January 1, 2010 was supposed to mark day one of Fox Soccer Channel not being available on Time Warner Cable due to a squabble over how much Time Warner would pay News Corp., which owns Fox Soccer Channel (as well as other Fox networks), for the right to carry its cable and broadcast channels.
According to The Wall Street Journal, News Corp. is asking for a $1 per subscriber each month for its Fox channels while Time Warner has suggested a figure closer to 30 cents per subscriber.
With both companies unable to agree contract terms by the December 31, 2009 deadline, Fox Soccer Channel (and other Fox networks) were supposed to go dark at midnight and remain dark until an agreement could be reached.
However, Time Warner Cable has received a brief extension from Fox while negotiations continue. But according The Orlando Sentinel newspaper, a three hour extension has been granted until 3am ET January 1st in hopes that a last minute deal can be agreed.
LATEST UPDATE: In a brief statement at 5:30 a.m. EST Friday, Scott Grogin, Fox senior vice president for communications, said “we are still negotiating.”
FINAL UPDATE: Late Friday, Fox and Time Warner announced that they made a deal to allow Fox networks to continue being shown on Time Warner Cable. Terms of the deal were not announced.
Since Fox Soccer Channel shows the majority of Premier League matches on US television, the risk of losing FSC is alarming news for Time Warner Cable customers. So here at EPL Talk, we’ve decided to create this open thread to encourage you to share your experiences, and to read what other Time Warner customers are saying. Plus, we’ll bring you the news on the latest developments and will share with you what other options are available to you to get Fox Soccer Channel.
Here are the latest updates:
- According to EPL Talk reader @mike10778, there’s an update on his local Time Warner Cable website that says “if we lose Fox Soccer Channel, we’ll get compensated with GolTV.” No offense to GolTV, but as a Premier League viewer, that’s like going to an expensive steak restaurant only to be served a piece of meat from Denny’s. Michael adds that “I’m calling DirecTV if we lose FSC” and complained that Time Warner Cable “just raised our rates 10%.”
- EPL Talk blogger Dave Warner brought an interesting story to my attention on the website, NewTeeVee. It describes how Time Warner – due to the spat with Fox – is explaining to its customers how to connect a computer to your TV set so you can watch Hulu and Fancast. The irony is that the last thing you would expect a cable company to do is to show you how to watch content online. Watch the video to see how Time Warner Cable walks customers through the step-by-step process.
If you’re upset about Time Warner Cable not agreeing to pay the rate that News Corp is asking for Fox Soccer Channel, you have several other options to get Fox Soccer Channel via other satellite and cable providers:
Whew… just in time for United vs Leeds!
just as FSC was going to HD. Without the EPL, life would really suck. i will change over to Direct TV immediately.
dont go to ditect tv, its crap, you wull regret it, i vjudt got out of their contect and back with time warner, its 50% more channel for channel on direct tv, and you dont get any more , if the inevitable happened then you could pay for fox soccer seperately and still be better off with t/warner
AT&T UVerse and Verizon FIOS are not available in my area. DirecTV and Dish Network are problems for two reasons: First of all of, we have trees surrounding my home and I am not willing to put up the massive antenna necessary to get above the treeline. Secondly, I can’t guarantee I will live in this home for two years, so I’m not willing to sign a contract (I’ve already been bit by the $500 DirecTV early termination bug once).
Like I said in one of my tweets, this is the saddest New Year’s Eve because tomorrow morning when I wake up, I probably won’t have my favorite channel. I would get FIOS or UVerse in a heartbeat if they were offered in my area. On a sidenote, the Consumer Reports newest issue came out today, and Time Warner was rated in the bottom third in every category among cable providers, and it did not garner a single positive rating (only neutral and below average). FIOS and UVerse were head and shoulders above the rest. Working for the post office (and getting to read the magazines I want to) has its perks
To add, if I can’t watch Leeds v MU on cable this weekend, I will never give Time Warner another cent after I move. I will make sure whatever apartment I rent/house I buy is in a good place to receive DirecTV.
Nevermind the fact that Time Warner doesn’t have GolTV, Setanta, or ESPN 360….
Time Warner NY has both GolTV and Sentanta…
Ok, it must be different in different parts of the country then. In my area (Ohio), you cannot get either channel.
