Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by fervorfactor, Sep 19, 2012.
Here's the latest update from directv. They don't think USC is ranked.
USC football isn't driving this. I'm watching USC/Stanford on a compressed 60 minute recap now. Basketball has to be a big part of this. I have Dish and this costs me nothing, so far.
They don't think UCLA is ranked either.
Look at the conference realignment and think about how big a part basketball was and is there. The best conference in the nation is getting torn apart and they were willing to let one of the top programs in the nation, Kansas, hang out to dry.
Football drives everything.
I'm a happy camper, $49 a month for 120 plus channels of service and the Pac-12 since my nest just got empty. I'll just shut my mouth and enjoy football and basketball. Sorry DTV dudes. I offered to upgrade my service for Pac-12 and they said don't worry. Dish Rocks!
I wouldn't be surprised if DirecTV is taking a hard line because of the rapid increase in carriage fees for channels focused on live sports. They've positioned themselves as the leader in sports so that is likely having a significant impact on their bottom line costs. They are probably regretting agreeing not to relegate the B10 network to the sports tier now that other conferences are looking for the same deal and others are also trying to create networks.
If DirectTV thinks the asking price is too high, why don't they state in their press release how much is the PAC-12 asking? Maybe because it is not really that high but with nicely placed wording make it look like PAC-12 is greedy.
I have to say, it sounds like its political in nature (SEC/Big 12 pulling strings) or that Direct TV is afraid to open the flood gates with conferences having 7 channels devoted to their programming. SEC is waiting in the wings so you know whatever happens to the Pac 12 is going to be quadrupled in their asking price.
Network games are important to specific fans and we want them to have their network, but Pac 12 continues to demand a significant price that would force all of our customers to still pay for this channel whether they want it or not.
Hey DTV assholes. Do you think I want 30 channels of home shopping or lifetime or the ****ing cartoon network? Well I still have to pay for those.
Apparently it is too much to ask to allow us to pay for the PAC12 channels in the sports pack, WTF?
Hey, lay off the Cartoon Network, I need me some Adult Swim. Venture Brothers is one of my favorite shows on TV, and all the skits in Robot Chicken are targeted specifically for the nostalgia factor of all the 35 y/os on this board using all our childhood icons, LOL.
I love those shows too, but I'm cool with waiting and getting them on DVD/netflix. I kinda want a package that gives me all the channels that a sports event may appear on, and that's about it.
Exactly. They have such ridiculous channels, channels so bad that they indicate that the satellite company treats the customers with contempt, and then won't carry the Pac-12? And to think, just a few short weeks ago I was angry at Dish based on reports they would not get the Pac-12 network and that a DirecTv deal was "imminent."
You can do that...if you are 'out of market' on DISH.
Directv apparently doesn't want to pay what Dish pays. The rumors are that Scott and Co have written the contracts with DISH and the big 4 cable companies to give them the lowest price, so if DTV gets a deal for less than those 5 current companies, the P12 then has to lower their rate too. It's not uncommon because it ensures the early partners at a disadvantage to a later partner, and it gives Scott the ability to walk away from DTV and say your offer is so bad it actually costs us more money than it makes. If DirecTV is actually proposing that P12 is only on a sports pack for 'in market' customers, they are essentially choosing not to carry the net. That's a non starter when compared to the other deals.
Keeping subscribers and prying subscribers away from other providers make the industry really competitive, and I'm sure these companies are salivating at the chance to pull customers away from DTV. They also want live sports because those cannot be replaced by netflix or other streaming. This is even bigger as cable/sat companies are afraid of customers dropping service completely. People always want the a la carte streaming for XX.XX per month, but if that were an option, no cable or sat company would offer P12 in the basic tier either. Or they would play a significantly reduced rate. Streaming a la carte would make it tough for the network to even break even, let alone pay $5-$10 million to each conference member. If I'm paying $100 a month for service, I'm glad that now some is going to my schools and not some 300 other channel that I never watch. I'm glad P12 has a card in the game instead of not.
