TV Blog

By RG

January 7, 2008 4:22 PM | Link to this

The problem I have with satellite is them charging for each tv hookup. I have 5 cable hookups in the house. Only 1 or 2 are being used at a time though. The additional fee for each hookup makes satellite too expensive for me.

By Tom

January 5, 2008 8:56 PM | Link to this

I have DirecTV and love it. My only gripe is, as others have said, KXAN will not allow DirecTV to transmit the KXAN HD signal. I have left numerous voice messages and sent emails to KXAN to ask why. There is NEVER a return call or email.
All the other Austin stations, except KXAN, do allow HD signal transmission. The Suddenlink uproar does not surprise me at all.

By RE: EricG

January 5, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

Eric, go look at many of the comments regarding U-Verse at Uverseusers.com. If you watch HD at all, you will not be satisfied.

I was initially extremely excited about U-Verse being available until I actually saw how bad the HD signal was in person. As much as I hate Suddenlink, their HD feed is almost as good as OTA. U-Verse compresses their signal way too much.

Also only being able to have 1 DVR, watch only 1 HD program at a time, and slow internet speeds are large negative aspects of the service.

If you don't watch HD programs, it will probably be a good choice for you. If you do, I suspect you'll be disappointed.

By Marc

January 4, 2008 10:52 PM | Link to this

Josh,

Why is Eric going to loose NBC HD content by switching to UVerse? I have UVerse (I also live in Leander) and they carry all of the local HD channels as well as roughly 34 additional HD channels. He's not loosing anything, he's gaining a bunch. I've had U-Verse for about a month now and it is fantastic.

By EricG

January 4, 2008 9:52 PM | Link to this

JoshD, unless I'm missing something obvious, Uverse does include NBC HD. I just double-checked the channel guide again, and all local HD channels are included. Not only that, but for the same cost/month that I'm paying for Suddenlink's basic tier w/o HD (i.e., local programming + CSPAN) and internet service, I will get 200 channels + internet through ATT (and that's not a teaser rate). As long as it works as advertised, it seems like a no-brainer.

By Roger

January 4, 2008 8:41 PM | Link to this

As a Suddenlink customer, I'm glad about getting KCEN. Which is more important, getting NBC HD or losing out on local news to a station which I never watched news on anyway? I'll take the HD content. If KXAN thought the customers were behind them, why did they remove the message board on this topic from their site? Fair market value is what people will pay not what you want to get paid. I've got a pair of old shoes, will someone give me fair market value of $1 million?

By Follow the money

January 4, 2008 6:51 PM | Link to this

It doesn't take Perry Mason to figure out what is going on.

Who owns U-Verse?
Who is in negotiations to purchase/merge EchoStar?
Who owns LIN TV?

By Joe Sink

January 4, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

Alise.. Your points are well taken, but inaccurate. There are FCC laws restricting cable systems and sat providers from importing out-of-town stations (like Oshkosh, WI, the example you cited).

Suddenlink was able to carry KCEN in Waco because of a very limited exception in the FCC rules.

Cable systems in the Austin METRO counties (like Travis) can only carry out-of-market stations IF they black out syndicated and network programming (like NBC shows, Wheel of Fortune, etc...) This protects the local Austin stations from outside competition.

HOWEVER... if the FCC considers an out-of-market station to be "significantly viewed" in your county, those black-out rules are waived. KCEN is considering to be "significantly viewed" in Williamson County, where Suudenlink is based. In fact, cable systems in Jarrell, Florence, etc... have carried all 3 Waco stations for years with no black-outs. Back in the 70s, KCEN was even on Austin's cable system.

This same exception applies to Hays County. It's why you can get all the San Antonio stations on the San Marcos cable system.

Just a little FCC primer. It gets complicated.

By Josh D

January 4, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

Eric, You realize you're going to lose NBC HD content, right? It's funny, but I'm now envious of Suddenlink customers! Trying to get DTV to switch to KCEN, too, just so we can get NBC HD!

By EricG

January 4, 2008 4:11 PM | Link to this

Regarding the comment/FUD about ATT Uverse customers needing to fear that their local programming could be replaced with non-local alternatives: that's just crazy. To think that the infrastructure that carries the television content (cable, TVoIP, satellite, etc.) has any influence on how likely it is that a provider will swap local for non-local, is silly. As we've just seen, any TV delivery mechanism can experience this problem, including cable. And given the multiple competitive alternatives, consumers can just switch to a provider that gave them what they wanted, including local content, if that's what was most important to them.

I'm currently a Suddenlink customer in Leander, and I'm switching to Uverse ASAP (my install is next week). Maybe Suddenlink did have the moral high ground, or maybe they didn't - I don't care. All I know is that NBC disappeared for a bit from my television, and has now been replaced with something from Temple. I was annoyed, so I sought out better alternatives, and Uverse was it. It's not my responsibility to support my local cable provider while they try to negotiate a competitive rate with the content provider.

