# Comcast "Flirts" with NBC **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 2, 2009, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comcast-flirts-with-nbc/512313 "2009-10-02T03:41:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comcast-flirts-with-nbc/512313/1 "2009-10-02T03:41:28Z")
> [@](#): > > A deal between Comcast Corp > (CMCSA.O) and General Electric Co (GE.N) for NBC Universal > would seem a storybook match – one wants in to the media > business and the other may be well-served to get out. > > Comcast shareholders see it another way, sending its shares > down 7.2 percent on Thursday as sources familiar with the > matter said the top U.S. cable service provider was in talks to > buy a majority stake in NBC Universal from GE. > > While a deal would allow Comcast to acquire the cable > networks it has coveted – Bravo, USA and CNBC, among others – Full story from [Reuters](http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0126911920091001) Any thoughts on this? Seems like a bad idea to allow the owner of the biggest cable systems in the USA to control a major network. Especially the NBC O&O stations would fall under Comcast, which would be interesting to see if there’s be any issues with the DISH and DirectTV set, not to mention VIOS and AT&T’s U-Verse. ---
**Author:** ![obfusciatrist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4af34b/32.png) [@obfusciatrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/obfusciatrist)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comcast-flirts-with-nbc/512313/2 "2009-10-02T05:00:21Z")
I’ll wait and see if anything real comes of it. Their unsolicited offer for Disney a few years ago never went anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Barchetta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/da6949/32.png) [@Red\_Barchetta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Barchetta)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comcast-flirts-with-nbc/512313/3 "2009-10-02T05:56:52Z")
I fear for Hulu ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comcast-flirts-with-nbc/512313/4 "2009-10-02T09:47:43Z")
> [@Markxxx](#): > > Full story from [Reuters](http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0126911920091001) > > Any thoughts on this? > > Seems like a bad idea to allow the owner of the biggest cable systems in the USA to control a major network. It would be like Sky in the UK, controlling the biggest satellite/cable operator and owning the content. And yes, it’s bad for consumers. Another cable provider wants to show Premiership soccer? No problem, Sky will sell them the rights – at a price of Sky’s choosing. If they don’t like the price, _shrug_, it just means more subscribers for Sky. We have competition laws, but the authorities seems too timid to do anything about it. ---
**Author:** ![TBG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c89c15/32.png) [@TBG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TBG)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2009, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comcast-flirts-with-nbc/512313/5 "2009-10-03T21:55:53Z")
Time Warner owns both cable companies and channels. Is it really a big deal? ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comcast-flirts-with-nbc/512313/6 "2009-10-04T00:46:38Z")
> [@TBG](#): > > Time Warner owns both cable companies and channels. Is it really a big deal? It’s a big deal for the US because we use affilates for the most part instead of O&O (owned and operated). In the US we have a must carry rule for cable companies. What that says is a station has two choices, they can require “compensation” from the cable for showing their TV station or they can demand a “must carry” option. For instance, in Chicago we have Channel 62 WYJS which is mostly religious and infomercials. It’s doubtful any cable comany would want that channel. All it does is take up space for channels consumers would rather have. So WJYS involkes a “must carry.” That is it says “I want Comcast to carry WJYS:” Comcast is forced to carry WJYS but receives doesn’t have to pay for it. Now other channels like WFLD Channel 32 the FOX channel in Chicago, are in demand. WFLD can say give me “X amount of dollars” to carry WFLD or we want to be put on a certain channel on all systems and we want Comcast to carry all the cable channels owned or co-owned by FOX. This is why you have so many “junk” channels on Cable. Since FOX has “American Idol” and that’s the #1 show, few cable companies would NOT want to carry FOX so they become willing to negotiate. Now if Comast owned NBC, it woujld be in a position to control the TV stations NBC now owns. Comcast would have a vested interest in bumping other channels off or to upper tiers to put other channels owned by NBC. In additon Comcast could say “Sorry” to satellite providers and U-Verse and FIOS customers, in markets where they own TV stations. This is would give Comcast a lot more influence than any other cable company and it would seem to go against public interest in MORE competition