TWC also provides internet you moron! That is why they are giving instructions for Hulu, etc.
yep…that’s TWs angle since you’re still using their network to watch the shows. However, they hate that people stream stuff online cause it drains the network so now they’ll cap your usage and charge you extra for using a lot of bandwidth. The irony of course is you wouldn’t be watching stuff online if they would just broadcast it.
Why are you calling people Morons when you obviously don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
Well it’s 3am EST and FSC is still on here (Bright House in Tampa). Hopefully it stays that way.
It is 9am EST and I still have Fox cable channels (FX, Fox Sports, FSC, etc.). I think they are going to hammer this thing out.
The exact Fox channels that would be dropped varies from region to region across the U.S. since Time Warner negotiates channel availability on a regional basis.
Unfortunately for us the one channel that seems to be included in all regions is FSC.
I was just watching FSC like an hour ago. Looked fine to me.
This Argument is nothing but a Marketing Gimmick for Time Warner. It’s all about making more money. In 6 months time the rates will go up for cable, and Time Warner will point to this Campaign against Fox as the Reason it had to raise it’s Rates. We are not as dumb as we look. Also, I heard that $1 per subscriber is more than fair payment to Fox. For Comparision it is said that ESPN gets $4-5 per subscriber. In the End, the Government will get involved and force both parties to negotiate. It is normal practice, when a company has a monopoly like Time Warner. Consumers have no other choices; and therefor Fox/s demands should be meet and TWC should be forced to accept. It’s not fair, bc we can’t just call another cable co to get the channels we want to watch.
The sad part is, many Americans are as dumb as they look. My local newspaper has been printing articles daily that look like they could have been written by Time Warner themselves. People are writing letters to the editor thanking Time Warner and railing on high prices, etc. Anyone with a skeptical eye can tell this is marketing genius (shifts blame for price raises to a third party). And consumers pay the price, through higher prices and through lack of choice. TWC is the only provider in my area. Satellite is not an option for me.
Bob Bradley – The last people I am going to defend are time warner but your premise is all wrong. Fox are demanding that TW pay them for carrying their previously free broadcast channel, in my market, that’s channel 5. Espn (owned by ABC/Disney) is not a broadcast channel. TW’s rationale is, if they agree to that – especially a $1 a month per customer, then ABC and NBC will ask for the same. Murdoch has a right to test them, TW who can probably afford it without passing it in to their customers still has a right to call their bluff. It’s two media giants squabling over money and you,the consumer of course, get stuck in the middle.
Forget corporate money battles and can anyone tell me has FSC gone HD and if so has Comcast added a separate channel?
Happy New Year!
Give them the dang dollar and what the heck I will pay a dollar more per month just to not have to go the the pain of switching services BECAUSE IF FOX GOES SO TO I TO VERIZON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If the worst happens, I would suggest trying foxsoccer.tv. FSC makes all of their EPL and Champions League games available online. I have used this service a number of times when I have been on business travel and it works pretty well. The video quality is good enough that you could connect your computer to your TV and still watch on a bigger screen.
The price is high but it’s less than Setanta-i and far more reliable.
Yeah, but most of the games shown on FoxSoccer.tv are not shown live, but on delay. Better than nothing, but still could be much better.
Cheers,
The Gaffer
There is no doubt that if Fox loses FSC I will go back to Direct TV. Thinking about it already.
Thank god for DISH
This is the latest-
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-01/time-warner-cable-news-corp-s-fox-resolve-dispute-update1-.html
why can everyone state the given costs to time warner per channel, i.e. $1 for fox, $4 for espn, etc, yet not make the resulting computation of total cost to programmers? if you pay $50/month for basic cable, how much of that do you think goes to programmers? in case you were wondering, the current margin on basic and digital video for cable companies is in the range of 3-5%, not much better than retail. by comparison, their margin on internet services is more like 35%. if you think they’d rather sell video than internet, you are very mistaken.
One thing I do sometimes is hook up my computer to my TV & stream Sky Sports News via Justin.tv Saturday mornings. I love how they hop from game to game (& some entertaining presenters).
these people need to get their heads outta their asses and agree on something quickly…