DTV is being a bit disingenuous with the 'all customers pay for P12' rhetoric... all customers in the 6 p12 states would pay for P12 Net. And yes it's a substantial amount of money. But out of region customers would barely pay a thing... most wouldn't subscribe to the sports pack or top tier, so they wouldn't pay. And if they did pay for those tiers, it would be something like $.10 for the channel. 10 cents for 10% of their customer base who are probably paying $120+ per month. boo hoo.
I also think people are right in thinking that DTV is scared of agreeing too fast with P12 because the SEC network is coming. CBS/ESPN are NOT going to give the SEC a lot more money due to expansion. BUT the SEC will have a large number of extra games that they can form a network with. A 14 team league has more football games than a 12 team league. SEC has a bigger following in market and out of market. They have seen how the P12 has rolled out their net and can do the same (big question is whether they will partner with anyone). So expect their net to ask for more and make more than p12, if that's the model they go with.
Actually I think the DirecTV deal for the PAC 12 network is a little more complicated than that. I'm pretty sure that the B10 Network is carried nationally by DirectTV as part of the Choice package, not on the sports tier. I think the PAC may be looking for the same deal for Pac 12 National and then the regionals available on the sports tier, with a minimum offer of overflow channels like Dish has or preferably tacking on the regional feeds in the sports tier. The PAC is likely arguing what is the difference between us and the B10 and DirecTV is likely fighting to just add them to the sports tier...at least that is my guess based on the language coming out DirecTV.
What complicates this deal is that I believe at the time the original B10 deal was signed, DirecTV was owned by Fox, who also had a 49% stake in the network, so it probably made sense at the macro-corporate level to give the network as broad of distribution as possible. Sports oriented channels are expensive, and DirecTV is likely fighting against that deal because it adds a decent chunk to their bottom line costs for the Choice tier programming that can't be recouped as easily as it can on a sports tier where people are willing to pay a premium for that type of programming. A big part of this is DirecTV likely trying to set a precedent for the new Lakers channel and other planned sports networks like the SEC's upcoming network.
Now if I'm wrong and DirecTV has refused an offer to put it on Choice in just the home footprint and the sports tier everywhere else like Dish took, then I dunno. In that case DirecTV is just being obstinate and maybe trying to squeeze them for an extra piece of the ad revenue or cheaper rates or something given their leverage as the sports leader and commercial sports bar accounts.
Can't you at least expand on this? I need four paragraphs to believe you.
Edit: Just kidding guys. The last few long posts were actually good reads.
Interesting point - I really hope that's not the hangup because I don't see it happening. Scott has said 'fundamentally similar' to Dish, which makes it sound like 6 states in market, rest in sports tier IMO. But he has alluded to wanting the same deal as the BTN (though at a lower rate). Dish has dropped BTN, any maybe they want to push it back DOWN to the same type of deal that P12 has. If national coverage means that much to Scott, he should lower the national rate to whatever will get the station distributed while still keeping the in market rate high. Hell, i'd consider giving it away for free to distributors (that have enough in market customers) on the condition that they guarantee to put it on a base tier.
Definitely partnering with Fox got the station going on Dierctv... and it seems like the cable companies guaranteed enough money up front that there was NO risk of the p12 network losing money short or long term, which is great compared to the joke of the Mtn (P12 is no MWC to start with). I was worried that those terms were so favorable to the cable companies that neither sat would come on board, but if cheap charlie signs up for P12, it can't be that bad of a deal can it?
As for the threat of the lakers channel raising rates, it will be interesting to see how much of a 'regional fee' Directv charges LA customers if/when they agree to carry the lakers. Seems like TWC wants $3.95 for the station per sub per month! But because of DTV's surcharge, they could pass that amount off on LA customers and not average it out over the country. SEC network is a different problem because the home markets aren't all that big population wise, but the national appeal might be greater. So they might want a larger per sub nationwide amount, which means DTV needs to hit at P12 now if the national rate/carriage tier isn't right.
I think choice in the 6 states and sports tier everywhere is the happy medium. I dunno. Hopefully. Then they can tell still tell the SEC exactly what deal they will get and it won't affect other markets' prices. DTV can also pass through the costs to the sub by market, so they don't even lose. Customers, unlike on cable, can opt out of regional networks altogether too.
