1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

$5.00 for the new Dodgers channel.

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by lipcrkr, Jan 28, 2013.

  1. Jan 31, 2013 #61 of 903
    FenixTX

    FenixTX Godfather

    480
    6
    Nov 11, 2005
    I believe a 1.14 rating equals only 100,000 viewers which isn't that many especially compared to how much TWC paid for this channel. The Lakers, on the other hand, averaged 3 or 4 times that many viewers for their games if I remember reading correctly.
     
  2. Jan 31, 2013 #62 of 903
    lokar

    lokar Icon

    740
    12
    Oct 7, 2006
    True but that is irrelevant to D*, who only cares about subscribers. Say half of that 1.14 rating are D* subscribers which I think is probably being generous. Probably only a portion of that portion will be mad enough to leave D* over not having the Dodgers. I don't know the numbers but it seems like D* would be better off to say to places like TWC that we are putting your channel on the sports tier or not at all and take the subscriber loss than continue this trend that will eventually bring very bad things to D*. Since D* gave in to the Lakers, I am guessing the numbers don't work out like I would think they would.
     
  3. Jan 31, 2013 #63 of 903
    Mark Holtz

    Mark Holtz Day Sleeper DBSTalk Club

    10,434
    77
    Mar 23, 2002
    Sacramento, CA
    I think that we are looking at different things....

    For Football, you are looking at a team that plays once a week (assuming the week runs from Tuesday until Monday), with most teams on a Sunday. Its easier for Football fans to keep track of their teams.

    Contrast that with Baseball, Basketball, and Hockey. Those sports play multiple times per week, making it harder for the fan to follow every game. And, until the advent of the regional sports network, only select games were broadcast on television. The bad part now is that, with the Regional Sports Network, 99.5% of the games are only on cable television.

    And then, you have to combine that with the fact that sports programming is something that people that people prefer to watch lives, and not DVR for later viewing. The advertisers love that part.

    This makes me want to cancel my subscription TV service.
     
  4. Feb 1, 2013 #64 of 903
    lokar

    lokar Icon

    740
    12
    Oct 7, 2006
    I watch everything on DVR including sports. With sports events, I start watching the event 1-2 hours after it starts and can usually catch up to the live event or be somewhat close by the end of the game. I can't imagine sitting through 18 minute hockey intermissions or football's absolutely ridiculous amount of commercials.
     
  5. Feb 1, 2013 #65 of 903
    FLWingNut

    FLWingNut Godfather

    467
    12
    Nov 19, 2005
    +1
     
  6. Feb 1, 2013 #66 of 903
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,230
    552
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Possibly the majority sentiment among this group. With Baseball I often start when they're in the 8th inning. Football about halftime. Tomorrow will be an exception, and not because of the commercials....
     
  7. Apr 8, 2013 #67 of 903
    tjguitar

    tjguitar Mentor

    157
    9
    Aug 23, 2006
  8. Apr 8, 2013 #68 of 903
  9. Apr 8, 2013 #69 of 903
    PCampbell

    PCampbell Icon

    1,639
    98
    Nov 18, 2006
    Athletes are payed way too much money and it has to come from some place and that place is us.
     
  10. Apr 8, 2013 #70 of 903
    chevyguy559

    chevyguy559 Fresno State Bulldog!

    764
    12
    Sep 19, 2008
    Fresno, CA
    All I know is I live over 200 miles from LA but I'm getting dinged $2.00 a month for the Lakers channel, if I get charged $5.00 for a team I despise (Doyers) I'll really be forced to look at my other options, which means less per month for DirecTV or even $0 a month from me....really the only thing keeping me from "cutting the cord" is sports....well I'm tech savvy enough to know I can find any sporting event online....that's the thing, I'm more than willing to pay a fair price for my sports, but when it goes too far, I pay nothing and still enjoy my sports.....same as how I enjoy my music these days :rolleyes:
     
  11. Apr 9, 2013 #71 of 903
    lipcrkr

    lipcrkr Legend

    331
    6
    Apr 27, 2012
    ESPN has ruined sports and hopefully people will begin to wake up.
     
  12. Apr 9, 2013 #72 of 903
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,230
    552
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    That's a wide indictment. Yes, there are things many don't like about the way sports have evolved, but what upsets you most?

    What do you think will "wake up" the people?
     
