Why is This Channel So Hard to Get??

[FredVelDaphFan]

I swear, I have called my cable company no fewer than 5 times on this question--why is this channel so frickin' hard to get? :mad: Currently, where I live, it is available only through direct TV or Dish network. The guy I spoke to even said that Boomerang is the most often requested channel from cable subscribers, but for some reason, Comcast cannot acquire the rights to carry it. If they get it, the guy told me, it would be "On Demand" or available on digital cable only, not basic service cable. Is anyone else having this problem convincing the company to carry the channel?

Please, spare the suggestions of "switching providers", "switching to digital cable" or going to Direct Tv. It is not an option right now.

[MrBananagrabber]

I've got IO digital cable and we still don't even have it. I've put in a request with them, but who knows if that'll do anything at all? I'd just like a chance to watch Batman again without buying a bunch of DVDs.

I guess the only thing to do is to keep requesting it. Good luck

[Natey]

Well most of us dont have it and well the reasons some people dont have it is A Basic cable ( i wouldnt think any cable provider would have Boomereang) You can get it aon Dish but its on the top 160 channels which is very very pricy. Your best bet it direcTV. Though its not on the least exspensive package its the best price

~Nate~

[Brainatra]

Though I don't have cable, my cable company carries it... then again, the local cable company's Time-Warner Cable (owners of Boomerang). Thus explaining seeing the Road Runner's face all over the place here (their broadband Internet service is called "Road Runner", with the Road Runner as its logo/in all the ads for it).

[FredVelDaphFan]

... the local cable company's Time-Warner Cable (owners of Boomerang).Figures that TW cable would be able to carry it. SOmetimes I wonder if it was not deliberate somehow on the part of the parent network (CN) to make it such a hard channel to get...Perhaps someone feared that CN wuold get too much unwanted competition?

[sdp]

I have Dish Network and i'm not allowed to get it, i think i have the top 150 :/ you can't buy just one chanel either, its the whole package, i'd love this channel.

[discoduck777]

I hate to make you guys jealous but I have it on DISH Network. I do feel sorry for those of you who don't have it.

[PeppeRaskell1]

Have you tried writing to the person who has the job of acquiring new channels for your cable system? The next time you visit the website of your local cable company, send them an e-mail asking who acquires the cable channels for your system, and then write him a letter asking for Boomerang.

Then give the address to a friend, and have him do the same. Repeat same procedure 'till everyone in your area sends an e-mail to the New Channel Acqusition person.

I believe it may have helped us get Boomerang in this area.

[Hockey Mask]

If the NFL football package isn't good enought to sway you to DIRECTV...Bommerang should be.

[Style]

I have Dish Network and i'm not allowed to get it, i think i have the top 150 :/ you can't buy just one chanel either, its the whole package, i'd love this channel. Weird. I got Boomerang on Dish, and "Top 150" should include Boomerang, last I heard.

I've got a question: Is your Dish Network equipment a little on the older side? Because in order to get boomerang, you need a Dish called the Dish 500, which can pick up the signal stream from two satellites simultaneously, not just one. And on Dish Network, they carry Boomerang on the secondary satellite along with a few other channels, whereas most of the main channels like CN are on the main sattellite.

So, that might be the issue why they won't "Allow" you to get Boomerang, if your equipment is older. But, they have been installing the Dish 500 as the standard for about the last four years now, so most newer customers should have it. (I first signed up for Dish Network in '98, so we had to upgrade the equipment at a price. )

[Jeff Harris]

The short answer:
Cartoon Network has done a piss-poor job of managing the network and marketing "retro" and cable operators aren't convinced there's an audience for "classic cartoons."

The long answer:
When Cartoon Network announced the creation of Boomerang, a retro animation network aimed towards baby-boomers and family audiences, in 1999, fans of these classic cartoons were thrilled. However, on April 1, 2000, when viewers (and cable operators) got their first look at the network, they were less than pleased. The lineup wasn't a linear 24-hour network but rather a rigid eight-hour rotation that repeated thrice a day. Not exactly something worth watching, let alone something worth carrying on cable lineups.

