Slashdot Mirror


DirecTV Drops Viacom Channels

An anonymous reader writes "DirecTV has dropped all of Viacom's channels. This includes channels such as MTV, Comedy Central, and Nickelodeon. The drop is reported to be over a carrier fee dispute. It appears programming content can magically disappear from satellite, too, and not just from streaming services. Viacom said it was 'because contract talks with DirecTV had “reached an impasse.” DirecTV, in turn, said in a statement that it had offered Viacom “increased fees for their networks going forward; we just can’t afford the extreme increases they are asking for.”' I guess pirating and physical media is the only way to make sure the content we pay for doesn't disappear."

17 of 378 comments (clear)

  1. Well there you go by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you want to see riots in America, this will do it.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Well there you go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you want to see riots in America, this will do it.

      Not if you're with DirecTV.... Viacom's channels have exclusive rights to "Riots in America".

      Of course, if *all* the carriers refuse Viacom's fees, I guess you could say that the revolution will not be televised.

  2. I don't see much to miss by sanosuke001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Aside from a few Comedy Central programs, I don't seem much here that I'd miss. MTV is full of BS "reality" TV and Nick is full of kids shows that are usually no Netfix if you need them and, being kids shows, they probably won't care if they're watching reruns (or notice). So, really, what does Viacom have that is worth paying increased fees anyway? It's not like South Park costs that much to produce (maybe FCC fees?).

    --
    -SaNo
    1. Re:I don't see much to miss by alen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      my wife are cancelling cable next month after we realized that we're paying $165 a month for triple play and the cable part is mostly the same few kids cartoons that we DVR and watch multiple times and we can buy them on amazon for $10 PER SEASON and watch unlimited times

      dont underestimate the power of stupidity

    2. Re:I don't see much to miss by demachina · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is a considerable hypocrisy in DirectTV's CEO looping a video on the down channels complaining about how awful it is that Viacom is forcing them to take all the channels as one package.

      I would love it if DirectTV let me buy the few channels they have we still watch ala carte for a small fraction of what they are charging for their packages.

      As others have said, Viacom expecting another billion dollars for their especially pathetic channel line up is over the top. Once you get past The Daily Show, South Park and Colbert there is absolutely nothing Viacom is offering that is worth paying for. And since they are all loaded with ads, why do people even have to pay for them like they are premium channels.

      I would also greatly appreciate if their boxes were setup to kill all the annoying shopping and religious channels they are carrying with simple switches. You can setup a custom guide without them but since they constantly move their channels around it is annoying to maintain it. Of course I imagine the shopping channels are paying them to force their channels down the throats of their customers so. . .

      One of the great mysteries of life to me is why people watch shopping channels or buy the crap they sell keeping them in business. Consumerism has achieved its ultimate goal when people actually sit and watch channels that are nothing but ads. The pinnacle of this phenomenon is I recently saw a shopping channel purportedly selling houses in Florida. Pretty much the last thing anyone should be doing is buying real-estate sight unseen on a shopping channel using an auction that is guaranteed to be rigged.

      --
      @de_machina
    3. Re:I don't see much to miss by nabsltd · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is a considerable hypocrisy in DirectTV's CEO looping a video on the down channels complaining about how awful it is that Viacom is forcing them to take all the channels as one package.

      I would love it if DirectTV let me buy the few channels they have we still watch ala carte for a small fraction of what they are charging for their packages.

      There's no hypocrisy at all here. The reason DirecTV won't let you pick individual channels is because their contacts with the channel owners won't let them.

      Companies like Viacom know that in order to allow providers like DirecTV to sell a la carte, they would have to price individual channels realistically, and they would get a lot less uptake, and thus advertising dollars (which are based on both actual and possible viewers) would go down. The affected channel list shows just how badly Viacom would lose possible viewers based on a la carte. Of the 17 channels, only about 4 could be considered "general viewership": 1 is gay/lesbian interest, 2 are aimed at African Americans, 4 primarily at children, 6 are music channels (well, maybe not MTV) with several aimed at specific types (Hispanic, country, etc.) of music.

  3. they are all evil by alen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    we go through this every year or so

    Content owner wants more money and demands rate increase
    TV service operator says no
    content owner pulls channels
    viewers scream bloody murder and rape and demand tv operator pony up a few $$$ of their limitless magical bank account
    tv operator blinks first then raises rates
    viewers complain but don't do anything
    repeat in a few years

    the content owners know people are dumb and live by the monthly payment and will blame their cable or satellite company. they sell their channels in bundles and raise the rates every few years. people continue to pay the higher rates because they are too stupid to do anything else other than look at rectangle with moving pictures

    1. Re:they are all evil by alen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      we're probably close to the peak if we haven't passed it yet

      i've noticed a lot more people i know don't watch TV much anymore and like to read, go outside and do other things that were considered geeky and dumb when i was a kid.

  4. And to compensate customers... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

    DirecTV has dropped all of Viacom's channels.

    ... DirectTV will, of course, lower their subscription fees accordingly.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:And to compensate customers... by PancakeMan · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know you were joking, but just as a point of information, it looks like DirecTV is giving away the Encore channels in an effort at compensation while the Viacom stations are dark.

  5. Re:Breaking News by Russ1642 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Stories aren't broken on Slashdot. We wait for one or preferably several news articles are written, people have a chance to actually read them (I know, not exactly reality), and then we can discuss them intelligently.

  6. I use Roku by na1led · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Canceled my Cable Subscription, which I was paying over $100 a month for. With Roku, I have Netflix, Hulu Plus, and Amazon Prime, all of which cost less than $25 a month, plus my roof antenna for local channels. Internet TV is going to be the future.

    --
    -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
  7. Net neutrality by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Net neutrality: ensuring that the Internet does not become like this.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  8. Re:What does that do to contracts? by Spritzer · · Score: 4, Informative
    Tough Luck.
    DirecTV Terms of Service

    (d) Our Programming Changes. Many factors affect the availability, cost and quality of programming and may influence the decision to raise prices and the amount of any increase. These include, among others, programming and other costs, consumer demand, market and shareholder expectations, and changing business conditions. Accordingly, we must reserve the unrestricted right to change, rearrange, add or delete our programming packages, the selections in those packages, our prices, and any other Service we offer, at any time. We will endeavor to notify you of any change that is within our reasonable control and its effective date. In most cases this notice will be about one month in advance. You always have the right to cancel your Service, in whole or in part, if you do not accept the change (see Section 5). If you cancel your Service, a deactivation fee (described in Sections 2 & 5(b)) or other charges may apply. Credits, if any, to your account will be posted as described in Section 5. If you do not cancel, your continued receipt of our Service will constitute acceptance.

    I would assume most or all other carriers have similar clauses.

  9. Give up the addiction by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cancel your cable. Go outside and enjoy it while it's still free.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  10. Re:Piracy is the answer by Spritzer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Or do like I do. Pay them for service and download most everything anyway. I'm paying for it. How I choose delivery is my business.

    SABnzbd + SickBeard + AstraWeb = FU and your silly games

  11. Re:Obligatory... by lobos · · Score: 4, Informative

    Any reason why Viacom or any other such wastewater producer can't just switch to streaming all their shows? ...Seems like a revenue source waiting to be tapped.

    As someone who covers media companies for an investment firm and spends a lot of my work thinking about things like this, they would lose out on a lot of money if they did that. Content owners currently have a dual stream revenue source. One are the monthly affiliate fees paid by you through the cable provider. The other is advertising. The content owners have been getting filthy rich through this model and have no desire to give it up.

    If they were to start going directly to the end users and charging you, chances are they would lose more money than they made under the old model. The first reason is there is no (or little) advertising in the model you are proposing. So your fees would have to cover all the money they make off of advertising. Which will likely never happen. The second is that, in the current model, many people pay monthly affiliate fees for channels they would not purchase on a standalone basis (this is the same reason why you will likely never see à la carte channels) and cable providers would demand lower affiliate fees, or drop the channels altogether, if the content owners started going direct to the end user. So your fee to get the streaming portion would have to be quite high because you are currently being subsidized by advertising and a lot of people who never watch the channel.

    I should note that I would love to see à la carte programming, but I'm just explaining why you're not going to see it right now. However, there may come a point when it starts happening. It really comes down to simple economics. If enough people start cutting the cord, or something else disrupts the current model enough, then they will start moving to other models. But right now it's way too lucrative for them to ever give it up.