1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the new DBSTalk community platform. We have recently migrated to a community platform called Xenfono and hope you will find this change to your liking. There are some differences, but for the most part, if you just post and read, that will all be the same. If you have questions, please post them in the Forum Support area. Thanks!

Lakers New Regional TV Network - NOW ON THE AIR

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by kb24sd, Jul 1, 2012.

  1. Oct 11, 2012 #841 of 2097
    kevintheoman

    kevintheoman Cool Member

    27
    0
    Mar 14, 2012
    You need to understand also that the Lakers territory extends into San Diego and Las Vegas. Half of San Diego and all of Las Vegas are cox cable. Part of Orange County is cox cable. I think there are pockets of cablevision somewhere in there too.

    Point is, there are many homes in the Lakers territory that have no access to the channel. Time Warner needs DirecTV more than DirecTV needs Time Warner.

    I suppose I'm agreeing with you actually....but your math just happens to be way off base.
     
  2. Oct 11, 2012 #842 of 2097
    sdk009

    sdk009 Icon

    695
    19
    Jan 19, 2007
    Kihei, Maui, HI
    That 271,000 represent the number of tuners set to FS West during a Laker game. You could say that that represents about 400,000 people maybe more. The Heat, Celtics, and the other top games and all of the playoffs are going to be on nationally on NBA TV, TNT and/or ESPN.
     
  3. Oct 11, 2012 #843 of 2097
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,090
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    I don't think so. CBS and Directv just re-upped themselves in a deal announced a few days ago. http://www.chicagotribune.com/enter...cbs-directvbre899005-20121009,0,6809781.story It included CBS Sports Network. So no mention of that channel going to a sports tier.

    Didn't Pursuit just re-up as well a month or so ago?

    Not sports, but ION just signed a new deal as well. They didn't get relegated to a higher tier.

    So no, based upon all of this I do not think so. So again, if they all go on a sports tier then it makes sense to push one away.

    It's also fair for the provider to say that they are making a business decision to not to carry the Lakers, Pac 12, or anyone else. But that is not what is being said from the highest levels of Directv.
     
  4. Oct 11, 2012 #844 of 2097
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,090
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    I do have my own proof, which is my direct (no pun intended) conversions with the President's office of Directv as well as higher level Pac 12 folks, not to mention everything else in the public domain about the Lakers, Pac 12, and other things. I have also talked to some higher levels in the Blazers organization over the years about the TV deals they have.

    That may not be proof for you and that is fine. That is your choice. I don't have the power of deposition and subpoena, so we'll never get a court room proof (and by the way a blog is not proof, nor even real journalism....)

    For that matter you have no proof whatsoever that Directv is telling the truth.

    I know Directv is not telling the truth about the sports channels. They dragged the Pac 12 out all summer with silly comments about how they would have an update as school starts. When pointed out to them that school had already started for several Pac 12 schools they ignored their earlier comment. Then on the eve of the season starting Directv walked away completely. Yes, they have offered some silly deal about PPV and a sports tier, but that's just self serving statements in the media.

    The same thing is now happening with the Laker channel, they've spun it for months now and push is about to come to shove to see how Directv acts in the next few weeks.

    It is OK for a company to walk away and decide whatever channel, including sports, is not in their business model. That is perfectly fine. It's a different thing to lie.

    Hey, I left Directv, I am all fine with that. As I told them when I terminated you and I are just not compatible. Directv kept wanting to continue the relationship despite the fact I made it quite clear I needed to leave because they didn't offer what I want and their competitors do. I was offered $25 off for two years, free equipment upgrades, free NFL Sunday Ticket, free HBO and the others, free Sports Pack, I think Gameplan came up in the discussion as well. Despite all of that I said NO. They didn't want to let go.

    A company can be honest and forthcoming with it's customers.

    And there is another side to all of this - Directv owns Root Sports. Root Sports NW had Pac 12 last year. Root Sports NW is showing what this year? Some Big Sky games and high school football games from Seattle area. Really, being in Oregon it's great for the Seattle area kids to get on TV, but seriously? In theory without the content my bill should be substantially less - but did I get any give back there? Nope. That giveback on lower content costs could have been passed on to other channels.

    And to boot we don't even get the NBA Trail Blazers on Directv to begin with up here. They walked from that deal long ago. Whether that hold up is on Comcast's end or Directv's end is not really know. Each says their own thing. Bottom line is that Directv made a business decision not to pick up the channel.
     
  5. Oct 11, 2012 #845 of 2097
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,090
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    Maybe, I don't know. But doesn't the Laker territory span all the way from San Diego to the middle of CA, include Hawaii, and Nevada as well? I don't know exactly where it all cuts off.
     
  6. Oct 11, 2012 #846 of 2097
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,090
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    Directv has obviously made a calculated risk by not carrying the Pac 12 Network they will not lose too many subscribers. We will have to see if that holds true and they do the same with the Lakers.
     