In 2001 and for a period of two years afterwards, the powers that be at Cartoon Network implimented a phase-out of classic animation (not unlike what TBS and TNT did when they got rid of all animation in the mid-90s) to convince cable operators to pick up their new Boomerang network, which, unfortunately, led to Cartoon Network dropping all Warner Bros., Hanna-Barbera, Paramount, and non-Tom and Jerry MGM shorts and shows. The strategy backfired, as most cable operators ignored Boomerang, largely because of its non-traditional network lineup grid.

In late 2004, Cartoon Network publicly stated that they might want to change Boomerang into a preschool-oriented network. Also around this period, Boomerang created a more linear network with a 24-hour lineup. Cable operators remain skeptical about the future of Boomerang and whether or not they want to actively pursue it. Some operators still believe that Boomerang has the eight-hour "boomeranging" lineup, which is why they often tell customers that if they carry the network, it could only be on a VOD service.

But the lack of cable operator confidence is only half of the story. Cartoon Network has NO idea how to market nor operate a retro television outlet. Turner Broadcasting knows how to operate a classic movie network because, gasp, they actually have people who give a damn about classic movies. The people who currently run Cartoon Network have little reverence for classic animation. It's not even funny. Boomerang is often seen as an afterthought throughout Techwood Drive.

When was the last time you've seen an Boomerang ad on Cartoon Network for something ON Boomerang rather than the network itself? Seriously, Boomerang has had numerous events and premieres, and most of the general public is oblivious from it because THEY DON'T HAVE BOOMERANG! June Bugs, the Pink Panther event, the Fantastic Four event, Battle of the Planets, the recent premieres of Batman: The Animated Series and Superman: The Animated Series, if you don't have Time Warner Cable, DirecTV, or Dish, and didn't have access to the internet, you wouldn't have known a damned thing about them since Cartoon Network has done a piss-poor job of managing Boomerang.

Cartoon Network should look at how MTV Networks manage TV Land for an example of how to manage Boomerang. TV Land has a very diverse lineup of classics, near classics, and retrospective/historical programming every day and night with a strong variety of choices. Boomerang could be an animated equivalent of TV Land, but neither Cartoon Network nor Time Warner would want to commit that much energy to something like that. It'd be so much easier to turn Boomerang into a preschool-oriented network than to, I don't know, make Boomerang something worth watching. Seriously, why aren't the remastered Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry shorts on Boomerang right now? Why hasn't Boomerang aired more classic shows from the Warner Bros library nor acquired more shows and shorts from Classic Media, Sony, and Entertainment Rights?

Boomerang has so much potential and yet lack the bodies to actually see it through, which is a damned shame.

[JCorey3rd]

Boomerang needs to pull a VH1 and feature talking heads jabbering about various H-B characters - whether it be fond memories or "what's the deal" questioning. Do some low budget specials in order to attract attention. Think of how much attention Cartoon Network received when they first came out with Space Ghost Coast-to-Coast. And they're making a nice profit off Adult Swim using characters that can be seen on Boomerang.

In the near future, all the major shows on Boomerang will be out on DVD.

Also would be nice if like "The Zoo," they'd create an hour long show that uses the various action cartoons.

they do need to do something special - besides running the usual programs. TVLand made its impact when it ran the Rat Pack live concert.

[Jeff Harris]

Boomerang needs to pull a VH1 and feature talking heads jabbering about various H-B characters - whether it be fond memories or "what's the deal" questioning. Do some low budget specials in order to attract attention.I could see them doing a weekly popnost* series ala Best Week Ever and The Soup on Boomerang. It would definitely bring in Gen Xers and the Internet generation to the network as well as advertisers willing to exploit them (of course Boomerang would actually have to show ads). Hell, I'd even settle for repeats of Space Ghost Coast to Coast on Boomerang.

The thing with Boomerang is that although it's primarily aimed towards Baby Boomer audiences, the network is clearly aimed towards younger viewers. By alienating older viewers who grew up in the 80s. Thundarr, The Smurfs, and The Snorks weren't the only shows worth watching from the 80s, I'd like to see something like Galaxy High, Teen Wolf, Wildfire, Transformers, Voltron, ALF, The Real Ghostbusters, Inspector Gadget, the 80s Superman series, Jem, Bravestarr, C.O.P.S., Dinosaucers, ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THE HANNA-BARBERA LIBRARY FROM THE 80s. Heck, I'd even stomach My Little Pony . . . in small doses, of course. DiC could be a good ally in providing 80s programming, but that's a whole other post.

