Time Warner Wins Ohio-Wide Cable Franchise

An anonymous reader writes "Time Warner Cable has received a state-wide franchise agreement in Ohio. Time Warner's agreement covers 260 communities in 60 of Ohio's 88 counties, for 10 years. AT&T was the first to earn a state-wide franchise contract, after a law was passed in September that allowed operators to negotiate a single state-wide agreement. In the past operators negotiated franchise agreements at the local level."

well

I for one love less choice!

Re:well

From the article:

"On June 25, 2007, Governor Ted Strickland signed Senate Bill 117, which created the one-stop, statewide video-service authorization process. Previously, cable or wire video-service companies had to negotiate local franchises with each municipality or township."

This isn't a state sanctioned monopoly, it is authorization to operate within the state. Previously, there was no mechanism for video services to operate at the state level since the were no real laws dictating any boundaries for them to operate in so they had to get authorization from and make contracts with individual municipalities so that they could actually operate their business. The state, decided that working with hundreds/thousands of townships/cities was asinine so they created a statewide authorization with some of the more strict rules that many municipalities imposed on the companies.

Explanation, please?

I live in Columbus, and have never heard of this. I hate T/W, but they're the only cable option where I live. Can someone please explain in English what this means or provide a link to something more substantial? I RTFA (which is just a press release from the mouth pieces downtown) but don't understand what this is? It mentions "increased competition" - but does nothing to explain how that is achieved? AFAIK, I still don't have an option to switch to another cable provider, but I haven't called them in the last 4 weeks to see.

Re:Explanation, please?

Can someone please explain in English what this means or provide a link to something more substantial? I RTFA (which is just a press release from the mouth pieces downtown) but don't understand what this is?

It's called "removing control at the local level, and moving it to people easier to reach to bribe". Traditionally, cable franchises (the right to do business in a market) are granted at a local municipality level. Cable operators are required to list on their bills the contact information for the market's franchising authority. This is so consumers can complain to them about service from the provider.

Because this office (which is usually connected to the local government) is the one who decides whether a cable company gets to stay in business in an area, as well as grant additional licenses to new providers, they are an important enemy to cable companies in individual areas. If a cableco was providing very poor services, the franchising office could grant a second company to provide services on their own overbuilt cable network to provide competition, or could simply pull/not renew the license of the original operator, forcing them to sell the market to another provider (this is more likely in small towns were more people may be on satellite or there are multiple cablecos located nearby).

With a statewide license, this sort of stuff isn't going to happen. Because obviously the state government is not going to kick a cableco out of all Ohio over problems in Tinytown, OH. Whereas before, the licensing board for Tinytown (the mayor, treasurer, and postmaster) might have done something about it.

The TFA (which is really just a state press release) says this is being done to promote penetration of broadband service in the state. Unless there are actual terms in the agreement that Time-Warner will service areas of __ population density or greater that's not going to happen. Time Warner will continue to push access in large cities, and let older rural cable networks degrade, confident they can still hold the market for 10 years at least.

in reality-land news:

"Time-Warner Buys Ohio-Wide Cable Monopoly"

Why isn't somebody in jail over shit like this?

"State-wide" agreement?

Time Warner Cable has received a state-wide franchise agreement in Ohio. Time Warner's agreement covers 260 communities in 60 of Ohio's 88 counties, for 10 years.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Rob

What the hell?

I cannot understand for the life of me why this is allowed, much less encouraged by the government. It's a state-sanctioned monopoly, pure and simple, and it's killing competition and forcing people to go with TW, which sucks shit. Just ask how well that Adelpia merger went and how well it's still going in their godawful email system. Seriously, what happened to the goddamned competition creating a more innovative market? Shit like this leads to stagnation, which is why cable internet still sucks ass when too many people are eating bandwidth. And the usual cable response to that? "We don't give a shit. Go pay double for half the speed on DSL." Ugh. Fuck this stupid bullshit.

Dear Ohioians,

You're boned.

Welcome to less competition and more control over you the evil customer. I strongly suggest you voicing your outrage to your state government and getting others to also voice their outrage with promises to make sure they will not ge re-elected for what they did if they do not repeal it right away.

Franchise agreements are how cable companies make sure they can have a legal way to force out competition. It helps the state and localities as they are offered a kickback to their coffers in a form of a "franchise fee".

This crap was used in the 70's and 80's to drive community TV systems out of existance as they cut into the profits of cable companies.

Potentially better for competition, not worse....

This is not an exclusive arrangement.

Before this law, cablecos & telcos who wanted to provide service would have to negotiate (and pay kickbacks) to each and every locality. Now, they can do it all at once.

This way, there's only one big authorization (and one big kickback!) and a competitor can start rolling out service in the entire state. No seperate deals required for Cleveland and Canton and--whoops, Cincinnati has signed an exclusive agreement with another provider, so we can't roll it out there...

Now, this doesn't change the fact that there are all sorts of other barriers to entry...but it does help with some of the red tape.

It really could be much worse

The first positive point of this is that AT&T didn't get any sort of exclusivity rule. If you think TW Cable is bad, try dealing with Ameritech^H SBC^H AT&T. Secondly, many of us are already stuck with TW Cable, so it won't get any worse. Although it's too bad for those areas that were previously covered by Cox Cable, which has a much better consumer reputation.

Utility monopolies are the norm in the US. Get over it. What is definitely needed, though, is a utility commission that actually regulates the businesses they're supposed to be in charge of.

Hot on the heels of AT&T...

AT&T was the first to get a state-wide agreement in Ohio, so they could deploy their half-assed next-gen U-Verse. People in Lakewood are not happy. [lakewoodobserver.com]

Not exclusive! Not monopoly!

I did a quick check of TFA and could not find the word "exclusive". So quit your whining about "monopoly" this and monopoly that.

If you're going to insist on anti-corporate whining, at least whine about the right reason. FTFA: "Previously, cable or wire video-service companies had to negotiate local franchises with each municipality or township." This merely prevents them from having to individually deal with every little rural hick town and arrogant bedroom community in the state, some of which may indeed have already negotiated exclusive "monopoly" deals with another provider.

Re:Not exclusive! Not monopoly!

I think you're onto something here. Rhode Island passed something similar in the past year allowing Verizon to sell FiOS statewide without having to negotiate with each little town. What was happening before was Verizon would have to go kiss every little town selectman's ass handing over fist-fulls of money at a time just to have permission to offer FiOS tv and internet in their town. Negotiations were taking over a year in some instances and ended with Verizon handing over millions of dollars just to be able to offer people faster internet access.

In that instance individual town licenses were a barrier to competition, not an encouragement for it. Somehow the state senators and reps in RI grew big enough balls to tell their local piddly town governments to screw off and they just gave Verizon a state-wide license. Result? Statewide fios deployment in RI.

Verizon's looking to do the same thing right now in Massachusetts. Each town wanted a bigger bribe than the last just to be able to offer fiber optic internet service to the residents. So this past summer, fed up with greedy local governments, Verizon pulled out of all local negotiations in progress and has announced they won't be applying for anymore. They want a state-wide license like time-warner just got here in Ohio and like Verizon already has in RI. Until they get it, no more fios expansion to any new towns in Mass.

There, so now that that's out there now try and tell me how a state-wide franchise is going to hold back progress any more than the old town-by-town franchise scheme. I know Telco companies aren't the epitome of business ethics and they could be upgrading their networks a lot faster but these local town governments aren't exactly making it easy.

Re:Not exclusive! Not monopoly!

If you're going to insist on anti-corporate whining, at least whine about the right reason. FTFA: "Previously, cable or wire video-service companies had to negotiate local franchises with each municipality or township." This merely prevents them from having to individually deal with every little rural hick town and arrogant bedroom community in the state, some of which may indeed have already negotiated exclusive "monopoly" deals with another provider.

Thank you, I was beginning to wonder if I had wandered into bizarro-land or something! I cannot for the life of me fathom the negative reaction to this. Wisconsin is currently passing a similar bill, and I am 100% in favor of it. Previously, when a new provider wanted to enter a community, they wouldn't be able to, because some other cable company was granted an exclusive contract for that community.

Now, if Time Warner wants to compete with Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, or whomever else, they can. They get the statewide contract, and no more messing around with local politicos with delusions of grandeur. It levels the playing field so that anyone can compete.

There's a reason that the cable companies have been running a campaign against such bills... they don't want to have to compete. They like the cushy exclusive local contracts because it means they only have to worry about actually doing enough of their job to make it look good every few years when the contract comes up for renewal... then pay off enough politicians to get them to either be in favor of the new contract without even reading it, or better yet, be 'sick' on the day it's up for renewal.

Less than the summary implies

There does not seem to be any exclusivity here, the press release notes that AT&T got the same authorization in November and eight other companies have applied for authorization.

Furthermore, "The Director does not have any authority, however, to regulate the rates, terms or conditions of a provider's service - including the networks or television stations that the video-service company decides to carry", so it is not clear if this "authorization" has much meaningful effect.

Could be worse?

I lived in Ohio for the last 4 years and I have to say, their cable sucks across the board. However after our cable company was bought out by Time Warner we saw improvements right away: We went from 4 HD channels to 20. Instead of waiting up to 4 weeks for a tech, they would come that day or at most 72 hours later. Our ondemand also gained lots of new free programming. I think Ohio could have done worse, I just hope that Time Warner continues to make changes to the basic infrastructure throughout Ohio even if the competition has been weeded out for them. But seriously, why would anyone want to live in Ohio anyway?

What this really means

Since very few ./ readers actually work in the cable or satellite industries, I can understand the boo-hooing and the "welcome to the evil government-sponsored monopoly" comments that have been posted so far. Let me explain what has actually happened here, and how franchising agreements work.

Time Warner has merely been granted, or has renewed, permission to provide cable in these areas. In exchange, these localities will charge Time Warner a fee per subscriber for the privilege of serving these communities. Franchise agreements almost always contain language regarding quality of service, customer compensation in the event of a missed appointment, and other requirements.

A franchise agreement is not a monopoly in and of itself. A franchise agreement is neither inherently good nor evil; it is a business contract much like any other. Any other company is welcome to petition City Hall or the state government for a franchise for these same areas. It is up to the state and local governments to decide who can provide service, and who can not. You may have read about Verizon and AT&T getting their wrists slapped for installing their product in a few area where they did not have a franchise. The affected town governments were not upset at the increased competition; rather, they wanted Verizon and AT&T to pay their cut!

This law regarding statewide franchises will benefit local entities as well as TV providers. Negotiating franchise agreements with every little town in the county is often a long, drawn-out tedious affair. Some small town governments have refused to allow other companies to start providing a competing service. You can't blame the industry itself for monopolism in these cases. Now, a single agreement will provide access to these towns while TW, AT&T, the 2 major satellite companies, and any other companies with a franchise all compete. 4 major players, all providing ESPN, et al...I personally fail to see the monopoly.

Good job you chaps won the cold war.

Otherwise people would have no choice in where they bought their services. And they would have to queue for food [bbc.co.uk].

Ain't capitalism great!

I for one am very happy!

Choice?...sounds un-American to me! People demanding choice sound get a one-way trip down to Gitmo for some waterboarding and tazer treatment! Get your ass to the Diebold voting machine and vote for the only choice...Time Warner!

I like the fact Time Warner is now the only game in town, especially here in the Cleveland area. I surely do not want more channels, faster internet connection, or competitive pricing.

I am of course being sarcastic, but it could it worse...Comcast could have won the state wide agreement. I take dial up over those fuckers!

Is new law AT&T funded...

like the BS that is being passed by the Wisconsin legislature to make all contracts at the state level with pathetically watered down consumers bill-of-rights? I will bet you that AT&T was praying for exclusivity after buying the legislation in Ohio, even though T/W is now second fiddle and no better.