  13. Apr 9, 2013 #73 of 903
    sum_random_dork

    sum_random_dork Icon

    911
    18
    Aug 21, 2008
    I don't think you can say they ruined sports they just changed how it is viewed. Most sports use to be the morning paper, the 6pm sports report on the news and a radio update. You would see local MLB games a few nights a week on an OTA station, NBA games were the same way. The only teams you'd see every week for sure were the NFL teams because of their Nat'l contract. ESPN changed a lot of that, people that weere into sports could flip on Sports Center and get an hr of sports instead of 2 mins on the news. RSN's then came along and started to broadcast most if not all MLB, NHL, and NBA games.

    I think you could say Cable has changed sports but it's not just ESPN, they are the leader (for good and/or bad) but NFL Network, TNT, TBS, Fox Sports all had a hand in it too.

    I have resigned myself to the fact we will be paying more for the sports we want to see. I hope Dodger fans get to see their team play next year (as a Giants fan hard to say the D word). I really hope that DirecTV and TWC/Dodgers, CSN Northwest, CSN Houston, CSN Phily, and Pac 12 networks can all work out deals soon. It'd be for the best of all "us" sports fans to have the options to watch what we want and price compare from one cable/sat company to another.
     
  14. Apr 9, 2013 #74 of 903
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    They have had a more profound effect than just changing how it is viewed. ESPN led the charge in highlighting big hits in football and players then tried to make the highlight film. They have done this in many ways. They have made the dunk extremely popular and focused on home runs in baseball. Players have changed what they do to make the highlight reel (witness that the ESPN dum-dum theme is often played).

    ESPN glorifies the winning over all else. They have helped destroy any sense of sportsmanship. All of it because they want to make money on the programs they push. So, a player or a team can be guilty as sin of things and they keep pushing them and ignore the bad side.

    They are not the only ones but they do set the tone and the standard. And they play favorites and glorify many of the wrong things.
     
  15. Apr 9, 2013 #75 of 903
    TJNash

    TJNash AllStar

    198
    11
    Jun 5, 2012
    San Diego
    Testify, Brother!!:icon_bb:
     
  16. Apr 9, 2013 #76 of 903
    adkinsjm

    adkinsjm Icon

    923
    2
    Mar 25, 2003
    Clippers deal expires at the hd of the 2014-15 season. The team should cash in as it's a bigger ticket than the Lakers right now.
     
  17. Apr 9, 2013 #77 of 903
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Are they? They may be winning but loyalties die hard.

    Here is an example. On StubHub, the asking price for First Round playoff tickets starts at $105 for the Lakers. $38 for the Clippers.

    The other games are in line.
     
  18. Apr 9, 2013 #78 of 903
    tjguitar

    tjguitar Mentor

    157
    9
    Aug 23, 2006
    I thought the clippers were locked up for longer than that?
     
  19. Apr 9, 2013 #79 of 903
    KyL416

    KyL416 Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    4,197
    538
    Nov 10, 2005
    Tobyhanna, PA
    And unfortunately with all these extra RSNs, and with Time Warner apparantly willing to create a new 24/7 RSN for each team (as opposed to just using a plus/overflow channel for conflicts or seeking an OTA partner like YES does in NYC), it's going to create a bidding war jacking up the costs even if Fox keeps them.
     
  20. Apr 9, 2013 #80 of 903
    tjguitar

    tjguitar Mentor

    157
    9
    Aug 23, 2006

    I agree - I think that Time Warner needs one of Ducks/Clippers just as much as Fox needs both if FOX wants to continue to have two RSN's in Los Angeles. I don't think TWC would put any of the other teams on their own network.

    With the Kings and Angels locked up long term (+ college sports), FOX already has enough content for one full time channel for several years. If FOX retains only one of the Clippers or Ducks, I don't think that's enough content for a full time second RSN, but it is enough for frequent overflow, aka FS West +.

    I can understand the Lakers having their own channel, they are the most popular in this region by far - the equivalent to the Yankees in NY - though it seems like Mountain West football/basketball, MLS and WNBA isn't enough content for the offseason. Even the Yankees share their channel with the Nets.

    If the Dodgers were on the Lakers RSN, TWC would probably be able to charge more than they current do for it.

    In my opinion, since TWC and the Dodgers are set on having the separate network (so that the Dodgers can get around revenue sharing), TWC really needs a second team on the Dodgers RSN...either the Clippers or the Ducks.

    It probably doesn't matter, though I would guess the Clippers get higher ratings. The Ducks are already forced to put some games OTA, so maybe they take a TWC deal.

    What is good is that since TWC already TWC Sportsnet, they could use that as overflow for SportsNet LA if needed if the Lakers had an off day.

    I just don't see there being four RSN's in Los Angeles long term. I think that either Prime Ticket's days are numbered OR the dodgers channel gets no satellite carriage.
     

Share This Page