In the near future, all the major shows on Boomerang will be out on DVD.Yeah . . . so will every series from Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, Fox, and Paramount, but the thing is that they're largely still on the air for the most part. The thing is, DVD animation collections aren't in the price range of many consumers nor are they widely supported by the studios. But just because they're on DVD doesn't mean that they shouldn't be on television. Just not on an outlet in less than 1/5 of the total cable/satellite households in the country.

[Geezil]

In addition to all that, I've come to understand more recently that in the NYC/NJ area, the absence of Boomerang has been due in no small part to a political war between Time Warner and Cablevision over (if I've got this right) local sports coverage. As long as that was frozen, such would also be the case with TW channels like Guess Which. Anyway, it seems from the latest reports that this war has ended, so we'll soon see Out Here if there's any truly positive result for cartoon fans.

[JCorey3rd]

Yeah . . . so will every series from Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, Fox, and Paramount, but the thing is that they're largely still on the air for the most part. The thing is, DVD animation collections aren't in the price range of many consumers nor are they widely supported by the studios. .
I see the price coming down on these collections. Remember how much the first batch of H-B 4 DVD sets were? $65. Now you can grab the Flintstones, Jetsons, Top Cat and Jonny Quest for under $30 if you hunt around. That's a pretty great price considering how much they were asking for VHS tapes wiht barely 3 episodes on them.

The Rocky and Bullwinkle season sets have dropped down. I think the price range is there for the consumer that wants these programs for themselves or to share with their children.

I've recently been hearing reports of home entertainment systems where you can upload your DVD content onto a harddrive and make your own channel. This way you don't even have to make the effort to get up and put the DVDs in the player. Your collection is now a click away. The consumer now owns the content.

[Brainatra]

Hmm...

These days, advertisers do want to go after younger viewers, and wondering if Boomerange were to start running ads, they'd start airing more and more recent shows (much as I'd rather the older stuff continued to get attention...).

Still, do agree their marketing of Boomerang's been anemic, and my guess is it's related to the lack of attention Time-Warner gives to its older characters in general nowadays---- the Flintstones, Looney Tunes, etc. don't get the attention Time-Warner-produced stuff like "Kids Next Door" seems to get nowadays. I'd be surprised if kids have even *seen* a "Looney Tunes" or "flintstones" episode nowadays, given they'd rather air "Yu-Gi-Oh" a zillion times per day across two channels...



-B.

[Steve Carras]

[QUOTE=Jeff Harris]I could see them doing a weekly popnost* series ala Best Week Ever and The Soup on Boomerang. It would definitely bring in Gen Xers and the Internet generation to the network as well as advertisers willing to exploit them (of course Boomerang would actually have to show ads). Hell, I'd even settle for repeats of Space Ghost Coast to Coast on Boomerang.

The thing with Boomerang is that although it's primarily aimed towards Baby Boomer audiences, the network is clearly aimed towards younger viewers. By alienating older viewers who grew up in the 80s. QUOTE]

But Jeffrey, the 50s-70s teenager, kids were THE Baby Boomers(The Smurfs,newer jetsons which I liked,etc.were the "youngershows".In more wys thn one..red, nohumor.,sve the Jetsons-see their thred.)

SMRUFS's n exmple of youinger vediewers being trgeted..the rel crtoonsfrom the 70snd beforeshouldbe the concern s well. (I still recll seeing the Chipmunks ndthen finding out no ClydeCrshcup,no Mrs.Frumpington,etc.
(:ack: :ack: :ack: :ack: :ack: :ack: -exlcmtions pointsbeingdfisbled by keybord

[FredVelDaphFan]

on April 1, 2000, when viewers (and cable operators) got their first look at the network, they were less than pleased. The lineup wasn't a linear 24-hour network but rather a rigid eight-hour rotation that repeated thrice a day. Not exactly something worth watching, let alone something worth carrying on cable lineups. </quote>
Sounds like whhat they have on CN now, ironically! 3 hour blocks of the same series! Gimme a break!


In late 2004, Cartoon Network publicly stated that they might want to change Boomerang into a preschool-oriented network.

OK, Teletubbies for 24 hours!


