# Epix movie channel runs into tough times



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

I didn't really know what forum to post this in,so I'll post it here. 

From latimes.com:
10 months ago,LionsGate,MGM and Paramount Pictures teamed up to create a "next generation" movie channel that would debut on the Internet and revolutionize the pay-TV business.
So far,the studios have invested $35 million in the venture,dubbed it Epix and said that LionsGate would produce the channel's first original TV series called "Tough Trade".
At the current time,Epix has been unable to secure distribution with any cable or DBS company,a crucial step in the launch of any new network.
DirecTV,Time Warner and Comcast all appear skittish about adding a pricey new movie channel at the current time,when they are fighting to hold the line on program expenses and retain subscribers.

Quite a bit more info about this story at the following link.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/business/la-fi-cotownepix6-2009mar06,0,309555.story


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

Just as I predicted. I see them going back to Showtime before too long.


----------



## rebkell (Sep 9, 2006)

Another problem with streaming is the cable companies seem to all be putting caps on Bandwidth usage, it's bordering on anti-competitive, but good luck on getting any resolution for the consumer.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

rebkell said:


> Another problem with streaming is the cable companies seem to all be putting caps on Bandwidth usage, it's bordering on anti-competitive, but good luck on getting any resolution for the consumer.


You want anticompetive, the telcos are way worse then the cable companies. AT&T is testing caps, Fronter has caps at a whopping 5GB/month.

http://www.frontier.com/5GB


----------



## rebkell (Sep 9, 2006)

Steve Mehs said:


> You want anticompetive, the telcos are way worse then the cable companies. AT&T is testing caps, Fronter has caps at a whopping 5GB/month.
> 
> http://www.frontier.com/5GB


That's pathetic, and what is their justification for all this, I don't seem to recall getting any notes with my bill from comcast about limits(it could have been there, but I sure didn't see it). The cable cos are going to totally ruin Demand stuff, of course you'll be able to use all of their's that you want, I'm hoping some agency steps in and rights this ship before it's too late. Now, I'll admit at the current time 250GB will probably satisfy my needs, but with Netflix streaming, and all the stuff that is showing up daily on the net for viewing video from all the different networks, this is got to be getting awfully close to anti-competition.

They sell you a service and then limit your use of it, speed should be the capping part, not the total bandwidth. You can faster speed with Comcast, but that just means you can use up your total bandwidth quicker.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

The cable companies are not ruining On Demand content, they practically invented it. Time Warner offers excellent On Demand service here, I see no problem in them trying to prevent people from using lets say DirecTV On Demand on their cable broadband network. If TW implements caps nationwide so be it, I'll just switch over to Road Runner Business Class, I'll lose my cable TV bundeling discount, but so be it.


----------



## rebkell (Sep 9, 2006)

Steve Mehs said:


> The cable companies are not ruining On Demand content, they practically invented it. Time Warner offers excellent On Demand service here, I see no problem in them trying to prevent people from using lets say DirecTV On Demand on their cable broadband network. If TW implements caps nationwide so be it, I'll just switch over to Road Runner Business Class, I'll lose my cable TV bundeling discount, but so be it.


It's fine if you have a choice, around here it's Comcast and a hit or miss DSL, there aren't really many options and I suspect half the country or better is in the same predicament. I do see a problem with them not letting me use the internet or capping it unfairly to prevent me from using another On-Demand service.


----------

