[Prince_Lightfoot]

We don't even know for sure what the hangup is in negotiations. Is it price per subscriber? Or what tier of channels the Pac-12 Network is getting place on? Or which Pac-12 channels get picked up and which don't? (Remember, there are the six regionals plus the national.) Or some combination of all these things and others that we can't even guess at?

So, the oft-repeated line form Charter is: "Charter is interested in providing the PAC-12 Network to our customers, but only if the cost of the service to Charter and subsequently our customers is consistent with agreements PAC-12 Network has with other video providers of similar size as Charter. We are hopeful that our negotiations with PAC-12 Network will result in more reasonable terms and provide Charter customers with value."

I don't see how this is a reasonable benchmark, though.  According to the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, here are the subscriber numbers as if March 2012:

1 Comcast Corporation 22,294,000   [Deal in Place - not available everywhere]
2 DirecTV 19,966,000                           [Not Cable, no deal]
3 Dish Network Corporation 14,071,000 [Not Cable, no deal]
4 Time Warner Cable, Inc. 12,653,000   [Deal in Place]
5 Cox Communications, Inc. 4,756,000  [Deal in place - not available everywhere]
6 Verizon Communications, Inc. 4,353,000  [No Deal in Place]
7 Charter Communications, Inc. 4,341,000  [No Deal in Place]
8 AT&T, Inc. 3,991,000                           [No Deal in Place]
9 Cablevision Systems Corporation 3,257,000 [No Deal in Place]
10 Bright House Networks LLC1 2,079,000  [Deal in Place]


So, who is Charter using for "other providers of similar size?"  There's only one, and that's Cox, which has a  much different geographic footprint. 

[Prince_Lightfoot]

We don't even know for sure what the hangup is in negotiations. Is it price per subscriber? Or what tier of channels the Pac-12 Network is getting place on? Or which Pac-12 channels get picked up and which don't? (Remember, there are the six regionals plus the national.) Or some combination of all these things and others that we can't even guess at?

So, the oft-repeated line form Charter is: "Charter is interested in providing the PAC-12 Network to our customers, but only if the cost of the service to Charter and subsequently our customers is consistent with agreements PAC-12 Network has with other video providers of similar size as Charter. We are hopeful that our negotiations with PAC-12 Network will result in more reasonable terms and provide Charter customers with value."

I don't see how this is a reasonable benchmark, though.  According to the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, here are the subscriber numbers as if March 2012:

1 Comcast Corporation 22,294,000   [Deal in Place - not available everywhere]
2 DirecTV 19,966,000                           [Not Cable, no deal]
3 Dish Network Corporation 14,071,000 [Not Cable, no deal]
4 Time Warner Cable, Inc. 12,653,000   [Deal in Place]
5 Cox Communications, Inc. 4,756,000  [Deal in place - not available everywhere]
6 Verizon Communications, Inc. 4,353,000  [No Deal in Place]
7 Charter Communications, Inc. 4,341,000  [No Deal in Place]
8 AT&T, Inc. 3,991,000                           [No Deal in Place]
9 Cablevision Systems Corporation 3,257,000 [No Deal in Place]
10 Bright House Networks LLC1 2,079,000  [Deal in Place]


So, who is Charter using for "other providers of similar size?"  There's only one, and that's Cox, which has a  much different geographic footprint.