From what I understand, the original idea for Boomerabg was born out of CN's desire to "shelve" the classic cartoons. It started out as a block called "Boomerang" which was sort of a test market. Talk aboput bad management.

[Kazuya Prower]

Its easier to get if you have satelite TV such as Direct TV.

[Jeff Harris]

I could see them doing a weekly popnost* series ala Best Week Ever and The Soup on Boomerang. It would definitely bring in Gen Xers and the Internet generation to the network as well as advertisers willing to exploit them (of course Boomerang would actually have to show ads). Hell, I'd even settle for repeats of Space Ghost Coast to Coast on Boomerang.

The thing with Boomerang is that although it's primarily aimed towards Baby Boomer audiences, the network is clearly aimed towards younger viewers. By alienating older viewers who grew up in the 80s.

But Jeffrey, the 50s-70s teenager, kids were THE Baby Boomers(The Smurfs, newer Jetsons which I liked,etc were the "younger shows")

SMURFS is an example of younger viewers being targeted. The real cartoons from the 70s and before shouldbe the concern s well. Steve . . . you called me Jeffrey. That's funny.

But I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not classified as a baby boomer and I barely qualify as Generation X. I'm just saying that Boomerang shouldn't be targeted exclusively to Baby Boomers and their families as the original intent was. There just aren't many shows on Boomerang that attract the Gen X/COTE (Children of the Eighties) audience on the network. I know that there are a few 80s shows on Boomerang, most of them either a part of the Funtastic World of Hanna-Barbera or The Smurfs, but these shows weren't real popular with the core of the Gen X/COTE generation. Aside from G.I. Joe and Thundercats, Boomerang has rarely aired anything aimed towards this audience. And they're not even trying to attract the 18-35 audiences that grew up with those shows. Hell, if they could attract that audience, perhaps the powers that be at Cartoon Network would make the network ad-supported.

From what I understand, the original idea for Boomerabg was born out of CN's desire to "shelve" the classic cartoons. It started out as a block called "Boomerang" which was sort of a test market. Talk aboput bad management.Well, that's partially true.

Boomerang was created as a place to house the Hanna-Barbera shows and shorts that had been pushed off the network in favor of the newer originals. Remember, in 2000, Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry, Acme Hour, Toonheads, Bugs and Daffy, Rocky and Bullwinkle, The Flintstones, The Jetsons, and the Termite Terrace artists anthology shows were still on the lineup.

The original Boomerang block, which had been a baby boomer-oriented mainstay on Cartoon Network since October 1, 1992, continued airing weekends on Cartoon Network until the end of 2003. The original Boomerang wasn't a test market. It, like Toonami, Miguzi, Fridays, and until recently Adult Swim, was a self-contained programming block and a regular part of Cartoon Network's lineup.

But you're right . . . bad management.

[FredVelDaphFan]

I had originally imagined Boomerang to be the Baby Boomer/Gen-X/COTE network, but alas, it never turned into that. When CN carried the shows like "Alvin and the Chipmunks" and "Beetlejuice," it looked like it would meet that target audience, but by overlooking it, CN management is making a very crappy decision. This is a sector of the population that has more buying power than the powers that be at CN give us credit for.

[Zechs]

I hope they don't turn it into a kiddie network. Then I'd stop watching. ( Not like I watch much T.V as it is)

[Gary L Thompson]

Short-term suggestion for "Boomerang"-starved viewer (I symphathize, I'm a Comcast subscriber myself):

Get together a big campaign to get "Boomerang" on Sky Angel. Since it's much smaller than the big two in dish services, the campaign would likely make more impact (since the network airs strictly old cartoons, it would go well with family-friendly programming Sky Angel airs), and the price of subscribing would be far less than getting an expensive sattellite tier.

Now onto the long-range question of the network's direction:

The short answer:
Cartoon Network has done a piss-poor job of managing the network and marketing "retro" and cable operators aren't convinced there's an audience for "classic cartoons."

The long answer:
When Cartoon Network announced the creation of Boomerang, a retro animation network aimed towards baby-boomers and family audiences, in 1999, fans of these classic cartoons were thrilled. However, on April 1, 2000, when viewers (and cable operators) got their first look at the network, they were less than pleased. The lineup wasn't a linear 24-hour network but rather a rigid eight-hour rotation that repeated thrice a day. Not exactly something worth watching, let alone something worth carrying on cable lineups.