By Josh D

January 4, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

I don't believe it works that way, Alise. The satallite companies infrastructure would allow them to do that today, but there are legal restrictions about who can be broadcast where. Suddenlink was fortunate that the region in question was legally allowed to recieve KCEN's feed. See: http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=TV37674.html

FWIW, Most that I have talked to find little value in the local affiliates anyway. They harp on their news value, because that's really the only thing they add. Other local programming is all but dead. Personally, the only time I have any "need" to watch local news is for weather and traffic, and even that coverage is dwarfed by the amount of information now available to us online.

By RE: Jodi

January 4, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

That's great that Uverse carries KXAN - the only problem is HD quality is subpar, you can only have one DVR at a time, and you can only watch one HD channel at once. Until that's fixed, I'll take Suddenlink and KCEN any day.

By Alise

January 4, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

This whole spat is so interesting to me. And the logical outcome of Suddenlink's actions are evading everyone.

It takes two to negotiate and if one party refuses every offer from the other party, negotiation ends.

U-Verse, which appears to be an option right now, might turn out to be your worst nightmare: If at&t cannot reach retransmission agreements with local stations, then, like Sudden, they are apparently free to import another, willing station. What you probably don't know is that at&t isn't building a cable tv system, they're building a nationwide computer network capable of carrying tv stations. With a nationwide system, it wouldn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that at&t can just start shopping around for the best deal in Network television from whatever local station is willing to provide it. Even if those stations are in Oshkosh, by gosh.

You, dear viewers, might someday find that all your ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox/WC network stations are not your local stations at all, but somebody else's.

Dear viewers, you know how a station stays in business, do you not? It sells things. It sells viewers, bundled in groups of a thousand, to advertisers. Now, if none of your network stations are local stations, the local stations you have will start to wither and die. There could be no local news on television after a while, no local public affairs after a while, probably nothing much but network shows and one hour commercials.

Be careful what you wish for.

By NotHappy

January 4, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

May be DirecTV will do the same by going to another NBC station. That way we will get NBC HD. I can always watch my news on any of the other 3 local stations.

By BJ

January 4, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

Way to go Suddenlink! I now have HD NBC, I can always get my news from another local station!

By Jodi

January 4, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this

I'm a spokesperson for AT&T and KXAN is available to Georgetown and Pflugerville residents through our DISH and AT&T U-verse television services. For more information, please call 800-ATT-2020 or check U-verse availability at http://uverse.att.com.

By Winchester

January 4, 2008 8:19 AM | Link to this

KXAN broadcasting the 700 Club, and their affiliation with a talk radio station whose programming is ultra right wing brings its news department into question.

By austinights

January 3, 2008 11:39 PM | Link to this

In the corporate game of chess - Suddenlink just took out the rook for KXAN leaving the King's jugular exposed. KXAN's remark about Temple's station not being 'Austin', although true - might not seem as important in the larger scheme of viewing habits. Viewers have alternate channels to catch what's going on with Austin local news. NBC only airs its programs on a specific channel. And, I know if it were me missing out on Friday Night Lights or other shows - I'd be pretty hacked. At least the viewers in the viewing area will have something to watch - even if they might not want to watch it. This should now get real interesting. My money is on an FCC complaint thus resulting in bringing out the big guns.

By JD

January 3, 2008 10:32 PM | Link to this

Ha! Thank you Suddenlink (clap, clap). I got to watch NBC in HD tonite for the first time on my DVR.

LIN wanted to play hardball and it didn't work in their favor. I'll miss the evening newscast, but that's about it. The morning news has been horrible after the set change and on air changes, and I typically watch KEYE now due to the HD newscast.

I hope the loss of 30,000 subscribers will put a dent in KXAN and LIN's advertising revenue as well as drive them down in the ratings.

By Dave G

January 3, 2008 8:50 PM | Link to this

I have not been affected by this Suddenlink vs KXAN mess, but as a former journalist I'm appalled KXAN would post such a slanderous story on their website as "Top News". Not only is this not "Top News" it's not news at all when it is a one-sided completely bias story. As they put it they want "to give you better options than the cable monopoly that currently exists." Wow! This reminds me of yellow journalism. KXAN, you should be ashamed of sinking to such lows. As a news company you are expected to report the news fairly and accurately even if you are part of the story. This is one KXAN viewer that will be looking elsewhere for local news.

By Josh D

January 3, 2008 8:28 PM | Link to this

KXAN's response... wow, just wow.
http://www.kxan.com/Global/story.asp?S=7547931

"Suddenlink Thinks Austin Is The Same As Waco"
Really? As a reputable news organization, you want to take such creative liberties with the title like this? Really?

" This deal forces viewers to watch news relevant to Waco, not Austin, and deprives viewers of local news, sports, and specialty programs."
Hardly. "Forces"?! Oh the drama. What about your coveted rabbit ears, not to mention the other local stations that ARE provided by Suddenlink?

