Time Warner Killed Kenny!

Some 16 million Time Warner Cable (NYSE: TWC  ) subscribers just breathed a sigh of relief, after learning yesterday that they can still watch The Daily Show, South Park, and Spongebob Squarepants. Viacom (NYSE: VIA.B  ) has settled its feud with TWC.

A crisis ...
Earlier this week, the news looked bleaker. Nineteen Viacom channels were set to go black for Time Warner subscribers, as Viacom threatened to pull programming over what amounted to about a penny-a-subscriber-a-day fee hike. According to Viacom, its networks (including Comedy Central, Nickelodeon, and MTV's multiple iterations) account for 20% of TWC's viewership, but TWC pays Viacom just 8% of total license fees.

TWC rejected Viacom's demand for double-digit fee hikes, on the grounds that it was unfair to ask its customers to foot the bill for a fee hike in the midst of a recession. (Suggestions that TWC could alleviate the unfairness by eating the penny-a-day extra cost itself were laughed out of the room.)

... averted
As in past disputes, such as the Viacom-EchoStar brouhaha of 2004, or the Time Warner (NYSE: TWX  ) -Disney (NYSE: DIS  ) dispute of 2000, both sides waged a media war in defense of their respective positions. TWC made Viacom out to be the greedy bad guy. Viacom incited a fifth column within its antagonist's customer base, urging TWC customers to defect to rival providers like DirecTV or Verizon (NYSE: VZ  ) .

Yadda, yadda. Ultimately, the parties came to terms, and TWC seems ready to pay a "modest" fee increase to ensure that its customers' supply of The Colbert Report remains uninterrupted.

Viacom's greedy and its mama dresses it funny
If that were the whole story, it would hardly be worth mentioning. But in this particular dispute, TWC played a new card. In addition to calling Viacom greedy, the cable company said Viacom was, well, stupid. The problem wasn't that Viacom isn't being paid enough, said TWC, but that the media giant is "putting most of their top-rated content on the Web for free."

You could almost see the wheels turning within the TWC execs' heads as this crisis came to a head: Viacom wants more money? Fine. We'll put up the requisite fuss, then just turn around and stick our customers with the bill -- maybe even pad it a bit. Viacom gets its money. We maintain our 18% operating margin. Everybody's happy.

The king is dead
And then came the doubletake: But wait! How do we know the customers will pay this time? If they've got the option of watching Daily Show reruns on the Web, and if they can entertain the tykes just as well by streaming Dora the Explorer and Spongebob online, then all of a sudden, TWC's audience begins to look a lot less captive.

That's why I place this dispute in a wholly different class from the content provider-cable company disputes of years past. I think we just saw a paradigm shift, Fools. The cable kingpins have lost their thrones to a new ruler: content.

Long live the king?
TWC can complain all it likes, but in my opinion, Viacom was actually stupid like a fox (to quote Homer Simpson). Giving away programming "for free" on the Web may sound like a crazy way to make a profit, but doing so helped Viacom severely weaken TWC's negotiating position in the ensuing fee dispute.

Basically, Viacom had TWC over a barrel. If TWC refused to pay the fee increase, Viacom might not only raid its customer base, encouraging defections to DirecTV and Verizon, but also divert ad revenue from TWC's TV channels to Viacom's Web sites.

Foolish takeaway
If I'm right, and this is a sea change in content's kingship, it could signal bad news for cable providers like TWC and Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA  ) . Conversely, the new trend could favor those forward-thinking content providers who've led the move to put free programming on the Web, including General Electric's (NYSE: GE  ) NBC and Disney's ABC, for example.

Time will tell. Foolish investors should watch for the next network-cable company fee dispute, to see whether TWC's novel lament becomes a chorus of dismay among its peers. In the meantime, keep enjoying Jon Stewart and Spongebob.

Fool contributor Rich Smith does not own shares of any company named above. Walt Disney is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor and Motley Fool Inside Value pick. The Motley Fool's disclosure policy, as luck would have it, is available for free viewing on the Web.


Read/Post Comments (3) | Recommend This Article (2)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On January 02, 2009, at 12:54 PM, vest0r2 wrote:

    Wasn't Time-Warner also dragging its feet in regard to carrying NFL Network? What became of the ala carte subscription idea for cable companies? I know that I'm paying for all kinds of channels which I never watch -- channels which seems to either run solid infomercials or run very heavy rafts of commercials.

    Can television programming not be delivered via broadband? On an episode-by-episode basis? Time-Warner is not providing service in this case. Again.

  • Report this Comment On January 02, 2009, at 1:24 PM, tru10man wrote:

    Yes, IP will forever disrupt electronic distribution.

    Winners and losers TBD at a later date.

    But here is an interesting speculation on TW. After the TWC spinoff, TW will be sitting with approx $14B+ in cash and a very clean balance sheet and after the reverse split fewer shares with greater marketability. Yahoo! has $3B+ in cash and no debt.

    TW buys YHOO for cash, stock and debt at a modest premium above market. Then challeneges GOOG in search. One plus one will equal more than two. And sets up TW to take advantage of IP delivery of content (HBO, WB, TNT, TBS etc) without worrying about the impact on TWC. TWC better get used to paying more for content to capture exclusivity or else.

  • Report this Comment On January 02, 2009, at 3:32 PM, TMFDitty wrote:

    vest0r2,

    Good point on a la carte. I've been watching this issue as well. Read more in:

    FCC: Friend to Cable Companies

    http://www.fool.com/investing/small-cap/2004/11/22/fcc-frien...

    FCC: Friend to Cable Consumers

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2005/12/01/fcc-friend-...

    Changing the Channel on Cable

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2004/03/29/changing-th...

    Fool on!

    Rich Smith

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 803179, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 9/2/2014 5:42:54 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement