Slashdot Mirror
Comcast In Deal Talks With NBC Universal
schwit1 sent us an LA Times article about another step in the seemingly unending media consolidation. This time it's Cable giant Comcast Corp. looking at NBC. NBC owns a slew of channels, including Bravo, USA and Syfy (who might have the single lamest rebranding since Spike). The article says that it would be far cheaper than the Disney deal Comcast tried to pull off 5 years ago.
The lamest rebranding:
www.theminingcompany.com to www.about.com
also of note:
www.askjeeves.com to www.ask.com
... interesting how the semantics (or maybe it is pragmatics) of a word make any further comment obsolete.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
.....the content, the distribution channel, and the local government-granted monopoly over neighborhoods, then they control the minds of the people.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
While the news came out, Comcast has since denied it is in a deal to purchase NBC Universal.
Granted, this is Comcast who is most certainly looking for ways to expand its monopoly and further control what people watch, but for now, there is no deal for them to purchase NBC Universal.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Well that's just Comcastic!
You mean they've got _4 Million_ dollars laying around?
Critiques of media consolidation involve a number of issues and notions:
That consolidation and globalization of media over the past decade have been massive.
That media consolidation is served by government deregulation and subsidization of
the airwaves.
That media consolidation and globalization are viewed as predecessors of global
capitalism.
That the bottom line of corporate media is profit, not content.
That media industries have become media oligopolies, that is, media conglomerates
are not agents of a democratic citizenry, but of a business and state elite.
That critiques of globalization and corporate power are marginalized.
That media audiences are treated as consumers rather than citizens.
That the traditional notion of media having a public interest obligation has
disappeared.
That democratically-based media outlets have expanded and while marginalized
provide an alternative to corporate media messages.
http://libr.org/amtf//bibliographies/bib.1.pdf
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
Comcast is already playing hardball with DirecTV over Versus.
Syfy makes me think syphillis everytime I see it.
"Chance favors only the prepared mind." -Archimedes
When the deal is complete, Comcast will raise the rates to carry their newly acquired channels to DirecTV, to ridiculously insane levels, just like they did with the Versus channel... all in an effort to try putting DirecTV out of business. After the royal shafting they tried sticking those of us with their Internet service, but not their cable TV service* (which they referred to as "bundling", but which was, in reality, a "satellite tax"), I will never spend another cent with those greedy bastards. Fuck Comcast.**
*I had AT&T Broadband, and when Comcast bought them out, they decided to modify their price structure to bring it in line with the rest of the country (their words). In doing so, my bill went from $32.95/mo., to $37.95, to $42.95, and then to $57.95/mo., in the span of less than 10 months. (No promotional rates were involved, either.) The last increase of FIFTEEN dollars a month was because I didn't have cable TV. Funny that I didn't have it at the beginning, and only paid $32.95 a month to AT&T, for the exact same level of speed and service. As far as I'm concerned, Comcast is even more evil and untrustworthy as Microsoft, which is really saying something. Stay classy, Comcast!
**Come on already, Qwest - where's the FTTH that your commercials keep trying to pitch to me, but I STILL can't get, less than 5 miles from Downtown St. Paul?!?
I've got a further comment...
How about Comcast spend those billions of dollars in cash they they have collected from consumers to.. oh say... UPGRADE THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE!
Build out their system to:
- broadcast more HD cannels
- decrease compression of channels so they are blue ray quality
- SPEED UP MY NET CONNECTION
- add technology so i can select what channels i pay for (i only want news, sports, and science channel, i dont want to pay for Bravo, or QVC, etc)
- SPEED UP MY NET CONNECTION
- etc, im sure you all have good ideas too
Seriously, lets stop living in 2000. Why can't we have internet service (at least in dense metro areas) like Japan or South Korea at 100Mbps??
(who might have the single lamest rebranding since well before Spike)
There, fixed that for you.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Typically Comcast does not comment on Mergers and Acquisition rumors. However, they have come out publicly and denied that there is a deal to acquire NBC. Comcast said, âoeWhile we do not normally comment on merger and acquisition rumors, the report that Comcast has a deal to acquire NBC Universal is inaccurate.â
NBC has not made any comment.
Syfy has the single lamest rebranding since Spike?
