PDA

View Full Version : Insight and Sinclair reach agreement


KevinP
12-23-2005, 12:17 PM
Looks like Sinclair has now reached an agreement with WOW and Insight within a couple of days. Maybe Time Warner will follow suit soon. I remember reading an article last year that insight would drop the local sinclair stations on 12/31/05, so I had my Dad buy an antenna last week to protect himself in case they did right before the Fiesta Bowl. I guess he doesnt need it. The Fiesta Bowl must be putting some weight on these corporations to work out the carriage agreements.

Sinclair Announces Analogue and Digital Cable Carriage With Insight Communications
Friday December 23, 8:30 am ET


BALTIMORE, Dec. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SBGI - News) is pleased to announce that it has reached a multi-year retransmission consent agreement providing for the analogue and digital cable carriage for television stations in eight of Sinclair's markets by Insight Communications cable systems, as well as providing for the carriage of multicast channels.
The markets which will be able to receive Sinclair owned, operated and/or programmed television station signals in high definition on Insight's cable systems are:


WICS/WICD (ABC 15/ABC 20) in Champaign/Springfield, IL
WDKY (FOX 56) in Lexington, KY
WYZZ (FOX 43) in Peoria, IL
WSYX (ABC 6) and WTTE (FOX 28) in Columbus, OH
WSTR (WB 64) in Cincinnati, OH
WKEF (ABC 22) and WRGT (FOX 45) in Dayton, OH

WZTV (FOX 17) and WUXP (UPN 30) in Nashville, TN and WMSN (FOX 47) in Madison, WI will also be available on a limited number of Insight cable systems in certain markets.

Barry Faber, Sinclair's Vice President and General Counsel, commented, "We are pleased to have reached an agreement beneficial to all parties involved. This agreement was made possible because Insight recognized the value of being able to carry our signals, which allowed for an appropriate economic agreement to be reached."

Sinclair has previously indicated that it does not provide cable operators with its digital signals without receiving adequate consideration. Sinclair continues to negotiate with other cable systems, and as a reminder, in those markets and for those cable operators where agreements have not been reached, viewers can access the high definition digital signal for free over-the-air.

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc., one of the largest and most diversified television broadcasting companies, currently owns and operates, programs or provides sales services to 60 television stations in 37 markets. Sinclair's television group reaches approximately 22% of U.S. television households and includes ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, WB, and UPN affiliates.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051223/phf001.html?.v=32

Scott
12-23-2005, 12:56 PM
Wow! Good find KevingP and thanks for posting it here!

digitalfreak
01-02-2006, 09:08 PM
Heh, this is part that kills me:

"Sinclair continues to negotiate with other cable systems, and as a reminder, in those markets and for those cable operators where agreements have not been reached, viewers can access the high definition digital signal for free over-the-air."

So, the cable companies should pay to re-transmit something that is free? God, I hate Sinclair.

zelig2
01-02-2006, 10:31 PM
No kidding, I hate em too.

Anyone notice on the Fiesta Bowl tonight that some text popped up on the bottom of the screen saying "Turn to channel ... to see this game in HD on Insight." Then something about calling to switch from Time Warner.

Real nice.

GenoG
01-03-2006, 12:19 AM
At this point, I would pay a small fee to get ABC HD through Time Warner. I'm fed up with TW and Sinclair in this dispute.

zelig2
01-03-2006, 09:24 PM
I don't see why they don't do what DirectTV and the like do and have a box that allows an antenna to be connected. Then they can even have the box be so smart to just add the channels in at the proper place (700s) and all is well. That would be the best way for them to give Sinclair the finger.

Either that or just sue them saying the signals are free over the air and they're just retransmitting at no cost to the consumer.

KevinGC
01-14-2006, 08:20 AM
Had a tech out at my house Thursday to reconnect my TW cable due to a subcontractor disconnecting the wrong house sometime on Tuesday. I mentioned about the TW/Sinclair mess. (Keep in mind this may or may not be accurate info, but he did seem to know what he was talking about)
According to him, TW paid 80 million for the right to carry ESPNHD, yet Sinclair wants TW to pay 120 million for the right to carry WSYX/WTTE. He also verified that WBNS and WCMH charge nothing. He was not aware of any forthcoming possibility of an agreement.

zelig2
01-15-2006, 12:56 AM
Yikes. That's just insane.

