FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Can the Comcast and Time/Warner Cable Merger be Stopped?

The announced merger agreement between Comcast and Time Warner Cable (TWC) for $45 billion in stock will combine the nation’s two of the nation’s largest media companies.  Each is a major cable multi-system operator (MSO) within an industry structured on the basis of local “regulated” monopolies, with little meaningful competition.  The merger will be one more step in the further consolidation of the media marketplace that includes “last mile” connections for wireline delivery, wireless communications, Internet access and, increasingly, programming.

Comcast is the largest cable and home Internet service provider (ISP) in the U.S., with 2013 revenues of $64.6 billion. The new post-merger media behemoth will control 34 million cable subscribers throughout the country.  Among the territories it currently controls are Boston, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Houston and Philadelphia.  In 2011, it acquired NBC-Universal Pictures from GE, including 33 local TV stations, the Spanish-language network, Telemundo, 13 cable networks (including USA, CNBC, Bravo, SyFy, MSNBC, CNBC, NBC Sports, Oxygen, the Weather Channel) as well as Universal, a major movie studio (and Focus Features, a boutique “art house” micro-studio) as well as the Universal theme parks in LA and Florida.  It addition, it controls the Golf Channel, E! Entertainment, G-4, Style and regional sports cable services as well as the lifestyle website, Daily Candy.  It also runs the Philadelphia Flyers NHL franchise and the NBA’s Philadelphia 76ers.

TWC’s 2013 revenue were $22.1 billion and provides cable service in 29 states, with controlling interests in Dallas, Los Angeles and New York as well as large segments of Maine, North Carolina and Ohio.  Under increasing financial problems resulting from its shotgun marriage with AOL, Time Warned spun off its TWC holdings in March 2009.

Cable television emerged in the late-1940s as a “retransmission” service to improve the signal quality of over-the-air broadcast analog TV channels.  Broadcast TV viewers often received signals that were dimmed or blocked because the local station’s signal was weak or due to interference from natural obstacles (e.g., mountains).  In the 60-plus years since the first cable wires were strung, the industry slowly improved the carrying capacity of the underlying coaxial “cable” and, with digital technologies, enomously increased the number of channels it could offer.

The cable industry’s power is two fold.  First, cable companies operate on the basis of an exclusive franchise negotiated with a particular locality.  Second, cable companies long controlled in-home access to video programming through a subscriber’s rental of the cable converter or set-top box.  Until recently, the cable industry effectively limited competition by restricting programming sources to major media conglomerates and resisting alternative signal providers especially via the Internet.  Today, the cable industry consists of two overlapping (and increasingly integrated) oligopolies: (i) cable multi-system “operators” (MSOs) or distribution companies and (ii) powerful “content” or programming companies exemplified by the Comcast-NBC-Universal merger.

Under today’s “regulated” media marketplace, cable monopolies face apparent competition from satellite companies like DirecTV and telecom companies like AT&T (Uverse) and Verizon (FiOS).  To appreciate how dubious such competition is, in 2011 Comcast and TWC (along with Bright House and Cox) signed a co-marketing agreement with Verizon.  Under the agreement, Verizon ceded competition over the delivery of broadband services in specific territories controlled by the cable companies for control over wireless services.  This contributed to Verizon’s decision to stop building-out its competitive FiOS service.

In all likelihood, the Washington, DC, No Theatre of public “regulatory” deception, the FCC and the Dept. of Justice will approve the merger.  Comcast will likely divest 3 million subscribers to comply within terms of what is known as the “30 percent rule” that ostensibly assures industry competition.  In addition, it is also expect to agreed to net neutrality requirements that it agreed to when it acquired NBC-Universal.

However, the consequences of the merger are clean.  As Free Press notes, “Comcast will have unprecedented market power over consumers and an unprecedented ability to exert its influence over any channels or businesses that want to reach Comcast’s customers.”  Corporate executives and bankers will get rich, cable jobs will be cut through “efficiencies” and subscribers will get worse services at higher prices.  And the U.S. status as a 2nd-rate telecom nation will only get worse.

David Rosen regularly contributes to the AlterNet, Brooklyn Rail, Filmmaker and IndieWire; check out www.DavidRosenWrites.com.  He can be reached at drosennyc@verizon.net.

 

 

 

More articles by:

David Rosen is the author of Sex, Sin & Subversion:  The Transformation of 1950s New York’s Forbidden into America’s New Normal (Skyhorse, 2015).  He can be reached at drosennyc@verizon.net; check out www.DavidRosenWrites.com.

Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
LEJ Rachell
The Baddest Black Power Artist You Never Heard Of
Lawrence Ware
All Hell Broke Out in Oklahoma
Franklin Lamb
Tehran’s Syria: Lebanon Colonization Project is Collapsing
Donny Swanson
Janus v. AFSCME: What’s It All About?
Will Podmore
Brexit and the Windrush Britons
Brian Saady
Boehner’s Marijuana Lobbying is Symptomatic of Special-Interest Problem
Julian Vigo
Google’s Delisting and Censorship of Information
Patrick Walker
Political Dynamite: Poor People’s Campaign and the Movement for a People’s Party
Fred Gardner
Medical Board to MDs: Emphasize Dangers of Marijuana
Rob Seimetz
We Must Stand In Solidarity With Eric Reid
Missy Comley Beattie
Remembering Barbara Bush
Wim Laven
Teaching Peace in a Time of Hate
Thomas Knapp
Freedom is Winning in the Encryption Arms Race
Mir Alikhan
There Won’t be Peace in Afghanistan Until There’s Peace in Kashmir
Robert Koehler
Playing War in Syria
Tamara Pearson
US Shootings: Gun Industry Killing More People Overseas
John Feffer
Trump’s Trade War is About Trump Not China
Morris Pearl
Why the Census Shouldn’t Ask About Citizenship
Ralph Nader
Bill Curry on the Move against Public Corruption
Josh Hoxie
Five Tax Myths Debunked
Leslie Mullin
Democratic Space in Adverse Times: Milestone at Haiti’s University of the Aristide Foundation
Louis Proyect
Syria and Neo-McCarthyism
Dean Baker
Finance 202 Meets Economics 101
Abel Cohen
Forget Gun Control, Try Bullet Control
Robert Fantina
“Damascus Time:” An Iranian Movie
David Yearsley
Bach and Taxes
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail