FreeChoiceTV

Cheers to the FCC!

Cheers to Cablevision!

Cheers to Consumers Union!

From Sky Report Feb 10, 2006

FCC Green Lights a la Carte

Given Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin
Martin's earlier opinions suggesting a la carte is a viable
model for selling video programming to consumers, it's not
surprising the agency and its Media Bureau came out with a
one-sided report that stated program choice is workable in
the pay-TV marketplace.

The FCC's a la carte report was released Thursday, and
proposed that consumers could be better off under a la carte.
The report also explored several a la carte options consumers
and industry companies could consider when studying program
choice.

The FCC report also took aim at what it calls "mistaken
calculations" in a 2004 study on a la carte conducted by Booz
Allen, which was originally submitted by the cable industry
for commission consideration. The Media Bureau said the Booz
Allen Study failed to net out the cost of broadcast stations
when calculating the average cost per cable channel under a
la carte. As a result, the study overstated the average price
per cable channel by more than 50 percent.

The report said the current industry practice of bundling
programming services may drive up retail prices, making video
programming less affordable and keeping some consumers from
subscribing to a pay-TV service. For many popular networks,
advertising and subscription fees may rise as viewers shift
to a la carte programming options, even if consumers opt to
watch only a few channels, stated the FCC report.

Also, a la carte could make it easier for programming networks
valued by a minority of viewers to enter the marketplace, the
report said.

Key lawmakers commented on the FCC move.

Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican and chair of the Senate
Commerce Committee, said if a la carte is not more expensive
for consumers, "I will support an effort to take such an
approach, subject to discussions with providers on the
downside of such a process."

Said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), "The report confirms what I
have believed for years - if consumers are allowed to choose
the channels their families view then their monthly cable
bill will be less. Choice is far preferable to being forced
to buy a host of channels they don't even watch."

From SkyReport 12/05/2005

Support Grows for a la Carte

Support continues to surface for a la carte options, an issue
that gained attention last week after Federal Communications
Commission Chairman Kevin Martin suggested cable/satellite TV
program choice should be given more consideration.

Gene Kimmelman of the Consumers Union said Martin should be
commended "for striking at the heart of the cable industry's
flawed pricing model which forces people to buy packages of
television channels they don't want and shouldn't have to pay
for."

He added, "Cable companies and broadcasters have fought a la
carte pricing for years, hiding behind the fallacious argument
that popular and unpopular programming had to be bundled
together to keep all programming afloat."

Phone interests, lobbying for telcos preparing to enter the
video business, also voiced support for a la carte.

Said Walter McCormick, CEO of Washington, D.C.,-based
USTelecom, "In today's dynamic communications market,
consumers win when they have a choice in service providers and
among offerings for video services. A la carte pricing is just
one more example of the endless possibilities for consumers
when selecting video services."

As for others, the new talk surrounding a la carte may be a
"sign that the benign regulatory environment for the cable
industry is starting to cloud up some," said Blair Levin of
Stifel Nicolaus.

"While we remain skeptical that government will be able to
impose indecency or a la carte regulation/legislation on cable
for now, the issues do give policymakers increased leverage
across several fronts," Levin said. "We doubt cable can afford
to simply stiff-arm regulators and legislators on indecency
and a la carte without jeopardizing their interests in bigger
fights over broadband network neutrality, telco video
franchising, digital TV multicasting must-carry obligations
and cable price increases."

----------------------

To the above, FreeChiceTV says: "If competition is willing to offer "a la carte" perhaps all that is needed is a strong (no loop hole) law/regulation that forbids the programmers/networks/broadcasters from forced bundling of retransmission rights. (e.g eliminate the 'If you want the ABC locals, you must put ESPN, Disney Channel and Lifetime in the basic tier... or if you want the Comedy Channel, you must take MTV and Nick at night.')" Without that forced bundling, the cable, satellite, telcos and even internet providers would be free to offer a la carte and packages that the marketplace would find attractive. This viewer has seen DISH Network and C-band satellite providers thwarted in their efforts to provide CHOICE to viewers from programmers who insist on unreasonable forced bundling.

--------------------

Cable and Satellite providers requiring that you MUST buy ESPN, CNN, Fox News, and the Disney Channel just because you want CNBC, is like your corner newsstand requiring that you MUST buy Sports Illustrated, Time, Newsweek, and Jack & Jill just because you want the Business Week.

Detroit Free Press Nov. 30 2005

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin says the system could help parents.

Kids and television

Television is pretty coarse, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin charged Tuesday. So he warned cable and satellite programmers to shield children from racy shows or risk coming under sharper government scrutiny.

"Parents need better and more tools to help them navigate the entertainment waters, particularly on cable and satellite TV," Martin said. "You can always turn the television off and of course block the channels you don't want, but why should you have to?"

In addition to expanding federal decency standards to include cable and satellite programs, Martin suggested several options, including creating a family-friendly tier of channels that would offer shows suitable for kids, such as the programs shown on the Nickelodeon channel.

Associated Press

FCC head promotes a la carte cable TV

Per-channel fee to lower bills, he says

BY PAUL DAVIDSON
USA TODAY

November 30, 2005

WASHINGTON -- In a sharp reversal, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission said Tuesday the agency now thinks cable companies should stop forcing people to subscribe to bundles of channels and instead let them choose the channels they want.

Kevin Martin, FCC chairman since March 16, asserted that a la carte pricing could both allow parents to block raunchy programming and lower subscribers' cable bills. His stance might push Congress to require cable and satellite companies to offer the option.

Martin said a 2004 FCC report, which concluded that most consumers would face higher cable and satellite bills under mandatory a la carte system, "presented incorrect and incomplete analysis."

A new FCC report near completion "concludes that purchasing cable programming in a more a la carte manner in fact could be economically feasible and in consumers' best interest," Martin said at a Senate forum on indecency.

Under an a la carte system, consumers would have to subscribe to a basic tier that includes the broadcast stations and channels such as CNN. Beyond that, they would pay only for channels they want.

The 2004 FCC report found that the average cable household, which watches 17 channels, would see its bill rise 14%-30%, assuming it ordered that number of channels. The average channel price would be $3.90 a month, the study said, and only subscribers who pay for fewer than nine channels would save with a la carte pricing.

Martin said the report mistakenly included the broadcast channels in the basic tier to arrive at that average price. Omitting those stations would increase the number of channels consumers could order without a price increase, he said, though he wasn't specific.

Kyle McSlarrow, head of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, called the a la carte mandate a "very dangerous idea."

-----------------

From SkyReport E-news Dec 2, 2005:

Cablevision Backs a la Carte

A cable operator in support of a la carte?

On Thursday, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan said he and his company agree with Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin that providing programming choice would benefit consumers. "Like Chairman Martin, we do not believe in the long term that selling programming a la carte will be detrimental to either programmers or cable operators," he said in a statement.

Dolan added, "Consumers should not be obliged directly or
indirectly to buy services they do not want." The chairman
said Cablevision has expressed support for a la carte in the
past, and Martin's remarks "encourage a move by the industry in this direction."

The Cablevision comments stand in contrast with earlier
statements from Kyle McSlarrow, president and CEO of the
National Cable and Telecommunications Association. McSlarrow said mandatory a la carte "would be potentially very troublesome for our goal of universal deployment of broadband services."

He added, "Such a massive government intrusion into how a broadband service like video is marketed, offered, and priced would undoubtedly chill the needed innovation and investment necessary to build out capital intensive networks that rely on the marketplace to determine the most economically effective way to provide a return on investment."

-------------------

We (freeChoiceTV) say hats off to both the FCC and Cablevision for recognzing that forced bundling of TV programming is unfair to the American consumer. As to Mr. McSlarrow's (president and CEO of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association) comments- of course it would be detrimental to Broadcast/SatelliteCable Cartel (BSCC), it would reduce the billions of dollars that the American consumer is being fleeced of via inflated prices for signals that they do not want. At least Microsoft's forced bundling of its Internet Explorer only cost the consumer less than $100 once every 4 or 5 years and not the $350 to $450 that the consumer is being overcharged every year. (see note1 below and do the math)

--------------------------

November 29, 2005

Statement of Gene Kimmelman in response to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s support for cable “a la carte” pricing before the Senate Commerce Committee’s Summit on Decency in the Media.

