Laserfiche WebLink
mlinnzapoais Star and Tribunin <br />Established 1867 Roger Parkinson PuthshOr am Presiaem <br />Joel R. Kramer Cxecutive Editor <br />TIM J. McGuire Managing Editbr <br />Robert J. White Editorial Editor <br />10A <br />Friday, January 25, 1085 <br />Cable TV struggles to find its place <br />Rogers Cablesystems, the Minneapolis cable-televi- <br />sior, franchise bolder, doesn't need to run snap <br />ops:as: It is one. From many viewers' perspective, <br />Rogers' tenure In the city must seem dominated by <br />controversy, Instability, uneven service and efforts <br />to renege on promises made to win the city fran. <br />chm. Claiming financial distress, the company <br />now wants further concessions from the city. De- <br />spite the able company's mixed record here. <br />short-term accommodation appears juaL'fied. <br />Rogers backs Its request with strong financial evi- <br />dence. While the Minneapolis cable system was <br />expected to lose money In Its early years, the loses <br />have exceeded forecasts. The resulting revenue <br />shortfall requires Rogers to borrow more than <br />anticipated to finish the system. The company's <br />lender has already Olt off credit to another able <br />company in a similar situation. <br />Four factors are commonly cited to explain Rogers' <br />weak ❑nenctal performance In Minneapolis. The <br />first Is marketing Rogers says It has problems <br />selling cable In Minneapolis, particularly to the <br />city's older residents. Critics point to the company's <br />failure to develop a strong marketing strategy. And <br />its efforts do seem puny — a shortcoming shared <br />by urban cable systems across the country. The <br />Industry seems to have assumed that cable would <br />Sell itself, and has been slow to respond when that <br />proved unwe_ <br />One reason the ssumption proved untrue, accord- <br />Ing to Roger, Is Increased competition from video- <br />cassette reeorden and other forms of entertain- <br />ment. Moreover, In Minneapolis Rogers must com- <br />pete with seven over -the -air television stations and <br />a rich assortment of cultural and sports attractions. <br />Some able-iodastry spokesmen cite a third factor <br />over which system operators like Rogers have little <br />control: programming quality. Rogers carries what <br />production companies offer. And nationally the <br />Industry is under fire for falling to provide the <br />wide variety of programming earlier foreseen. <br />The fourth factor is poor service. In Its short <br />association with Minneapolis. Rogers has acquired <br />an unfortunate reputation for not responding well <br />to customer concerns. <br />Rogers made extraordinary financial and service <br />commitments to secure the Minneapolis francIlLSe. <br />But If the company promised much, the city ALSO <br />demanded much, and Rogers' bank Judged the <br />franchise a safe Investment. All were reacting to <br />what, In hindsight. were unreasonable expectations <br />for cable television. It would be unfair to force <br />Rogers alone to bear the penalty for that shared <br />misjudgment And Minneapolis won't benefit by <br />demanding compliance with the existing contract If <br />that means a weaker, leseffective cable system. <br />As Rogers' record In Minneapolis shows, urban <br />cable television is an infant Industry groping to find <br />its niche In a highly competitive environment. Just <br />as xrly expectations of cable were thnated, an <br />may present estfmales be understated. In respond. <br />Ing to Rogers' latest plea, Minneapolis should help <br />ease the company's rloancial burden while the <br />system is being completed. The city should also <br />make clear that Rogers mist help limit by Improv- <br />ing marketing and service. Long-term adjustments <br />to the franchise should be avoided until the system <br />Is finished and a clearer picture emerges of cable <br />television's place in the Minneapolis entertainment <br />and communication markets. <br />