.  Obviously the Hallmark's aren't it but IMO some of the next bunch (Food, DIY and so on) could have more of an impact.

---

Losing channels is always a concern for any TV provider. 

In the time that you have had U-verse, how many expired carriage agreements have been successfully renegotiated?  How many channels have been removed from the lineup due to the failure to negotiate a new carriage agreement with the content provider?

---

Yes, I understand that this is a concern with other TV providers but I'm not a subscriber with them.

I think the important questions for UV are:

How many carriage agreements *will* be expiring over the next year? With whom?

Does the comparably small amount of subcribers to UV (as compared to other companies) have AT&T at a renegotiating disadvantage?

If other agreements have been successfully renegotiated (besides AMC), then maybe it would be to AT&T's advantage to state what those are. It might give subscribers some sense of ease. Unfortunately, between AMC "scroll wars" and Hallmark "is anyone at the negotiating table" (both very public disagreements between parties), you can't help but wonder what will happen when it comes time to renegotiate with one of the bigger channels.

Again, official information can go a long way in easing fears among subscribers. AT&T could use it to their advantage, and since they're not, why?

Just saying.

[Dead_Terrorist]

---

dhascall wrote:

FWIW I do not recall Comcast losing any channels in my market, in the 15 years that I had them.  I don't care at all about Hallmark or HMC but Food, DIY and others are a bit more critical, especially to the wife.  If they go, we may have to look at CC again.  So these channels may be your tippers.

---

I think we're all missing the point. As long as I had TWC and DISH.. I never once received a notice about a channel. The reason, until AT&T got in the game, none of the other providers were following the FCC mandate that "requires" they provide 30 days WRITTEN notice to their customers that they "could potentially" lose content.  AT&T is always under a microscope due to their old monopoly ... so I venture to say they are being overly cautious with all these postcards.  TWC and DISH never once provided me with anything in writing about contracts.. the only notification I received would be when Charlie E would run a crawl across the screen on a channel they were "fighting" with.

IMHO, I think you would see CC and the other companies now sending postcards or whatever to meet the federal regs that they have ignored for years....  Hopefully, someone will eventually change this law as I (me personally) get tired of seeing all of this back and forth...  I'd like to see it change to where "if and when" a channel is removed because of a contract dispute.. a slide gets placed on said channel as to the reason why it's gone..

I don't care if they are "negotiating hard" to keep xxxxxx channel or AT&T is not willing to pay yada yada...   we all know :

"It's all about the Benjamins" ....  

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

Dead_Terrorist wrote:

IMHO, I think you would see CC and the other companies now sending postcards or whatever to meet the federal regs that they have ignored for years....  Hopefully, someone will eventually change this law as I (me personally) get tired of seeing all of this back and forth...  I'd like to see it change to where "if and when" a channel is removed because of a contract dispute.. a slide gets placed on said channel as to the reason why it's gone..

I don't care if they are "negotiating hard" to keep xxxxxx channel or AT&T is not willing to pay yada yada...   we all know :

"It's all about the Benjamins" ....  

---

DT, I agree.  I get tired of the back and forth too.  The notifications do comply with FCC regulations, but they cause a lot of angst among the customers and lead to threads being created like this one.  I would rather not be notified unless a channel is removed.  In the vast majority of cases, negotiations are successful and the channel remains on the air.  The Hallmark situation was an anomaly.

[johnnybebad]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

---

johnnybebad wrote:

Not to mention that they still don't carry NBA TV, MLB Net, MLB EI, NHL Center Ice,Universal Sports, sub-channels,

---

Universal Sports IS a sub-channel.

---

Thanks for the clarification. My neighbor has it with Comcast.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

There is no national broadcast of Universal Sports.  It is carried as a subchannels by NBC affiliates in some markets.  I believe Comcast carries that subchannel in some of it's markets.

[spd2demun ACE - Master]

Think Dead_Terrorist is onto something!

We were prisoners of Cable for nearly 25 yrs.!  What I do recall is MANY notifications about channels being removed from Basic/lower priced-tiers, and moved to higher-priced tiers.  Basically ended up with garbage channels (IMO) unless we upgraded.

Perhaps that is what ATT is trying to avoid, but could still be an option to bring discontinued channels back with an additional subscriber fee.

[bnichols_1]

What I don't understand is why ATT does not help itself. We get a postcard whenever there is some potential bad news (as federal law requires) but not a peep when there is good news. Today, with no fanfare, a new channel (1799) was added to the regular HD tier without any announcement, email, anything. The other day there was an on screen message about something (not programming related) but nothing about a new channel. Why do they hide their good news?

