True, wendell - for this post, I counted partial ownership and joint ventures as "ownership." Technically, these TV channels are owned by holding corporations who are in turn owned by another holding corporation and so forth ... but behind all the commotion stood only a few companies.
Hallmark Channel is owned by Crown Media Holding in the United States (they are controlled by the Hallmark Company which makes the cards). Internationally, however, it is owned by NBC Universal Global Networks, which in turn is owned by GE.
@Adam Stanhope: Or do you think it will just encourage more homeless to come to San Francisco?
I can’t believe that you actually said that, Alex.
I used to work in San Francisco, so I'm familiar with the city's very tolerant policies toward the homeless (well, maybe "was familiar" is more like it - this was some years ago, so unless Mayor Gavin changed the ways of the City ...)
Anyways, San Francisco is the only city I know of that doles out monthly checks to the homeless after only a short period of time of "residency." A few years ago, the City got a black eye when someone discovered that they spend $40K per homeless person in services.
$40,000!
If they had just given that money to the homeless, I'm sure a lot of them wouldn't be homeless anymore!
The word on the street was that other cities in the US actually give one-way bus fares to their homeless people to go to San Francisco...
As far as I know, Direct TV is owned by John Malone's Liberty Media (It used to be partly owned by News Corp until Redstone sold/swapped the shares).
Larry, Discovery Channel is owned by the John Malone's Discovery Communication. This company also owns Animal Planet, TLC, and the Science Channel.
I can’t believe that you actually said that, Alex.
I used to work in San Francisco, so I'm familiar with the city's very tolerant policies toward the homeless (well, maybe "was familiar" is more like it - this was some years ago, so unless Mayor Gavin changed the ways of the City ...)
Anyways, San Francisco is the only city I know of that doles out monthly checks to the homeless after only a short period of time of "residency." A few years ago, the City got a black eye when someone discovered that they spend $40K per homeless person in services.
$40,000!
If they had just given that money to the homeless, I'm sure a lot of them wouldn't be homeless anymore!
The word on the street was that other cities in the US actually give one-way bus fares to their homeless people to go to San Francisco...
Anyhoo, I think these people only "rented out" the front of the house - so no damage to their possessions.
@violet: ouch on the piano! I hope they compensated you for that.