"Shutting down programs is unpopular".
Many private radio broadcasters believe that obtaining a license also solves the distribution issue
Many private radio broadcasters believe that the distribution issue has also been resolved with the concessionCablecom is being forced to clarify its product range policy due to the demand from secondary channels for a cable network slot. However, according to Paul Winiker, neither the claim to a connection nor cost neutrality are realistic.the planned cable radios will not get into the cable networks so easily? Where is the problem?
Paul Winiker: We were virtually bombarded with applications for second, third and fourth radio stations. However, some of these requests are made for purely tactical reasons, because they are hoping for a better starting position when it comes to frequency allocation. But that's not the only reason why we don't simply switch off existing radio stations. We are very, very restrictive in this respect.
Around 40 radio stations can be received on the cable network. Why is it so difficult to replace some of these mostly foreign stations with the new applicants from Switzerland?
Winiker: Shutting down programs is very unpopular. This is never possible without upsetting a large number of customers. For Cablecom, this means: Does the activation of a new program justify taking a program away from a certain customer group? A sensible product range policy that takes the wishes of its customers seriously is of the utmost importance to Cablecom.
The wishes of cable customers are also the subject of a cable radio study published last fall (see also WW 46/01). The study, initiated by Swisscable, SRG, Radiotele and various radio stations, sets out clear priorities for the broadcasting of radio programs.
Winiker: We are aware of the study, but it gives us little more information than we already had. Around a year ago, we asked over 20,000 cablecom customers about their priorities when using radio stations on the cable network. In that survey, 96 percent said they were "satisfied" to "very satisfied" with the cable radio offering.
Several of the projected cable radios seem to have miscalculated in terms of distribution. What was their miscalculation?
Winiker: Distribution is a very important issue for all media. Unfortunately, this fact is totally neglected by some broadcasters. These broadcasters believe that they can apply for a license from the Federal Office of Communications and then have distribution in the bag with the license. But this is not the case. On the other hand, distribution is not free either. Every program activation requires the use of the technical and personnel infrastructure of the cable networks. Of course, the question is always who pays these costs.
Broadcasters want the cable network operators to provide the activation as free of charge as possible. What can you offer them?
Winiker: That is a matter for negotiation. There is no generally applicable rule here. However, the key factor in the assessment will always be whether a program offers real added value in the existing range. If this is the case, we will not focus on the cost issue. Another question, however, is how the cable networks that do not belong to Cablecom will react. We have no influence there. Interview: Daniel Schifferle
Paul Winiker: We were virtually bombarded with applications for second, third and fourth radio stations. However, some of these requests are made for purely tactical reasons, because they are hoping for a better starting position when it comes to frequency allocation. But that's not the only reason why we don't simply switch off existing radio stations. We are very, very restrictive in this respect.
Around 40 radio stations can be received on the cable network. Why is it so difficult to replace some of these mostly foreign stations with the new applicants from Switzerland?
Winiker: Shutting down programs is very unpopular. This is never possible without upsetting a large number of customers. For Cablecom, this means: Does the activation of a new program justify taking a program away from a certain customer group? A sensible product range policy that takes the wishes of its customers seriously is of the utmost importance to Cablecom.
The wishes of cable customers are also the subject of a cable radio study published last fall (see also WW 46/01). The study, initiated by Swisscable, SRG, Radiotele and various radio stations, sets out clear priorities for the broadcasting of radio programs.
Winiker: We are aware of the study, but it gives us little more information than we already had. Around a year ago, we asked over 20,000 cablecom customers about their priorities when using radio stations on the cable network. In that survey, 96 percent said they were "satisfied" to "very satisfied" with the cable radio offering.
Several of the projected cable radios seem to have miscalculated in terms of distribution. What was their miscalculation?
Winiker: Distribution is a very important issue for all media. Unfortunately, this fact is totally neglected by some broadcasters. These broadcasters believe that they can apply for a license from the Federal Office of Communications and then have distribution in the bag with the license. But this is not the case. On the other hand, distribution is not free either. Every program activation requires the use of the technical and personnel infrastructure of the cable networks. Of course, the question is always who pays these costs.
Broadcasters want the cable network operators to provide the activation as free of charge as possible. What can you offer them?
Winiker: That is a matter for negotiation. There is no generally applicable rule here. However, the key factor in the assessment will always be whether a program offers real added value in the existing range. If this is the case, we will not focus on the cost issue. Another question, however, is how the cable networks that do not belong to Cablecom will react. We have no influence there. Interview: Daniel Schifferle