I think you're forgetting The Shack
Comcast sucks......... limited channels HD and standard, your bill is never what they say it will be my bill jumped from $69.99 a month to $150.00, and this week i order a new dv recorder box and they offered for a tech to come out and "install" the box for the small fee of $99. i had to laugh. Hate to see what they have in store for us with even more of a monopoly.....
this 'sif-fee' channel all about?
I hope this means good things for my Sheinhardt Wig Company shares!
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Telecom giant Comcast is buying privately held goatse.asia, a top web destination firm, for $3.1 billion in cash, the companies said Friday afternoon. Comcast is set to purchase goatse.asia from private equity firm Hellman & Friedman, which bought the website in 2005 for $1.1 billion in a deal that took the company private. For Comcast, the deal will likely help boost its presence in the area of Internet display advertising, ads on banners, videos and other non-text based types of ads. Goatse.asia specializes on placing and serving banners and other display ads on its prominent Web site. "Comcast is the 800-pound gorilla in online services. They were before this merger and they will be tomorrow so on one level this doesn't change anything," said Derek Brown, an analyst with Cantor Fitzgerald. "But at the same time, this deal clearly has the potential to ignite Comcast's efforts in the display ad market and down the road gives them the opportunity to create a platform that marries both their services and display ads in a way that it will be hard to fathom others imitating," Brown added.
Fabulous, just when we have an alternative to the cable delivery system become viable. . . I am curious how much this plays into Comcast's desire for NBC. They see people making an end run around their monopoly and are implementing this plan to plug the gap.
**sarcasm** Don't see why not, they did such a good job with TechTV.
but at the end of the day, no one has to sit there watching cable television. If Comcast is the big evil monopoly in your area, and you are anti-Comcast, then just don't watch cable*.
Should people in Comcast areas who can't get DSL (for whatever reason) go back to dial-up?
So if the distributor owns the content creator, does that mean no ads? I grew up with paying the equivalent of $20/month for TV and getting no ads, so I found it highly irritating in N. America paying $40/month or more, and being bombarded with the most mindless of advertising.
Dream on.
I live in a state that Comcast doesn't service so I don't have to worry about them much. However I am a big fan of Hulu, which NBC owns a big stake of, right? Would anyone comment on Comcast's trend of business practices and what they might do with their share of Hulu?
if nbc will be run anything like comcasts cable modem division, I assume I will get to watch about 10 minutes of jay lenos new show, then nbc will "go down", at which point I will call into nbc, ask them what the problem is, have them tell me they can see my tv just fine so the problem must be on my end. I'll restart my cable box, but no change. After another 20 minutes on the phone they will tell me more people in my area have reported an issue and that a technician is on the way to the main nbc studio. 45 minutes later nbc will start broadcasting again and the show will be over.
Don't anthropomorphize computers: they hate that.
this 'sif-fee' channel all about?
Sif-fee-liss.
So this would be like AOL buying Time Warner? (I know it was the reverse). These kinds of odd combinations are the signs of executive minds run amock.
Isn't professional wrestling fantasy anyways?
Isn't professional wrestling fantasy anyways?
comcast likely get fcc on them and lose CSN Philly from being cable only.
Recently Comcast's SportsNet took over my Portland Trail Blazers local NBA broadcasting, they've basically held the channel hostage and have failed to negotiate a deal with other providers to carry the channel. Most of the quibble is over cost. There are a ton of people who don't want to deal with Comcast or don't even have Comcast in their area who are blacked out. Communication & content companies need to remain separate. One should not control the other. Comcast should be split into Comcast Communications & Comcast Content if this is the road they want to head down.
I think you are thinking ftc, since there is likely to be trouble merging companies that large with that much market share unless they burn certain parts of their network
Has anyone stepped back and looked at the situation and asked: how the f. does a copper wire utility company grow to be so rich in so little time? Everyone knows it's a monopoly with too much influence over the govt. and regulations. But crap- it has gotten so out of hand! A good friend of mine thinks all utility wires, pipes, etc., should be publicly owned- non profit, and I agree. Think of all the good that money could do back in our hands. I'm proud to say I have not directly contributed $0.01 to Comcast's riches.
How do you split up a cable line or fibre lines between multiple providers? The best way is to have a shared network where it is split fairly between the providers using the line. The maintainer is payed by the providers using it. This is already done with DSL, cable is not required to do so. Problem is, the DSL owner gets an unfair edge and bandwidth over the other providers despite being required to allow others to use it (and still pay them a use fee.)
The solution should be obvious:
A single maintainer handles the lines and spits them at a lower level (frames, packets, or physical bandwidth) and providers then pay a use fee and can all compete evenly with nobody owning the maintainer.
Now some might think a private corp would be good for this-- even though it would still be a monopoly and could abuse the providers using it (who'd get more say than individuals due to our partially broken political system.) I would say the GOVERNMENT should run the monopoly and be accountable to the people. It would lower costs and could run at a loss (investment in local infrastructure to attract business.) This is conceptually the SAME as the roads, water, and sewage in most the USA already. The public right-of-way is what allows interconnections such as roads. Sure we could allow multiple cable wires, power wires, etc cluttering up our public lands but ultimately, that would result in MORE COST to consumers who'd have to pay for all the redundancy. So we grant monopolies and rarely allow multiple grids to be constructed. I've seen too often how government / private monopoly partnerships work; that is to say, they do not work well at all!
I'm NOT saying government run internet (even though they have monitored it already-- being private doesn't help prevent anything.) Government merely becomes the FAIR middle man for others to use the infrastructure, just like the highway system. It would be far better than the DSL owners today who screw the 3rd party providers or cable which has no alternative providers.
Yes, this reasoning can extended into health insurance; but your possible opposition to that sanity doesn't mean you have to attack the whole concept (and by extension water, sewer, power, roads, police, fire, air, etc -- which some fanatics DO already.)
Oh, if your roads, water, sewer suck-- that is YOUR FAULT because you are in charge of it. Stop blaming government like you are not part of it. (assuming you have a democracy-- if your democracy is flawed or a farse, then that is your fault instead.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
"There can be only one"
But in this case, no sword battles and cool lighting effects will be involved.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You think like a ReThuglican Jew
Media consolidation is a bad idea. It delutes variety and competition. There are already two very large multi-media monopolies, Clearchannel and NewsCorp, that have shown how bad the market can become when Government is lobbied to change laws allowing these precedents. Content and distribution should be seperate.
-Eric
Cables for a CITY are NOT cheap. The big problem is LABOR and upkeep. BTW, they are on the phone posts not underground (the cost for underground now would be nuts.) Many people complain about the wires we have already. It takes many switching / hub stations to run these networks; they are not cheap or small.
DSL shares the line to other ISPs already. Its not impossible.
TV and radio will go digital; in my area there is talk of putting it inside a IP packet just so they can try to loophole around the local gov "tax" (they use the public's land for their wires, so they pay rent but the contract is vague in wording and might not cover "internet".) TV is now digital and the huge amount of old TV bandwidth is being wasted. anyhow:
Cable is DEAD. DSL is dead. Both corps are fibre now and the phone corp is now getting to the last mile and replacing that copper too (only 4 miles away from my house now! I can't wait!) Comcast by now has all hubs (over here) copper free and will go the last mile after the phone company starts to hurt them with higher speeds. The old last mile is slowly fading out.
Nothing prevents placing a low level of the network under government control; allowing IP packets to be split between ISPs on the network. Or having the switching stations decide which ISP to connect you to. The biggest cost is the last mile, so the gov could handle just the last mile.
I was involved in the local cable commission so I actually know what I'm talking about.
---
Bridges:
Hey! I often drove down that bridge that fell! The public was cheap on funding roads until just that year WE voted to mandate funds for roads actually goto roads. FYI: The bridge was under construction at the time it fell. It also was a FEDERAL bridge so it wasn't entirely the states responsibility. That having been said, the public hasn't wanted proper upkeep and we get what we deserved (I actually was complaining years beforehand it would take a disaster before we'd fix the bridges.)
Roads are EXPENSIVE especially when you have snow and allow too much weight trucked down it. We built too many fancy roads for what we are willing to maintain. Why? because of property value; upkeep is not sexy.
That having been said, our highway system and roads are some of the best in the world for a nation this spacious.
I said FAIR middle man; not perfect. DSL corps are not fair to those who share their lines. Duopolies are not great competition either.
At least my mayor could get fired for screwing something up instead of a failure bonus or pay raise...
Government is not some corp like Enron to hate-- government is WE THE PEOPLE.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news