Oh, and by the way KXAN... HD! You're living under a rock if you don't believe NBC viewers are ECSTATIC about finally getting NBC's HD content. You've been bested in just a few days by a Temple/Waco station! Who doesn't appreciate local viewers again?

Finally, thank you KCEN for clarifying what "Fair Market Value" is for NBC content.

Isn't it beautiful when a monopoly (KXAN's rights to NBC in Austin) is busted?

By John

January 3, 2008 8:13 PM | Link to this

What makes this move even better? I found this on the KCEN web site. "KCEN the only locally-owned area TV station. KCEN has been serving Central Texans for 54 years under the same ownership (1953-2007)." Nothing like using the little guy to stick it to the man! http://www.kcentv.com/about.html

By Lester

January 3, 2008 8:10 PM | Link to this

Looks like Mr. Lassberg has forgotten the first rule of business. "Never let them see you sweat". The more he writes, the more I think, WOW !!!! Way to go Suddenlink. NBC programing is NBC Programing, is NBC programing.

By John

January 3, 2008 8:06 PM | Link to this

Way to go Suddenlink!!! I spent nearly two hours this afternoon fiddling with the rabbit years trying to get the KXAN broadcast. My wife had me on a mission since ER is a new episode tonight. Fox 7 came in almost as well as over the cable, but absolutely no luck with KXAN. Why are they always bragging about their big antenna on West Lake Hills? After finally conceding defeat, I hooked the cable back up. What's this...channel 4 is back! Wait a minute; it's the NBC affiliate out of Waco! At first we were a little perplexed. Then we realized that either way, we were getting our NBC broadcasting.
I’ve just read on KXAN’s web site that “Suddenlink thinks Austin is the same as Waco”. Another cheap shot from the LIN Broadcasting people that I’ve come to expect during all of this. Listen, I still don’t care who’s wrong or who’s right. I don’t care about which company owns more stuff. I see two significant differences here. First, Suddenlink immediately offered free antennas to their customers. Maybe not the best solution, but they didn’t have to do that. Can you imagine the time and resources that local Suddenlink employees spent putting together the antenna packages? Second, Suddenlink found an alternative means to supply their customers with NBC programming. To whomever in the Suddenlink organization came up with that solution; BRILLIANT!
I wasn’t too happy about the fact that Suddenlink just raised their basic cable to almost $50 a month. Now I understand why. If LIN Broadcasting had its way, our rates would probably go up another $5 a month. As far as I’m concerned, as a customer, Suddenlink approached everything in these negotiations with their customers in mind. That is plainly evident from the two examples mentioned above. LIN Broadcasting appears to have done nothing except to greatly hurt their local station. Even after bragging it up on this final post to KXAN’s web site. Perhaps if LIN Broadcasting wanted to demand higher than average market value, they should invest more in the local station. I feel bad for some of the previous and current folks at KXAN who have suffered over the years. The trend at KXAN has been more about appearance and less about substance.
Now, let’s see what our neighbors to the North are up to.

By Lester

January 3, 2008 8:05 PM | Link to this

Well, it looks like we just found out what KXAN's fair market value is !!!

By jrt

January 3, 2008 7:15 PM | Link to this

Thank you Suddenlink for KCEN! Finally, I get to see Poker After Dark at 1:05am. Eight NBC stations nationwide refuse to carry this show, including of course, KXAN. I can't believe what KXAN posted on their web site about the situation: "It is also a far more expensive and wasteful proposition for Suddenlink than the modest license fees sought by KXAN." Uh, does anyone believe that?

By emp

January 3, 2008 5:09 PM | Link to this

Wahoo! Thank you Suddenlink. I just turned to channel "4" and was greeted with KCEN in Temple. Halleluja! Now I don't have to remember how to use my VCR; I can just record with my DVR.

By Josh D

January 3, 2008 4:38 PM | Link to this

Suddenlink's latest move is pure awesomeness. Not sure it will withstand a court challenge down the road, but brilliant regardless. To make it even better, Suddenlink customers will come out ahead with NBC HD programs!

http://suddenlink.wordpress.com/2008/01/03/central-tx-nbc-update/

By Marco Martinez

January 3, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this

PR meister? Debunked? Courtney thanks for keeping the dialogue civil and above the belt. Courtney, quite frankly, you and your company come off as being disingenuous and dishonest. LIN TV is operating ONLY in their own financial interest without a care for the general public they should be serving.

This isn't a new development; LIN TV has a track record of requesting significant rate increases from cable operators. KXAN and LIN TV both stated Suddenlink would be "pulling the plug" on KXAN, but in reality LIN TV has a team of lawyers ready to file lawsuits against cable operators rebroadcasting without a contract. This isn't a misreprensation of the facts it is an outright LIE. KXAN continues an attempt to to sway viewers with lies and misleading statements to put pressure on Suddenlink. A KXAN forum was created and when backlash appeared, the forum was censored and ultimately removed. Why? Because the truth about LIN TV was coming out and the public was not the mindless lemmings LIN TV had hoped for.

