Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by kb24sd, Jul 1, 2012.
Good point. The Lakers have no ownership stake in these two RSN's.
Oh yes they did. I was specifically told this on the telephone when I called the President's office...that I do not need the channel. Not only once, but TWICE.
You now seem to think that you know what is talked about in my conversations with Directv? Dear Lord.
Why do you defend Directv so much? Are you really Mike White in disguise? You seem to have an answer for everything, yet are not included in every conversation a customer has. You just somehow have to be right on everything don't you?
There are also facts out there that are not part of press releases.
Fine, call them sports networks.
Pretty much every new sports network coming on line is owned by a league or team and they are taking content away from existing channels. In some cases filling a void and offering additional content that was not available, but mostly just taking away content from existing providers.
Fine, call them sports networks. Never said majority ownership, I said ownership includes the teams and in other cases the league.
My facts are sound. It's your interpretation that is flawed. We both know that I already have no respect for you and your opinions and we're going to spar on this if you and I battle back and forth, so best that we stop that here now.
Lets discuss the topic not each other. This thread is about the Lakers on Directv.
Adding some color
I honestly get the sense that DirecTV will not carry this channel, at least not for the foreseeable future.
The only thing that may change their stance is:
1. Loss of subscribers
2. TWC agreeing to either lower their cost to nothing or ala-carte.
If DirecTV adds this channel at TWC's terms, then we can only guess that they felt the cancellation pressure.
Dish's apparent openness to the PAC-12 network is, in my opinion, penance for doing what DirecTV is currently doing. Cyclical.
Regardless, DirecTV, in my opinion, is damned no matter what they do, part of which is their own making.
I think DIRECTV will carry the Lakers come November. If not, i will stream the games online. I'm paying TWC $30 a month for Internet, so as long as i can watch the Lakers i'm fine. Will never go back to cable.
They have said they would offer the channel if the pac 12 agree to a cost they felt was acceptable, or as an a la cart offering. PAC12 declined. I don't know how much more honest you can be.... And it is there place to decide what channels they carry for what prices, and its you place to decide if you agree or would be better off with a different carrier.
You misunderstand what I am saying. They already add a $2 fee to some peoples packages specifically for rsns. They might start doing that with everyone on older packages if they create a new set of packages at higher prices. This would allow them to show the increase in costs of their packages as being related to the rsns. I am not going to explain the details of how/why, but I am thinking that concept.
We're paying TWC ~$52.00 a month for internet, but I still can't get the stupid streaming site to work.
It just keep's saying I'm outside the area, yet I'm right here in So. L.A.
Go figure ...
OK ... forcing everyone in an area to pay $2 or $4 more for their RSNs might work (at least for DirecTV and the RSNs). Giving people the opportunity to "opt out" of an RSN won't keep the price low. An a la carte RSN is going to be more expensive (unless it is a channel people don't want). I believe we are on the same page with that.
Higher prices in some markets than others breaks the "national pricing" DirecTV likes to use ... but if it takes higher prices to get the channels it is a choice.
You know that was a revised message played in what, week 4? That's not being honest and forthcoming, that's simply pandering and self-serving.
Facts were all summer they first said "we have no plans," then they said, "we'd like to have it and we'll have an update closer to when school starts..." then when pointed out school had started at several Pac 12 schools were in session, they ignored it and continued to say the same, then on the eve of the opener they walked away completely, and then each week Pac 12 has been gunning for them in press releases and only finally, in week 4, they came up with this message.
So while they are NOW saying that, that is not what they said all along. All along they strung us along. They could have been honest up front and simply said "we cannot afford it w/o increasing the package cost" and then let that ride. But they didn't and have allowed most of their competitors to zoom right by. How are they doing it? Directv is the more expensive option of the providers as well, so something is awry here. But companies can make business decisions all the time - they should just be honest.
I can honestly tell you the coverage on Dish is great. I have most of the sports either on the 413 channel or on alternate channels. I am waiting for them to get the streaming option up for full-time access to Pac 12 Oregon and other regionals, they now say firmly by 10-19 they'll have that option for us.
Then when I cancel they make it a longer process than usual, trying to continue to talk me out of it, when I tell them over and over again I want out and here is why. But then they come back with NFL Sunday Ticket for free, $25 off for a year, free multi sport, new equipment, etc. I had to decline these options repeatedly and just asked to cancel....but even then they made me sit on hold for a bit. I think it's part of a strategy to make it hard. Again, goes right to being forthcoming and honest....I told them in the first sentence I want to cancel and here is why - I wasn't going to change my mind -and I respected their decision not to want me as a customer. I told them I got it and just wanted to go. But they still made it longer than what it needed to be.
So while NOW they say they'll add it as a PPV or to a sports tier, that is a week for massaged message because they are taking a beating.
I would also encourage EACH one of you to call up and threaten to cancel and push it to the last minute (or pretend to). Assuming you are a good customer who unloads $100 or more a month with them and is in good standing for a number of years you will be able to extract substantial savings from them - at least $25 a month for a year (I feel you could talk them into 2, free new equipment, free multi-sport, free pay channels, and so forth. Take Mike White to the cleaners. If you don't want to switch and are pissed off make em pay.
This thread has required several clean ups due to inappropriate personal conversations. If this trend continues, all parties who participate will be banned from the thread without any distinction as to "who started it."
This is a valid topic and I don't want to see this thread dragged to the level of other sports threads.
You need to stream the game on another website, not TWC. I'm watching it right now on my 52" TV. I don't know if i can give the link on here.
Stuart, am i allowed to give out the link to other subscribers so they can watch the Lakers?
I can not see D* not adding this channel ASAP a lot of local bars in L.A have D* just on D* carrying NFL Sunday Ticket. D* would lose a lot of customers if this is not added
Evidently, twc commercials got lots of loud boos last night when they appeared on the scoreboard during the exhibition game at staples last night!
Do you guys think it would have helped negotiations if the Lakers had part or majority ownership of the channel?
Of course they probably wouldn't have gotten the money they did.