In 2001 and for a period of two years afterwards, the powers that be at Cartoon Network implimented a phase-out of classic animation (not unlike what TBS and TNT did when they got rid of all animation in the mid-90s) to convince cable operators to pick up their new Boomerang network, which, unfortunately, led to Cartoon Network dropping all Warner Bros., Hanna-Barbera, Paramount, and non-Tom and Jerry MGM shorts and shows. The strategy backfired, as most cable operators ignored Boomerang, largely because of its non-traditional network lineup grid.

In late 2004, Cartoon Network publicly stated that they might want to change Boomerang into a preschool-oriented network. Also around this period, Boomerang created a more linear network with a 24-hour lineup. Cable operators remain skeptical about the future of Boomerang and whether or not they want to actively pursue it. Some operators still believe that Boomerang has the eight-hour "boomeranging" lineup, which is why they often tell customers that if they carry the network, it could only be on a VOD service.

But the lack of cable operator confidence is only half of the story. Cartoon Network has NO idea how to market nor operate a retro television outlet. Turner Broadcasting knows how to operate a classic movie network because, gasp, they actually have people who give a damn about classic movies. The people who currently run Cartoon Network have little reverence for classic animation. It's not even funny. Boomerang is often seen as an afterthought throughout Techwood Drive.

When was the last time you've seen an Boomerang ad on Cartoon Network for something ON Boomerang rather than the network itself? Seriously, Boomerang has had numerous events and premieres, and most of the general public is oblivious from it because THEY DON'T HAVE BOOMERANG! June Bugs, the Pink Panther event, the Fantastic Four event, Battle of the Planets, the recent premieres of Batman: The Animated Series and Superman: The Animated Series, if you don't have Time Warner Cable, DirecTV, or Dish, and didn't have access to the internet, you wouldn't have known a damned thing about them since Cartoon Network has done a piss-poor job of managing Boomerang.

Cartoon Network should look at how MTV Networks manage TV Land for an example of how to manage Boomerang. TV Land has a very diverse lineup of classics, near classics, and retrospective/historical programming every day and night with a strong variety of choices. Boomerang could be an animated equivalent of TV Land, but neither Cartoon Network nor Time Warner would want to commit that much energy to something like that. It'd be so much easier to turn Boomerang into a preschool-oriented network than to, I don't know, make Boomerang something worth watching. Seriously, why aren't the remastered Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry shorts on Boomerang right now? Why hasn't Boomerang aired more classic shows from the Warner Bros library nor acquired more shows and shorts from Classic Media, Sony, and Entertainment Rights?

Boomerang has so much potential and yet lack the bodies to actually see it through, which is a damned shame.I could see them doing a weekly popnost* series ala Best Week Ever and The Soup on Boomerang. It would definitely bring in Gen Xers and the Internet generation to the network as well as advertisers willing to exploit them (of course Boomerang would actually have to show ads). Hell, I'd even settle for repeats of Space Ghost Coast to Coast on Boomerang.

The thing with Boomerang is that although it's primarily aimed towards Baby Boomer audiences, the network is clearly aimed towards younger viewers. By alienating older viewers who grew up in the 80s. Thundarr, The Smurfs, and The Snorks weren't the only shows worth watching from the 80s, I'd like to see something like Galaxy High, Teen Wolf, Wildfire, Transformers, Voltron, ALF, The Real Ghostbusters, Inspector Gadget, the 80s Superman series, Jem, Bravestarr, C.O.P.S., Dinosaucers, ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THE HANNA-BARBERA LIBRARY FROM THE 80s. Heck, I'd even stomach My Little Pony . . . in small doses, of course. DiC could be a good ally in providing 80s programming, but that's a whole other post.