  7. Oct 11, 2012 #847 of 2097
    Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    Web is right. Why argue what's apparent? Let's see what unfolds in terms of subscriber numbers over the next few years and we'll see if DirecTV is right.

    Ultimately, direcTV screwed itself in their negotiation stance. No matter what they do now, they're going to piss off anti lakers and anti pac-12 fans no matter where they put it and indiscriminately charge.

    Reap what your big mouth sows....
     
  8. Oct 11, 2012 #848 of 2097
    Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    If that's the case, I have no interest in the Big 10 network, why am I paying for that???
     
  9. Oct 11, 2012 #849 of 2097
    Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    Actually, 3/4ths of their entire "sports package" falls into my no interest category. I don't want to subsidize what I don't want to watch.
     
  10. Oct 11, 2012 #850 of 2097
    Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    So I'm sorry Laker's fan. Schadenfreude. Can't have it both ways.
     
  11. Oct 12, 2012 #851 of 2097
    maartena

    maartena Hall Of Fame

    2,828
    9
    Nov 1, 2010
    There's a good chance that 90% of the programming you have is "what I don't want to watch", and you pick and choose the good stuff from the remaining 10%.
     
  12. Oct 12, 2012 #852 of 2097
    fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,546
    136
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    Exactly. DirecTV knows what the channel is worth to them. If they can get it for that price, they will take it. If not, they will accept the fact that they will lose some subscribers. If they pay more than what they feel it is worth to them, they will not be able to make up the difference by the number of customers they retain or gain.

    It is not necessarily going to piss off anti Lakers and anti PAC 12 fans as long as what DirecTV pays for the channels is offset by the number of Lakers or PAC 12 fans they either retain or gain by adding the channels.

    The biggest difference between the Big 10 network and the PAC 12 network is that the Big 10 network only requires one CONUS slot, but the PAC 12 wants seven CONUS slots. The other difference is that the Big 10 carriage was negotiated years ago when the costs to carry were not as great. Dish dropped the Big 10 when their contract expired. Let's see what happens when DirecTV's contract is up for renewal.

    The big difference between the Big 10 network and the Lakers channel is that the Big 10 games are not be blacked out in 90% of the country, but the Lakers games will be.
     
  13. Oct 12, 2012 #853 of 2097
    TJNash

    TJNash AllStar

    198
    11
    Jun 5, 2012
    San Diego
    I must have missed the press release confirming that Directv will not be carrying TWC/Lakers. I must have missed the numerous press releases announcing all the other carriers that have signed on to take the channel.

    But, hey, guys, don't let FACTS get in the way of your ill informed conclusions.
     
  14. Oct 12, 2012 #854 of 2097
    silkypimp

    silkypimp Cool Member

    21
    0
    Sep 30, 2012
    I agree, It's amusing to read all of the posts by Forum Members who somehow have greater knowledge over everyone else. :hurah:
     
  15. Oct 12, 2012 #855 of 2097
    silkypimp

    silkypimp Cool Member

    21
    0
    Sep 30, 2012
    Bambler's Source: I read other forums on the internet and watch Directv(even though I hate it).
     
  16. Oct 12, 2012 #856 of 2097
    Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    Personally, I find your statement(s)--especially about me--rather ironic. But that's beside the point.

    I think DirecTV kind backed themselves into a hole with some of their statements and some of the reasoning sprayed here on whether DirecTV should or should not carry this channel.

    By their own doing, this issue has galvanized people on both sides, especially IF they ultimately carry this channel, which would go against the essence of their argument to not carry this and other sport's channel.
     
  17. Oct 12, 2012 #857 of 2097
    silkypimp

    silkypimp Cool Member

    21
    0
    Sep 30, 2012
    "yawn"
     
  18. Oct 12, 2012 #858 of 2097
    maartena

    maartena Hall Of Fame

    2,828
    9
    Nov 1, 2010
    No they didn't. BIG10 went dark when they couldn't reach a deal, but they did eventually come to terms. They weren't "dropped" like they dropped AMC, they just fought about it like DirecTV did with Viacom.

    They also had a short-term agreement for the first 2 weeks, and negotiated a permanent deal in week 3. All in all BIG-10 was black on Dish for no more than a few days.
     
  19. Oct 12, 2012 #859 of 2097
    Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    Instead of trying to invoke a "value-conscious" approach to these negotiations, DirecTV would have been better off going a different, more neutral route in regards to their public statements. Unless, of course, they have no intention at all in carrying this (and other) channels, which could very well be the case.

    I know it's a cliche', but the position DirecTV is taking (at least publicly) means they're going to piss off people no matter what they do; damned if you, damned if you don't.
     
  20. Oct 12, 2012 #860 of 2097
    Mariah2014

    Mariah2014 Breaking the mold

    843
    5
    Apr 21, 2006
    Somewhere...
    Which is why it is time for two providers. One al carte provider that might not have any sports and a provider than bundles everything and includes sports and you know that coming in. I think if that was to happen networks like TWCS LA would be available already.
     

Share This Page