LIN TV and ONLY LIN TV are holding the KXAN transmission hostage preventing over 30,000 viewers from viewing the signal. A new agreement simply hasn't been reached because LIN TV is is attempting to increase their revenues. Even though LIN TVs 3rd quarter revenues were up 134% compared to a year ago they still want more.

LIN TV and KXAN also continue to try to divert Suddenlink subcribers to competitors (i.e. Echostar). Interestingly enough AT&T that owns much of LIN TV and is in negotiations to buy or merge with Echostar. Conflict of interest? Promoting "fair competition in the market"? No and hell no. When it comes time for KXAN's license renewal there will be a fight and we will see what Kevin Martin and the FCC say about LIN TVs actions.

By austinights

January 3, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

Spelling out reasons either LIN/KXAN or Suddenlink is right v. wrong in either direction is rather pointless. In the end, it comes down to one thing - the viewer's consumer choices. When is the last time a viewer sat down at their TV and cared about the finer points of market share values? Viewers only care about one thing - when they turn on the channel - can they see their selected KXAN program on the cable company's system - hence both would be to blame in my perspective.

30,000 irritated consumers could band together and put a dent in both companies' wallets. It might make them remember next time that a remote control has a lot of power when its turned to a different station - or someone decides to rent a movie or read a book instead.

By Courtney Guertin

January 3, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Sick of the blame game and want your KXAN back? Then you need to hear the facts. Suddenlink’s PR meister has been making some very misleading claims that need to be debunked.

1) This is not, as Suddenlink claims, a case of a small local cable operator being intimidated by a distant TV conglomerate. Suddenlink is one of the ten largest cable operators in the US, headquartered in St. Louis, with cable systems in 20 states and three times LIN’s revenue. Suddenlink came to Austin only four years ago and we’ve been serving the community since 1979.

2) The negotiations breakdown was not, as Suddenlink claims, the result of last-minute demands by LIN or a refusal to negotiate. We have been negotiating for months and LIN has made numerous large concessions to Suddenlink in an effort to reach an agreement. Suddenlink is simply refusing to pay market rate -- less than two cents a day per subscriber -- and much less than Suddenlink is paying for many niche cable channels which have only a fraction of KXAN’s viewership. Ask Suddenlink how much they are paying for MTV, ESPN, FOX News, etc.?

3) Regarding our New Mexico station: Suddenlink has cable systems in several of our markets and it made sense to negotiate them as a group. Suddenlink agreed to that until the last minute (Dec. 19) when they tried to limit the agreement to its Austin systems. We have not ruled out a deal which covers only KXAN but don’t be fooled into thinking this is why an agreement was not reached.

4) Suddenlink accuses LIN of violating the antitrust laws. Suddenlink claims that LIN’s resistance to its last-minute negotiating ploy of excluding all non-Austin signals is somehow illegal. There is no conceivable antitrust violation here. Suddenlink should not charge anyone with “tying” one channel to another. Have you tried to buy a single cable or broadcast channel or self-select a group of channels from Suddenlink? You can’t.

5) KXAN should be free to folks with outdoor antennas, but it should not be free to Suddenlink so they can resell it for tons of money. To make matters worse, they use that money to pay cable channels like ESPN, Lifetime, USA, and FX so they can outbid the broadcast networks for NFL football (and other sports) and for first run dramas and comedies. If broadcast networks and local stations don’t get their fair share of the subscriber fees, they won’t be able to continue to produce competitive quality programming, most importantly, the top-quality local news which is so important to Austin.

We have talked to hundreds of viewers who now see through Suddenlink’s strong-arm PR tactics. Many callers say they have switched to DISH or AT&T’s U-verse and say they are paying less and getting better service than what they were getting with Suddenlink. We want to resolve this, but won’t be bullied and neither should you.

By Ryan

January 2, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

This comes directly from the LIN-TV website, it is the companies values. As you can see servicing their customers beyond their expectations is as the bottom of their list, while superior ROI is at the top.

LIN TV realizes its mission and vision while being guided by these core values:

Provide shareholders with a superior return on investment
Articulate a clear and sound strategy
Respect and trust peers
Build a culture that embraces the new digital environment
Recognize outstanding performers who exceed expectations
Embrace a variety of skills, talents and ideas
Encourage innovation and entrepreneurial style
Set standards for integrity, character, honesty and fairness
Service customers beyond their expectations
Deliver broadcasts with excellence, quality and accuracy
Explore and embrace change in the marketplace

By Ryan J - Pflugerville

January 2, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

I am so sick of having the worst cable offering in town (suddenlink) and not having any options. I spoke with ATT the other day and they said that they would have uverse in most of pflugerville by the end of this year. If Suddenlink does not double their HD line up, get NBC back, and offer "on Demand"; I, along 90% of Pflugerville customers will be gone!