I have DirecTV. Will not use U-Verse or Time/Wasted. I have had zero transport problems with DirecTV since I have been with them. The only issue that I have had was when a new HD box shot craps. It was replaced in no time at all after getting by the script kiddie in Customer Service and to someone with a brain that I could talk to levelheaded. Real simple, box overheated and would shut down. Supervisor said after I was done explaining the situation - "What is your address so I can send you a replacement?"

There are options to AT&T and T/W. There always have been.

Stupid cities

A smart city would allow consumers at least 2 cable providers. That provides at least some competition.

How good of them

I'm so glad our States are working so hard to remove puzzling choices from our lives.

The telephone companies are coming to the rescue

You folks are looking into the past instead of opening your minds to the future. Here is a quote from the press release that will help: "In addition to AT&T Ohio and Time Warner Cable, eight other companies have applied for authorization. They are: ... Cincinnati Bell Extended Territories LLC ..."

If Cincinnati Bell gets approved, then they can offer cable services anywhere that they're running phone lines without getting permission from every piddly-ass city and township in the region. Some of you may have heard of AT&T which conceivably could offer wireless cable service.

In the past, the cable companies sent every channel to your house, regardless of whether you were even watching/recording or not. I'm thinking they will use a switched technology that uses IP to send only the channels to your house that you need.

This is a great step forward for cable service in Ohio. When we're sitting here in Cincinnati with three cable choices, satellite and digital local channels over the air, the rest of you will be jealous.

In related News..

Liquid plumer was named Alaska's sole internet provider.

Good

Because it's much more difficult into getting a statewide monopoly, and because both ATT and Time Warner now have state-wide right to provide the service.
Have you seen that many local authorities grant multiple licenses? No. Because it's easy (and probably fun) to talk over a group of local politicians into locking everyone in your town into exactly ONE provider "for your own good". You also pay for this wonderful right by dishing out extra 4 bucks for "franchise fee" and only get to have one cable company.
The more providers there are, the better.

Terrible news indeed

Living in Ohio has just gotten worse apparently. I have Time Warner at two different residences and for some reason they charge me two different rates for Road Runner. Also, having decided I want to save money, I canceled cable at one residence so I would just be paying for Road Runner. Unfortunately, Road Runner was cheaper since I was getting some sort of package deal, which was then no longer in effect. So, my rate on Road Runner went up, thus saving me no money.
At my other residence, Road Runner quits working for several days every now and again. I keep calling tech support, they keep saying it's my fault. Other people with Road Runner in the same apartment complex have the same issue at the same time. So, no, it's not my fault. My cable modem did not just spontaneously decide to quit working.
If Verizon were any better at either location, I would switch. Until some good competition forms, I'm stuck with one of two evils.

I'm "lucky."

I have had time warner at my house for years, and RELATIVELY speaking, I'm lucky. I don't have AT&T, Comcast, or any of those other crooks that other people are forced to deal with. Time Warner, at least in -my- area of town, is reliable enough to only go down perhaps once or twice a year, which I can live with. Their speed is still good enough, and they don't pull that of that censorship business.... yet.

Reaganomics ?!?

Is this a spillover from Reaganomics?

What in the world are you talking about?

Do you even know who Ronald Reagan was?

Some of you left-wing kooks are absolutely pathological in your addiction to political fantasies.

PS: If you want to know how "politics" really works, then watch Showtime's Brotherhood [sho.com].

And no, it's not a show about the GOP.

Re:No Free Market

They could take a lesson from Cox Communications then. Every time a tech has had to come to my apartment, they show up within the 2-hour window, sometimes early. Yesterday they called me and asked if they could come 3 hours early!

Mod Parent back up.

(Score:-1, Troll)
This is how the "free market" works, eh? You scratch my back I scratch yours? Is this a spillover from Reaganomics?

Unfortunately that wasn't permitted if you were unionized.
If you were union, you were broken in any way possible.

Re:So

No, "Bushnomics" is based on contraband. Reagan (and the people that support him) sold the country's soul to the company store. Anyway, it appears Ohio has quite an eclectic population. They so readily sell themselves out like this, and yet they give us Kucinich, the only decent character on the campaign trail. There must be an oasis in that desert.