Yeah . . . so will every series from Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, Fox, and Paramount, but the thing is that they're largely still on the air for the most part. The thing is, DVD animation collections aren't in the price range of many consumers nor are they widely supported by the studios. But just because they're on DVD doesn't mean that they shouldn't be on television. Just not on an outlet in less than 1/5 of the total cable/satellite households in the country.I agree Boomerang has been long overdue in moving into the 1980s era, which ranks with the 1960s as the great explosion of animation on American TV. Personally, I would dedicate prime time and/or midday hours to the 1960s cartoons, and the afterschool hours (maybe the early morning hours as well) to the 1980s toons, since that was when those '80s classics aired originally. The weekends I would mainly devote to 1970s SatAM and the occasional movies (no later than the 1980s). And while MGM/HB and WB might remain the foundation of the network, I think Boomerang should start moving aggressively to acquire the rights of and rotate in classic cartoons from other companies: Famous/Harvey, Translux, Rankin-Bass, Filmation, Depatie-Freleng, Jay Ward Productions, Total Television, Format, UPA, etc., etc.

Well, I think CN has had more than a fair chance to make Boomerang work, maybe the solution is to turn the management of the channel over to TCM instead, with instructions to hire classic cartoon lovers and lure a couple people from TV Land. And yes, it doesn't matter if you have the very best product in the world, if you don't know how to package it in a way that will attract buyers, all you have is the best product in the world and no customers.

And yes, I agree Carras' idea has some merit, though I think TV Land has been overdoing that sort of thing nowadays (I would also hope such shows would have fun with the old classic characters, rather than make them objects of mockery like AS seems to do all too often).

[Steve Carras]

Short-term suggestion for "Boomerang"-starved viewer (I symphathize, I'm a Comcast subscriber myself):

Get together a big campaign to get "Boomerang" on Sky Angel. Since it's much smaller than the big two in dish services, the campaign would likely make more impact (since the network airs strictly old cartoons, it would go well with family-friendly programming Sky Angel airs), and the price of subscribing would be far less than getting an expensive sattellite tier.

Now onto the long-range question of the network's direction:

I agree Boomerang has been long overdue in moving into the 1980s era, which ranks with the 1960s as the great explosion of animation on American TV. Personally, I would dedicate prime time and/or midday hours to the 1960s cartoons, and the afterschool hours (maybe the early morning hours as well) to the 1980s toons, since that was when those '80s classics aired originally. The weekends I would mainly devote to 1970s SatAM and the occasional movies (no later than the 1980s).
Y'knowq, actually I started comi98ng up with a schedule just like yiours regarding when the differents deecades should be showcased..

And while MGM/HB and WB might remain the foundation of the network, I think Boomerang should start moving aggressively to acquire the rights of and rotate in classic cartoons from other companies: Famous/Harvey, Translux, Rankin-Bass, Filmation, Depatie-Freleng, Jay Ward Productions, Total Television, Format, UPA, etc., etc.

Well, I think CN has had more than a fair chance to make Boomerang work, maybe the solution is to turn the management of the channel over to TCM instead, with instructions to hire classic cartoon lovers and lure a couple people from TV Land. And yes, it doesn't matter if you have the very best product in the world, if you don't know how to package it in a way that will attract buyers, all you have is the best product in the world and no customers.

And yes, I agree Carras' idea has some merit, though I think TV Land has been overdoing that sort of thing nowadays (I would also hope such shows would have fun with the old classic characters, rather than make them objects of mockery like AS seems to do all too often).
THanks!

[Elven Moon]

I have the On Demand (with a pathedic selection, by the way), but I can't get the channel it looks like :sad: (I have Comcast).

[Mr Cat Dog]

By saying that Boomerang doesn't have an audience is a bit harsh, as it's the highest rated commercial kids channel in the UK, narrowly beating Cartoon Network itself. Because of this, most satellite/cable companies offer it at the bare minimum price.

Although to be fair, the only kids channels that aren't on the basic packages are the Disney channels.

[Gary L Thompson]

I have the On Demand (with a pathedic selection, by the way), but I can't get the channel it looks like :sad: (I have Comcast).
I've looked up the selections of the kids section of Comcast VOD, and yes, I thoroughly agree compared to other networks like PBS and Nick, Boomerang's selection is pathetic.

[Jeff Harris]

By saying that Boomerang doesn't have an audience is a bit harsh, as it's the highest rated commercial kids channel in the UK, narrowly beating Cartoon Network itself.Well, that's in the UK, not Stateside. The UK satellite/terrestial markets isn't as political as it in the US. By political, I'm not talking government politics, but competitive politics. Fewer cable and satellite operators (at last count, I think the only cable television operators are Time Warner, Comcast, Cablevision, Charter, and Cox and DirecTV and Dish are the only direct satelite systems out there) as well the fact that there really isn't competiting cable companies in the same markets leads to stagnation (hopefully, Verizon could change that).