[HDFan]

---

Dead_Terrorist wrote:

---

dhascall wrote:

FWIW I do not recall Comcast losing any channels in my market, in the 15 years that I had them.  I don't care at all about Hallmark or HMC but Food, DIY and others are a bit more critical, especially to the wife.  If they go, we may have to look at CC again.  So these channels may be your tippers.

---

I think we're all missing the point. As long as I had TWC and DISH.. I never once received a notice about a channel. The reason, until AT&T got in the game, none of the other providers were following the FCC mandate that "requires" they provide 30 days WRITTEN notice to their customers that they "could potentially" lose content.  AT&T is always under a microscope due to their old monopoly ... so I venture to say they are being overly cautious with all these postcards.  TWC and DISH never once provided me with anything in writing about contracts.. the only notification I received would be when Charlie E would run a crawl across the screen on a channel they were "fighting" with.

IMHO, I think you would see CC and the other companies now sending postcards or whatever to meet the federal regs that they have ignored for years....  Hopefully, someone will eventually change this law as I (me personally) get tired of seeing all of this back and forth...  I'd like to see it change to where "if and when" a channel is removed because of a contract dispute.. a slide gets placed on said channel as to the reason why it's gone..

I don't care if they are "negotiating hard" to keep xxxxxx channel or AT&T is not willing to pay yada yada...   we all know :

"It's all about the Benjamins" ....  

---

Let's try to be factual.  DT - you are way way off the mark here.

ALL multichannel providers (every cable operator, Dish, DirecTV, FIOS, U-Verse, etc.) offer notice to customers.  This is a FCC regulation. Anytime a channel is moved or deleted there must be 30-day notice.  I can assure you that all providers understand that provision.  (NOTE: There are exceptions to emergencies or unforeseen circumstances ... but trouble with negotiation is not grounds for unforeseen circumstances.)

That said ... the FCC is noticeably quiet on what is required for 30-day notice.  A crawl across the screen on the effective channel is adequate, a bill message counts, a notice in the newspaper legal section is fine, an ad in the newspaper covers the requirement.  AT&T has decided for separate direct mail.  Direct mail also adhers to the FCC requirement.

All companies do 30-days notice, but some companies use different tactics for their notice  

I think another reason the AT&T direct mail tactics have really stuck out is the sheer number of programming contract issues AT&T has had recently.  texasguy was correct earlier by saying all companies have had problems with negotiations and have had to notify customers of possible channel loss.  And texasguy was correct that rarely does that really transition to actual loss of channel.  But texasguy was incorrect when he stated that ALL providers have dropped channels in a programming dispute.  Although DirecTV had a big issue with Versus and certainly Dish currently with Fox, they are big exceptions.  Many cable systems have never dropped a channel - dhascall - you are correct here.

[SomeJoe7777 ACE - Geek]

---

HDFan wrote:
Many cable systems have never dropped a channel - dhascall - you are correct here.

---

If you're a mom-and-pop cable company that has 8000 customers in apartment complexes, it's a lot easier to say "we've never dropped a channel" because those operators typically carry a fraction of the channels that a national operator does.

One of my relatives lives in an apartment complex where the only TV service available is one of these carriers that has monopolized the complex, they carry a grand total of 57 channels.  And about 20 of those are locals.  Between the monopoly that allows them to charge exorbitant prices to the customers, the tiny number of channels, and a very low service level (only about 8 HD channels and no converter boxes), it's easier for them to pay the content providers whatever they want.

[athenian]

---

dhascall wrote:

FWIW I do not recall Comcast losing any channels in my market, in the 15 years that I had them.  

---

Times have definitely changed.  In my market, the last two years have been filled with disputes between various content providers and cable companies.   It seems as though every two months we see newpaper and television ads about some channel being pulled from this or that cable/satellite company.  

We were originally with "ATT Mediaone" but when that was bought by Comcast, we lost a couple of our favorites so we moved to DirecTV.   We were happy with the content on DirecTV but not with the equipment so we decided to take advantage of a U-verse promotion.    We'll re-evaluate in 6 months.   If AT&T loses channels and doesn't improve its On Demand offering, we'll probably return to DirecTV (which by then should have some new boxes).

[dhascall ACE - Professor]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

There is no national broadcast of Universal Sports.  It is carried as a subchannels by NBC affiliates in some markets.  I believe Comcast carries that subchannel in some of it's markets.

---

There may not be any national Universal Sports "channel" at this time but Universal Sports was apparently mentioned in a survey that UV was sending out recently about channels that subscribers would like to see.