This has been an interesting discussion. Thanks to all.
I didn’t realize that content providers like TCM get paid (kickback anyone?) per subscriber. I just assumed they negotiated $$$ to be carried on a channel lineup.
I’m not in that London. Lovely London, Ontario, (Canada) lies halfway between Toronto and Detroit. FYI.
But thanks for thinking of me!
I would assume Turner insists it be included if cable channels want TNT, TBS, CNN, or any other Turner Broadcasting networks.
Only a part of their film library is public domain. Turner himself bought the rights to all MGM films long before he set up TCM. Today, Time Warner owns TCM, so they have the rights to any Warner Brothers films. There are also blanket licensing deals with most of the Hollywood studios. Licensing in bulk allows to keep the costs per film down, and it’s cheap since they’re buying rights to films that have no broadcast value as part of the package. Turner is also one of the few markets for old movie rights, so it makes financial sense to agree to it.
I did not know this existed. Off to investigate their library…
I’ve purchased movies that I have discovered via TCM, so someone is getting money because of the channel.
They used to be the only place to watch some movies, because they were never available on DVD or VHS, but more are coming out all the time. So that, too, is a side benefit of TCM. For somebody. If Turner owns the DVD rights, then thank you Ted.
Why would it be a kickback? The content provider is offering something of value, and wants to get paid for it.
Content provider: “Mr. Cable Company, I have a channel that your subscribers want to watch, and they’ll consider getting cable TV from you to be more worthwhile if you offer it to them. Do you think that it’s worth $x per subscriber for you to carry my channel?” High-demand channels (i.e., channels that a lot of people want to watch, like ESPN and HBO) are able to demand a higher rate from the cable companies; low-demand channels are only able to get a relatively small rate.
My understanding is that the shopping channels get offered to cable companies for very little, since their business model is that they make their money from sales, not from cable fees. That’s why cable providers are so willing to offer them – it lets them add to their channel count, without having to spend much, if any, money.
Actually the Shopping Channels pay to be carried, that is why the providers are so willing to include them.
Its a minor pain for viewers as there usually is not an easy way to bypass the Shopping Channels and Pay Per View Channels. You can sit there and build a huge Favorites list on many of the Cable/Sat systems but that then needs to be maintained and probably misses free weekends.
I like TCM. They respect movies as art (the colorizing debacle was a long time ago).
The kickback quip was made in jest. My sorely (which spellcheck resolves to ‘soberly’ 
) lacking understanding of the economics of cable/satellite TV is quite evident. I appreciate all the comments.
^^^ This.
I always thought that colorizing was a trivial offense compared to arbitrary editing for time, censoring, and superimposed ads seen on most channels.
Didn’t Orsen Welles say on his deathbed, regarding Citizen Kane, “Tell Ted Turner to keep his goddamn Crayloas off of my movie”? 
I thought he said “Rosebud” on his deathbed.
I enjoyed Robert Osborne’s introductions to the movies. He always had great production notes and actor trivia.
Sometimes they brought in a guest celebrity to introduce the movie.
Are they still filming the intros for newer films?
Ben Mankiewicz is doing it now, but I do miss Mr. Osborne’s intros.
There is one thing that would be a perfect fit on TCM. “Inside the Actors Studio” with James Lipton. Very insightful, and I think it would be an awesome addition to have in between feature movies.
There’s a difference between holding copyright, and distribution rights. I know this from working in a art house. We sometimes had trouble getting classic films, because even though something might be in public domain as far as copyright was concerned, someone might still hold exclusive distribution rights.
I think what Turner holds are distribution rights. You are not doing anything illegal by making copies of his films (the restored ones are another matter-- he may own exclusive rights to his particular restoration), if you have the technology, but you can’t distribute copies. That’s a difference from new films, which you aren’t actually even supposed to copy from the TV. (Albeit, no one is going to come after you for copying something to your DVR to watch once, then deleting.)
I agree. I enjoy that they (TCM) don’t seem to edit that I am aware of. Plus I have a PAUSE button on my remote in case if a potty break is needed. 
Add in the factor the beginning hideous efforts on colorizing actually detracted from the experience.
There was a reason why these directors, cinematographers, lighting crews, et al perfected their craft for B&W film stock.
Very insightful. It is hard enough to follow studios these days. Turner bought the rights to libraries, other studios joined the bandwagon, which then merged with Time Warner, which was later acquired by ATT, whom which is now suggested to sell off Turner assets in order to complete a merger.
I guess they call it “Hollywood Bookkeeping” for a reason. I wish I were a corporate lawyer as I could have my popcorn and eat it too.
nm. Ninja’d by ekedolphin.