By Mark

January 2, 2008 3:24 PM | Link to this

I subscribe to Suddenlink, although I wouldn't call myself a "faithful client." However, I do appreciate them more after seeing them stand up to LIN-TV. Who needs KXAN anyway? Not only do I not watch any of the shows on that station, but I find it completely laughable that they withdrew a blog because of the lack of KXAN support. What did they expect, that we'd want to PAY for something we should be getting for FREE? Get real KXAN.

Besides, half of the shows on NBC can be viewed for free from the NBC website.

By Bill

January 2, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

I had Suddenlink when taken over from Cox. I was not that happy with their HD programming with only a few HD channels. I therefore canceled SL and went with DISH. I am so happy with DISH, lots of HD and the quality of the picture is far superior than SL. Do yourself a favor check out DISH, find out about the great programming with lots of channels. Cost was about the same as SL, but you get so much more!!!!

By Marc

January 2, 2008 1:57 PM | Link to this

I'm just happy that AT&T U-Verse is available where I live in Leander and that I switched to them about a month ago, dropping Suddenlink. I applaud Suddenlink for standing up to KXAN/LIN over this issue, but the bottom line is its the Suddenlink customers that are really getting the raw end of the deal here.

By NotHappy

January 2, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

I agree with overall sentiment. LIN is playing hardball. They are doing the same in other ways. Local NBC is the only station for which we don't get HD on Directv. All other stations have been able to reach the agreement except NBC. And since there is a local NBC station, I can not subscribe to an east coast or a west coast station even if I am willing to pay for it. Talk about monopoly.

By Sam Deglia

January 2, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

It is time to file a FCC complaint and being the process to challenge KXAN's license renewal. They are clearly not operating in the public interest, have failed to promote "fair competition in the market" and have deliberately and intentionally misrepresented facts to viewers.

I guarantee you multiple parties are willing to broadcast to the Austin Metropolitan area as an NBC affiliate without trying to charge exorbinant fees for rebroadcast rights.

Eric Lassberg should be fired for intentionally misreprenting germane details of the negotiations. It was LIN TV that forced the channel off the air and not Suddenlink. It was KXAN that started a forum, censor and then remove it after viewer backlash.

Call KXAN, LIN TV, KXAN advertisers, the FCC and your politicians and raise hell. LIN TV is holding their signal hostage and misrepresenting the information.

By Pete Abel, Suddenlink

January 2, 2008 8:11 AM | Link to this

With respect to what Joe Sink said about KCEN in Waco, TX -- we are looking into that but currently believe, even with KCAN's refusal to be carried by Suddenlink, they could still block the NBC shows on KCEN if we tried to add the latter station. It's ironic: Cable companies are accused of being a monopoly even though we have significant competition. But local TV stations are granted almost-absolute monopolies by the federal government; they can pull their network signal away from viewers and refuse to allow any other network station to be offered in the same market. LIN-TV makes a big deal about "fair market value," but there's no way to determine "fair market value" for KXAN when LIN-TV has an NBC monopoly in the Austin area.

By Mary in Georgetown

January 2, 2008 7:51 AM | Link to this

Al J's remarks regarding KXAN's co-anchor ("eye candy" "arrested for DWI") are offensive. The person in question is one of very few in Austin who can pronounce names correctly!

We were unhappy with Cox when we moved here; we continue to be unhappy with SuddenLink. People may complain about TimeWarner, but unless you've had to endure another cable provider, you don't know what you're talking about.

By Harry Carr

January 2, 2008 3:22 AM | Link to this

Welcome to the new world, Lin tv is in San Angelo also,we went 1 year with out our two stations.Abilene was the same thing.Now they
transmit signals from Abilene to San Angelo
omly thing here is a sales team.We dont have color vary much of the time.Lin/Nexstar is 2 of the largest jerks there is.

By Joe Sink

January 1, 2008 11:14 PM | Link to this

This kind of retransmission dispute is common between stations and cable companies, and LIN is known to demand exorbitantly high rates for their signals.

I'm pretty sure that Suddenlink could temporarily replace KXAN with KCEN, the NBC station in Temple-Waco. They would just need a retransmission agreement with KCEN. Normally, they would have to black much of KCEN's NBC programming since it's an out-of-market station, but if KXAN refuses to allow carriage, that should be a moot point.

Other cable systems have used out-of-market channels to replace local ones in these disputes before. At least you'd have NBC network programming back.

By David

January 1, 2008 10:11 PM | Link to this

Everyone is paying the price for LIN's ability to determine fair market value (or lack of ability). The inclusion of KXAN-DT on TWC only came about at the last minute prior to the Olympics and is currently carried under a temporary agreement.

In case you did not know, KNVA also has a DT station, but it was not included in the agreement and therefore is not carried on TWC.

While LIN claims that other carriers have recognized the fair market value of their property, it has not been without much strife.

By Dan

January 1, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

Regardless of who is right or wrong--as if that could even be determined at this point--the bottom line is that KXAN won't be missed, but NBC will. Find a local substitute--Waco, Bryan, San Antonio, Dallas or Houston--so we can see the national programming and let's move on. Quit punishing the public.

By Kevin

January 1, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

Will advertisers on KXAN get refunds? Market value on rate card should dwindle down quickly.

By Mike

January 1, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

ABC, NBC, PBS & CBS should be a right for US citizens regardless of their choice of cable providers. To pull these stations off the air due to "Contract Negotiations" is using the public in a way that should be illegal. Suddenlink, NFL & LIN corporations need more money for better lawyers!!!??? How does my congress representative feel about this? RE-REGULATE AND SET THE RATE NATIONALY BEFORE WE HAVE TO PAY FOR EACH SHOW ONE AT A TIME!

By Ralph

January 1, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this

I really do not care whose problem this is with Suddenlink and KXAN. I know I am paying good money to Suddenlink for cable services and am not getting it. It was bad enough when we had Cox cable but Suddenlink is the worse I have ever had. And they just went up on their rates for less coverage by pulling KXAN. Get your fish fried Suddenlink and get on providing us the cable service we are paying for.

By Tom

January 1, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

We are tied to Suddenlink because they (or their predecessor) provided the capital investment to pay for the hard-wired cable system, etc. We need a way to level the competitive market so we can chose from competing cable providers the same way telephone providers now compete. I (we) can do without KXAN. There are many other sources for local news and weather. My 94-year old Mom will sure miss Wheel of Fortune, though!!

By Morris

January 1, 2008 7:32 AM | Link to this

Not sure is right or wrong in this mess but if not resolved ASAP it will be a lose-lose situation for KXAN and Suddenlink.KXAN will drop in the ratings and Suddenlink will lose customers.

By JD

December 31, 2007 9:52 PM | Link to this

I noticed this quote from KXAN's general manager Eric Lassberg made earlier this month on another story, "Ultimately we are in the business to serve the viewer and we feel that we are doing that better than before."

http://www.austin360.com/tv/content/tv/stories/2007/12/1204tvcolumn.html

Funny, KXAN and LIN sure aren't serving this viewer better than before since I don't get KXAN any more. If KXAN were trying to serve the viewer, they would allow Suddenlink to keep broadcasting their signal while negotiations were still ongoing.

By Steve

December 31, 2007 9:10 PM | Link to this

Looks like they're both at fault. I tried Suddenlink (cause they're the only choice for Georgetown) and had them take it out after two days and went back to DTV. No one at Suddenlink even asked me why I was ending the service.

I don't even like watching local news, KXAN or any of the others. Maybe DTV will let me subscribe to one of their national NBC channels, then I could get their shows in HD.

The whole thing is digusting, and sounds like something going on in the 3rd grade.

By BBinGeorgetown

December 31, 2007 8:50 PM | Link to this

I was concerned until I realized that KXAN is a NBC station. Since their local programs are only average and maybe one or two of the NBC programs are watchable, I say find another NBC station (in Texas if possible) and let KXAN sponsors ignore this part of their market. I assume that KXAN will reduce their advertising fees to match their reduced exposure. If you want to get the attention of KXAN, contact their advertising clients. I am not a fan of Suddenlink, but this time it is not their doing.

By phil

December 31, 2007 8:43 PM | Link to this

There's probably plenty of blame on both sides. Suddenlink just raised our basic/expanded cable rates by 7% and this is what we get for our $$. Too many of their cable channels are junk. Why am I paying for a channel for real estate agents trying to sell real estate? Not to mention all the other low quality programming/channels. Bring on ala carte programming selection. If Suddenlink didn't have a strangle hold on broadband cable service in Georgetown we would have been gone long ago. Anyone know of a decent alternate for broadband internet service in Georgetown? Verizon doesn't have DSL in my area and as far as I know there's no wireless service. We need competition and alternatives to these one choice cable companies.

By drew

December 31, 2007 8:11 PM | Link to this

I find it unfortunate that KXAN management failed in the PR battle with Suddenlink. I really could care less about the points of contention in the contract. I would think an NBC affiliate would at least have taken the high road and continued open service despite not being able to reach an agreement. Instead from a PR perspective they have managed to get into a pissing contest with a rather small cable provider and by most counts they seem to be losing the PR battle and yet they are the one with the ‘microphone’.

By Al J

December 31, 2007 7:43 PM | Link to this

Just maybe KXAN thinks their "fair market value" is a tad more than it it really is. When a station gets rid of its best field reporters and keeps a co-anchor for the 5, 6 and 10 o'clock news that is really no more than "eye candy" until she got arrested for DWI and has that branded on her forehead, maybe, just maybe, those are a couple of the reasons their news is usually ranked no higher than 3rd.