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin should be strongly commended for striking at the heart of the cable industry’s flawed pricing model which forces people to buy packages of television channels they don’t want and shouldn’t have to pay for. His support for “a la carte pricing” should help push it forward, giving consumers’ wallets a break and allowing them more control over their television choices.

Cable companies and broadcasters have fought a la carte pricing for years, hiding behind the fallacious argument that popular and unpopular programming had to be bundled together to keep all programming afloat. Last year, the FCC issued a staff report based on erroneous assumptions that kept this charade going. Today, Chairman Martin has blown a huge hole through this fortress of deceit.

Consumers Union hopes to work closely with Chairman Martin, his colleagues at the FCC and members of Congress to ensure that consumers receive the true benefit of being able to choose the channels of their choice at a fair price on cable and satellite television systems.

Contact:
Jeannine Kenney, Consumers Union, (202)-462-6262

--------------------

Please write now to the FCC, to the House and to the Senate.

If your Representative or Senator is on one of the committees it is even more important that you write, call, email or fax.

-----------------------------------------------------

Your actions are starting to work. Please keep contacting your people in Washington.

--------------

"When it comes to purchasing cable channels beyond the basic tier today, consumers have all the choice of a Soviet election ballot," --Sen. John McCain

Demand 'a la carte choice. Watch everything that you want, and cut your cable/satellite bill in half or more**!

With the change to digital delivery of television programming, the Broadcast, Cable and Satellite giants (we call them the BCSC the Broadcast/Cable/Satellite Cartel ) are trying to erect expensive toll booths on what was once free or almost free TV. Over the last couple of decades the BCSC has succeeded in gaining tight control of what we view. The BCSC has been busy setting up a complicated set of toll booths small and relatively inexpensive at first, now they are growing larger and soon will become very expensive.

Like the OPEC oil cartel, the BCSC reaches agreements and "understandings" to restrict what you can watch, what you can NOT watch and how much you pay for it. They even force you to pay for things that you don't want. In some cases you may be forced to pay and support programming which you are philosophically opposed to. The BCSC has powerful industry associations and lobbyists who exert enormous pressure on the FCC and the politicians in Washington.

The technology is here today. The digital satellite and cable boxes are addressable. That means that your cable or satellite provider can let you subscribe to just those channels that you want to pay for, and not require you to pay for those channels that you never watch and don't want to pay for.

The purpose of this web site is to provide information about this situation, and to help you the consumer fight to:

Eliminate forced bundling of multiple channels.
Take back our right to watch what we want.
To pay only for what we want to watch.
Cut your cable bill in half.
This can all be done with " 'a la carte " choices for cable and satellite television.

Please review the material on the other pages of this website and please join other viewers across the country by contacting the FCC and your Senators and Representatives in Washington to urge that we be given a free choice ... " 'a la carte" choices in what we buy from our distributors of television programming.

The "DO NOT CALL LIST" legislation was recently passed with lightning speed. It proved that our politicians in Washington WILL listen to consumers (and voters) if they speak loudly and with one voice. And our representatives WILL act, even against the wishes of powerful industry groups if enough voters flood their offices with letters, phone calls, faxes and emails demanding " 'a la carte" TV choices.

Now is the time to flood Washington with your letters, phone calls, faxes and emails.

Thank you,

Bob Stevens, FreeChoiceTV

========================

**A survey (1) by National Programming Service shows that where 'a la carte pricing is freely offered to consumers (C-band-"big dish" satellite) the monthly cost ($20.20) was less than half of the monthly cost of the mini-dish (DirecTV & DISH Network) systems ($49.62) and less than one third the monthly cost of cable systems ($63.80).

Note (1): According to a recent National Programming Service (NPS) announcement, "the average monthly bill for a C-Band customer is less than half of the bill paid to both small dish companies and cable companies." NPS provided a price comparison: NPS - $20.20, small dish - $49.62* and cable - $63.80* (*From SkyTRENDS 2002 Annual Report.)