And they all don't like each other. DirecTV, owned by News Corp, had shouting matches with Viacom and Time Warner in public, dropping their channels on numerous equations. Disney's ESPN and Cox Communications had public squabbles as well. Cox also pulled a number of Fox affiliates earlier this decade. Disney even told Time Warner subscribers to get DirecTV after Time Warner pulled network-owned ABC affiliates from their lineups. And even as we speak, Comcast and the Baltimore Orioles-owned MASN (with DirecTV and a pair of News Corp-owned DC affiliates, WDCA and WTTG, in their corner) are in a battle.

[Mr Cat Dog]

By political, I'm not talking government politics, but competitive politics.I can actually imagine George Bush shouting down the phone about not being able to get Boomerang, but that's just me. Fewer cable and satellite operatorsNope.The UK have 3: Sky, NTL and Telewest. The former being satellite and muchmore popular because it's much more accesible than cable, which isn't installed everywhere.And they all don't like each other.That'll be the difference then. By law, Sky (the biggest one, with the most money and channels, owned by Rupert Murdoch as well) has to give most of its channels to the cable providers. But Sky has the premier sports and movies channels, so that's another reason why it's considerably more popular than NTL or Telewest.

If the cable/satellite companies liked each other, and Turner was a bit better at handling Boomerang (because Turner UK are handling it great to be honest), then do you think it would work over there for you?

[Mugen]

By saying that Boomerang doesn't have an audience is a bit harsh, as it's the highest rated commercial kids channel in the UK, narrowly beating Cartoon Network itself. Because of this, most satellite/cable companies offer it at the bare minimum price.


I noticed that too. It's kinda amazing because it's the exact opposite over here in America. Does Boomerang carry commercials in the U.K.?

[Mr Cat Dog]

Yup. Turner also advertise it on different channels (such as CN and Toonami). Unlike Turner US, Turner UK seem to know what they're doing for Boomerang. Now if they could only do the same for CN and Toonami.

[Gary L Thompson]

Well, that's in the UK, not Stateside. The UK satellite/terrestial markets isn't as political as it in the US. By political, I'm not talking government politics, but competitive politics. Fewer cable and satellite operators (at last count, I think the only cable television operators are Time Warner, Comcast, Cablevision, Charter, and Cox and DirecTV and Dish are the only direct satelite systems out there) as well the fact that there really isn't competiting cable companies in the same markets leads to stagnation (hopefully, Verizon could change that).

And they all don't like each other. DirecTV, owned by News Corp, had shouting matches with Viacom and Time Warner in public, dropping their channels on numerous equations. Disney's ESPN and Cox Communications had public squabbles as well. Cox also pulled a number of Fox affiliates earlier this decade. Disney even told Time Warner subscribers to get DirecTV after Time Warner pulled network-owned ABC affiliates from their lineups. And even as we speak, Comcast and the Baltimore Orioles-owned MASN (with DirecTV and a pair of News Corp-owned DC affiliates, WDCA and WTTG, in their corner) are in a battle.
Well, again, I would suggest taking a shot at Sky Angel. You wouldn't run into these kind of politics (on second thought, I take that back, it seems I do remember some politics going on with this dish service too). On the other hand, it's certainly not the scale of what is going on with DirecTV, and it might be easier to make the pressure for Boomerang heard above the din here than at a media megagiant corporation.

Come to think of it, the new HDTV dish service Voom might be worth a try too. It's relatively new, and from I recall, their cartoon lineup was made up of strictly old cartoons anyway, so Boomerang would fit right in.

[FredVelDaphFan]

Well, I think CN has had more than a fair chance to make Boomerang work, maybe the solution is to turn the management of the channel over to TCM instead, with instructions to hire classic cartoon lovers and lure a couple people from TV Land. And yes, it doesn't matter if you have the very best product in the world, if you don't know how to package it in a way that will attract buyers, all you have is the best product in the world and no customers.
This sounds like a great idea and a workable one too, especially since Boomerang:cartoons::TCM:Classic movies. It takes a classic oriented group to run a classic oriented station.