By austinights

December 31, 2007 7:15 PM | Link to this

It seems that the two corporations are squared off to fill their own pockets and the viewers are just stuck with whatever result...and viewers don't really have that many good things to say about either.

I just read a bunch of forums about Suddenlink and they were getting blasted left and right from customers in Central Texas and all other areas they service as just cruddy for the most part. As for KXAN, you can just read these comments and see that viewers are pretty digusted.

From a business perspective for LIN-TV, it was interesting to note that earlier in 2007 it announced it was exploring putting itself on the "for sale" block, but as recently as early December that seems to be on hold.

Interesting article on this link:

http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=72325&art_type=10

I think the market will decide the outcome, because just like the TV writers strike - once viewers have had enough - they will turn their attention elsewhere and getting them back will be more costly than having had the conflict in the first place.

By alan

December 31, 2007 7:12 PM | Link to this

Not just Pflugerville! What's wrong with the political leadership in Georgetown? It seems as if none of the towns surrounding Austin like to provide much competition in the cable market. We are moving to Escalera Ranch which only provides Suddenlink while Time Warner is available directly across the highway. What's wrong with being able to choose between these two instead of having only one choice?

By Bob

December 31, 2007 7:02 PM | Link to this

There is a very simple way to determine who is at fault here. Which entity charges you money to provide KXAN's signal? If you want to complain to someone, call the one that is not delivering what they are charging you for.

By Dan

December 31, 2007 5:21 PM | Link to this

This is what happens when there's no viable competition in the cable market. I hope the political leadership in Pflugerville is paying attention.

By Tammy

December 31, 2007 5:20 PM | Link to this

I also noticed that KXAN has removed all comments from their discussion page when it became apparent that most of the posters were favoring on the side of Suddenlink. Seems to me we are dealing with a spoiled brat of a station with KXAN. Sorry, I can get my news anywhere. KXAN just isn't as superior in the local broadcast department as they seem to feel they are. They can be replaced. And if you ask me, I think a lot of their viewers will realize this, after all this nonsense.

By Joe

December 31, 2007 4:52 PM | Link to this

Doesn't Waco have an NBC station? Dump KXAN and pick up Waco's, I could care less. In the meantime I guess I'll be searching the torrent sites for the few NBC programs I watch

By Sammyj

December 31, 2007 4:33 PM | Link to this

Hooray for Suddenlink! I say stand up to the greedy LIN-TV and petition the FCC for permission to carry an alternative NBC affiliate. Broadcast TV's revenue stream is its ads, which the distributors cable and satellite help to propagate. True, the distributors are exacting an HD fee from their customers, that LIN-TV wants a piece of... but do they deserve a cut of the action when it's all the distributor's costs to deliver the HD bandwidth? Pete Abel is right, LIN-TV wants their ad revenue supplemented by a per-user fee. No! We users pay enough watching their 20 minutes of advertising per hour!

By Chris

December 31, 2007 4:21 PM | Link to this

First: Over the past few years our cable bill has increased and our customer satisfaction decreased. The removal of one of the basic channels (KXAN) is simply another example of the customer being caught in the middle.
Second: The satellite providers in my area are really no better with their current service and support. Enough said there....
Third: I think we should cool off some time and let Suddenlink and LIN work it out. I say this in hopes that we will not see another cable rate hike as a direct result of this corp spat.

Bottom line: Shame on LIN and Suddenlink for not focusing on the customer.

By Robin

December 31, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

As a resident of Pflugerville, I'm not happy about what is happening. At first I was all set to blame this on Suddenlink who I have not been happy with, but after doing more research I see that LIN is the primary reason for this and this isn't the first time they have done this in other markets.

I sent an email to KXAN and just simply said that they needed to do the right thing and think about their viewers instead of their profit margin which is their only concern. We don't mean anything to them. I will start enjoying the news on KEYE and watch all of my NBC shows online.

By rogelio

December 31, 2007 3:51 PM | Link to this

Stop whining about who's right and who's wrong in this debate. You've all become so attached to that stupid wire coming out of the wall that you forget that you can get KXAN for FREE by just hooking up a pair of rabbit ears to your TV. A hassle, sure. But if you live in those areas affected this is your cheapest option. Or better yet, just turn off the damn TV and get on with your lives. Remember, reality was not created for entertainment!!!

By John

December 31, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

We must remember, as consumers, we have a choice in this matter. I’ve been considering the alternatives to Suddenlink for awhile. Maybe this is the time to make the switch. Yes Suddenlink, there are alternatives in my market. As for KXAN, their bread and butter is their advertising. I hate to take it out on their advertisers, but I see no other option. For the next month, I will absolutely avoid any company or service advertised on KXAN. I will also be avoiding ALL of their news coverage. I encourage anyone who reads this to do the same.