Of course now looking at the Lakers/TWC channel rate, I would guess DTV is going to play hardball with them too, and DTV figures they don't want to pay for P12 when all the big So Cal sports fans will leave DTV anyway over no Lakers. I think So Cal is 40% of the subs in the entire P12. If no deal with the lakers is reached, the fans that stay with DTV will be the fans who don't care about sports, and would stay whether or not the P12 is included in DTV's lineup.
It's because they both like money and are trying to get as much of it as they can. Duh.
So am I understanding this correctly? I want both pac12 and sec/cbs networks(whenever that occurs), but will be forced to lock into a 2 yr contract when upgrading to HD. Basically I should sit tight with my thumbs up my ass for the next year or so because there are many more pissing matches to come?
you will sit there with your thumbs up your ass and like it.
~Michael D White (CEO of dtv)
Sounds like SEC network will start in 2014:
If you really want Pac 12, I'd get dish now. Termination fee goes down according to how much time you have left on the contract and since all these companies give new customers great deals but don't for current customers, it even pays to bounce around, with the downside of the install hassle. In 2014, you can be virtually be free of the contract and make another decision.
Thank you sir may I please have another.
Jim Carlisle, Ventura County Star tweets
Jim Carlisle @VCSJimCarlisle
DirecTV says it offered to carry Pac-12 Networks as a stand-alone channel for customers to take a la carte or to carry games on demand -more
The on-demand proposal was to be in place "until we get this worked out." Pac-12, however, rejected both ideas "without any consideration."
DirecTV: "It’s regrettable and unfortunate, but Pac 12 keeps denying these few exclusive games to the people who really want them the most."
Why would the P12 executives even consider the offer? They want a multi year deal, but would sell their greatest piece of leverage for peanuts? If only we could all buy the games we wanted on PPV, and none of the ones we didn't. It's such a departure from normal cable/satellite/sports network business practices that it should have been dismissed immediately.
DTV thinks p12 fans are dumb enough to fall for their PR BS. Pretty insulting, because again we pay for a lot of programming we never watch. It's their business model not ours.
Of course, the federal leadership in 2003 passed the law that forbids citizens the right to free cable competition OR subscribing to existing individual channels. They were paid off by cable-companies to legalize "tier packages only" instead of giving us the digital rights that were available - single channels, so we'd never have to support any channel we didn't want to watch. The Party Of No did what they did best: digital rights were available to us, but "NO" was their vote.
I'd LOVE to only pay for the channels I deem worth watching. But I'd also love to have legislators that actually represented their own constituents rather than a party boss. I don't really understand why we need so many legislators that only vote the way their party dictator decides. Why not fire all but one legislator, and those hundreds of thousands of staffers, and give that one dictator proxy votes? Heck, they can pull a Wall Street and get an Auto-Bot to vote No, No, No.
You realize that a la carte programming would be the death of channels that don't cater to the lowest common denominator, right? There might even be a few channels that you like that would go away because not enough other people would pay to keep them on the air. A la carte sounds great, but in practice it would be a disaster for a lot of viewers...
Junction, there's no basis for that. But there is history for the other way - there were a lot of local TV-channels that made ample profits and were in business for two decades. So profitable that the big networks went thru and bought them up.
Personally, I'm much rather risk it. Why give Entitlements to groups that don't earn it? And puh-leeze, the threats of "They'll raise the prices!" - heck, they raise prices because the sun rises. A cloud appears. I'd love to see TV channels survive on the programming their viewers really like, rather than having the Judge Judy's, Jerry Sandusky-Springer and umpteen shopping channels be propped up by misuse of my dollars to ComCast, AT&T and TimeWarner. Make them be responsible AND have proper accounting.
But that's what it's all about. Proper accounting. The fear of all studios and networks.
While a la carte would certainly reduce the number of channels, it may improve the quality of those that remain. I personally believe it is never going to happen, so I'm not too worried about it.
Separate names with a comma.