I spit in the general direction of Sinclair...

whitllam
01-15-2006, 11:29 AM
I spit in the general direction of Sinclair...

Noooo...

"I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hampster and your father smelt of elderberries!" - French guard in Monty Python and the Holy Grail

:D

zelig2
01-17-2006, 05:17 PM
After a deal with Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc., WideOpenWest cable television customers will be able to watch Ohio State University in the Fiesta Bowl in high-definition.

Sinclair, which operates WSYX-TV and WTTE-TV, Columbus' ABC and Fox affiliates, said Wednesday it reached an agreement to provide its high-definition broadcast signal to Denver-based WideOpenWest Holdings LLC.

Sinclair has been providing its regular signal to WideOpenWest and other local cable providers free of charge, but has demanded payment for the high-definition signal.

Randy Nungester, head of WideOpenWest's operations in Ohio, said his company is not paying for the high-definition signal but, citing confidentiality, he would not disclose what WideOpenWest is giving Sinclair in the deal.

Sinclair is still negotiating with market leader Time Warner Cable, which has about 320,000 subscribers in Central Ohio. Time Warner receives a high-definition signal free of charge from NBC-owned WCMH-TV and WBNS-TV, which is owned by Columbus' Dispatch Broadcast Group.

Time Warner has been negotiating with Sinclair for "several years," said spokeswoman Judy Barbao, but it's sticking to its refusal to pay extra for the HD feed. Time Warner feels subscribers who spring for high-definition television sets shouldn't have to pay extra for the signal, she said.

The fact that WideOpenWest came to terms won't hurt Time Warner's bargaining position, Barbao said: "We're focusing on our own negotiations."

"Sinclair continues to negotiate with the other Columbus-based cable systems and, as a reminder, viewers can access the high-definition digital signal for free over the air," Dan Mellon, Sinclair's general manager in Columbus, said in a press release.

I just came across this online. It was posted December 21, 2005. It's interesting to see the part that says: "...[WOW] is not paying for the high-definition signal..."

KevinP
01-18-2006, 09:58 AM
The only thing that I can think that Sinclair would want from WOW other than money is the promise that WOW will carry any multi-casted channels that Sinclair offers. I hope this isn't the case. I'd rather have my monthly bill go up by $1 than to see FOX and ABC degraded by multi-casting. If Sinclair's not asking for money I can't believe TW cant get a deal done.

zelig2
01-18-2006, 12:45 PM
My guess is that WOW isn't nearly as big as Time Warner so they don't care as much. If anything they probably hope it'll help pressure TWC into paying for their channels. Does multi-casting even hurt cable people? Since it's a fiber feed from ABC/FOX to Timewarner there's no reason to drop that bit rate, only for when they have to broadcast it. I would think they could just send the full stream of all multicast channels to the cable companies.

KevinP
01-19-2006, 12:03 PM
I'm not sure if multi-casting effects cable, but when channel 10 multicasts the NCAA tournament it looks the same on TW and OTA.

TheCableGuy
01-20-2006, 05:24 PM
It's a no win situation for anybody at this point. If TW caves in and pays Sinclair, you can bet your sweet bippy that the other "free" local HD channels are gonna put their hand out too. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't people already complain about paying too much for cable services anyway? ~sigh~ Negotiate, funny word. Funny in the sense that nobody else expected to be paid for it, so what makes Sinclair feel they should be?
~crawling back to my corner~

rossl
01-20-2006, 09:10 PM
It's a no win situation for anybody at this point. If TW caves in and pays Sinclair, you can bet your sweet bippy that the other "free" local HD channels are gonna put their hand out too. Correct me if I'm wrong, ...

I have been following this for a long time but nobody has ever come out with one crucial element of the argument. Just how much does Sinclair want? Will it raise my cable bill 5 cents, 50 cents, or 5 dollars?

KevinGC
01-21-2006, 08:04 AM
Supposedly from what the tech said that was at my house (see post above), TW had to pay 80 million for the right to carry ESPNHD (nationwide I assume), yet SBG wants 120 million from TW to carry WSYX/WTTE locally.

zelig2
01-21-2006, 11:58 AM
I would imagine if that 120 million number is right then it's for all of the stations that Sinclair owns. From their view point ESPN is only one channel while they have tons of channels from all their stations.