By John

December 31, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

Another scheme by large companies to line the pockets of their executives and shareholders while sticking it to their customers. I can’t believe the LIN and Suddenlink have not been able negotiate an agreement. There’s absolutely no reason this should have gotten to the point of affecting the customer. Key employees involved in this negotiation for each party need to be replaced with employees who can get things done. Obviously the current staff is not capable of providing the best service to their customers. Both of you need to stop the finger pointing and act like adults.

By brian

December 31, 2007 2:35 PM | Link to this

Will my suddenlink bill be credited since I'm not getting what I'm paying for?

Williamson County is limited in its TV and high speed internet options so we are stuck suddenlink.

By code51

December 31, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this

This is exactly why I no longer have Suddenlink. A terrible company. They don't have a clue on how to run a business. Competition need not worry. They bite. Cox was much better. Time-Warner is far superior. I feel bad for Georgetown, Pflugerville and Leander. These cities deserve much better. Cancel your Suddenlink account and go with Dish Network or Direct TV. It is worth it.

By JD

December 31, 2007 2:02 PM | Link to this

Amazing, KXAN deleted all of the comments from their website regarding this situation. Most of the comments were *against* KXAN regarding their greed over this situation. Funny, KXAN suggest customer's swtich to Echostar, but not DTV. Could this be because they've pulled this same stunt with DTV and HD re-transmit rights?

Quit being greedy LIN and give me my NBC back. AALL of the other local stations have signed agreements except KXAN and LIN.

By Brian

December 31, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

Suddenlink has had horrible service ever since they came to Georgetown. This comes as no suprise since they appear to be not focused on the customer.

By Last Resort

December 31, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this

If all else fails, plug in the rabbit ears.

By Pete Abel, Suddenlink

December 31, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this

To respond to Carl's point, I appreciate everyone's frustration, but a note of caution based on prior experience: There’s a good chance the satellite companies will be in a similar situation in the future with KXAN. Case in point: In Bossier City, Louisiana, we had a dispute earlier this year with a TV station there. We finally reached an agreement and the station was never taken away from customers, but prior to reaching that agreement, the TV station kept telling customers to switch to satellite TV. Today, guess what’s happening in that same area with that same TV station? They’re in a fight with Dish Network, and the TV station is threatening to pull it’s signal away from Dish.

Bottomline: Even when the cable, satellite, and other companies offer economic consideration to TV stations, the stations are saying “not enough.” At what point do consumers, cable, satellite, and phone companies get a say in this matter? Do we give TV stations whatever they want, or do we try to negotiate reasonable deals? And how can we negotiate reasonable deals when TV station owners are allowed to simply storm away from the negotiating table and take their stations away from viewers?

Despite of all that, Suddenlink is ready and willing to continue negotiations with LIN/KXAN and we are willing to reach a fair agreement with them. Unforatunately, right now, LIN-TV holds all the cards.

By Adam

December 31, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this

What bother's me is that Suddenlink is the only cable game in town, unless you want to go with a dish product.

Where is Time Warner or AT&T. No Michelle Valles, this sucks!!

By Jeff

December 31, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this

This is like watching the wannabes on a music board or a pro wrestling forum. It is in the public interest for the cable to carry the TV station. The station has an obligation to the public, too. It looks like these cable deals are going to end up leading to increased regulation from the feds if things do not straighten up. I am sick of the fingerpointing. Go badmouth Hulk Hogan or Bruce Springsteen if you want, but put the cable TV back on for the people you serve. Both of you GO TO YOUR ROOMS.

By concerned

December 31, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this

...and yet, LIN (KXAN)employees will bear the brunt of corporate greed.

Did this happen with CW?

...and what about the rumors of layoffs at that station?

By ron

December 31, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

Steve: Since laws were changed in 1992, "Must carry" only applies if the station elects to demand it. But, in that case, they can't use extortion tactics to try and squeeze money out of cable operators... the cable operator has to provide a channel, but also doesn't have to pay a cent back to the station.

Now we see the real truth... this isn't even about paying for HD, it's about paying for stations that aren't even in Texas?? Way to go LIN... you're making Sinclair look like a saint in the broadcasting industry.

Side note: I think it's interesting that KXAN has removed the ability to post comments from their propaganda page on this issue... so much for open solicitation of feedback from their viewers.

By Rick

December 31, 2007 11:32 AM | Link to this

LIN has been known for playing hardball with anyone wanting to retransmit their signals. So far both DirecTV and Dish Network have not been able to get rights for any high definition channels in any city for LIN stations, including KXAN and KNVA in Austin, DirecTV customers in Austin need to use an antenna to get those two stations in HD.

By carl

December 31, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

If we all decide to drop Suddenlink and go with another provider(i.e. DISH) we will see KXAN back before the end of the day. Call sunddenlink and CANCEL YOUR CABLE!!

By steve

December 31, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

Isn't the "Must Carry" rule by the FCC still in force? That rule provided that all cable operators were to carry broadcast stations in their outlined area.

I know a lot has changed since I studied cable television in college but I thought that was one of those old "stand by" regulations cable operators were obligated to follow, as per the FCC.