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

Longhorn Network

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by jon99, Jul 5, 2011.

  1. Oct 8, 2011 #381 of 691
    DCSholtis

    DCSholtis Up The Irons!

    5,775
    6
    Aug 7, 2002
    When did D* get the Longhorn Network?!!! They just did an in game add for the next Texas game on the Longhorn Network and listed the carriers listing D* as one of the carriers?!!
     
  2. Oct 8, 2011 #382 of 691
    RAD

    RAD Well-Known Member

    16,414
    122
    Aug 5, 2002
    Dripping...
    They don't, I went back and played it, they were listing carries that don't carry it and the voice over was saying to call and tell them you don't want to miss the UT Kansas game.
     
  3. Oct 8, 2011 #383 of 691
    luckydob

    luckydob Godfather

    451
    0
    Oct 1, 2006
    ESPN is getting desperate. They are listing 5 carriers telling people to call for the LHN. People just dont want it.
     
  4. Oct 8, 2011 #384 of 691
    Davenlr

    Davenlr Geek til I die

    9,136
    27
    Sep 16, 2006
    Looks like the ratings on this network are going down as fast as OU's points are going up.
     
  5. Oct 8, 2011 #385 of 691
    mnassour

    mnassour Icon

    859
    9
    Apr 23, 2002
    People? People? Since when did any of us get a questionnaire from DirecTV, Dish, Time Warner, or the neighborhood paperboy asking if we wanted LHN? "People" haven't been given the chance to say if they want it or not. The corporations that determine what we can watch have...and the money that ESPN's asking along with the tier it's demanding just won't wash.

    It will indeed be interesting come renewal time when ESPN makes the Longhorn Network a mandatory part of the ESPN package. DishNetwork is already making plans for life after ESPN. Given its focus on sports, I think DirecTV will be over a large, orange, barrel.

    Jeez, I just hate crap like this.:mad:

    Well, given the fact that only six rice farmers and three people in Austin on fiber can see it, that's not too surprising! :lol:
     
  6. Oct 8, 2011 #386 of 691
    luckydob

    luckydob Godfather

    451
    0
    Oct 1, 2006
    People, yes PEOPLE do not want this channel. I will give you the fact that there are some that may want this channel, but lets call a spade a spade. One school on one network does not a channel make. TWO football games and they probably want an outrageous amount per sub per month for this. No one outside of Texas wants this channel, and just because you are may have graduated from Texas doesnt mean you want it either. Limited market appeal and a outrageous price means that PEOPLE DO NOT WANT THIS CHANNEL. I am guessing you are not biased either as I can see your Texas flag avatar. It's okay, you can keep calling D*, but unless they hear more than those same people from Texas and ESPN calling, it won't mean much to the providers. ESPN doing this is desperate, very desperate....because after the Kansas game, what is left to watch? PRACTICE?

    No thanks to LHN here in the midwest...maybe if it was the big 12 network then it could have more mass appeal, until then...NOPE.
     
  7. Oct 8, 2011 #387 of 691
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,582
    369
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    You're mostly right, except that people outside of Texas not wanting it. UT has one of the nations largest alumni groups.
     
  8. Oct 8, 2011 #388 of 691
    luckydob

    luckydob Godfather

    451
    0
    Oct 1, 2006
    That doesnt mean much except that they have a large alumni group. Those alumni outside of Texas have kids who then go to other schools or Texas. Large alumni population doent scratch the population outside that alumni base or even the base of an entire conference. LHN is just not wanted by a large section of the populous.
     
  9. Oct 8, 2011 #389 of 691
    Shades228

    Shades228 DaBears

    6,081
    45
    Mar 18, 2008
    They have the largest amount of people with 5 credit hours?
     
  10. Oct 8, 2011 #390 of 691
    luckydob

    luckydob Godfather

    451
    0
    Oct 1, 2006
  11. Oct 8, 2011 #391 of 691
    mnassour

    mnassour Icon

    859
    9
    Apr 23, 2002
    Look, folks, I didn't mean to turn this into a pissing match. My point is that with the Longhorn Network, as with others, what WE THE PEOPLE WANT is rarely taken into account. What matters is whether it makes money for DirecTV and the other providers. Given what ESPN is asking, I don't see how it can be a profit-making proposition.

    And until some research is done or we see what kind of take rate a channel like this would have, none of us are really qualified to say how many people want it. This is the first effort by a major university to muscle its way onto the broadcast spectrum.

    And before the Texas-bashing gets completely out of hand (again) please allow me to repeat that the UT-Austin administration approached Texas A&M with the proposal of building a statewide network for the third-tier rights for college athletics four years ago, but the (IMHO) short-sighted folks in College Station weren't interested. At that point, the UT administration simply said F* this, we've got a product and we're going to sell it. ESPN bit bigtime and the rest is history.

    Once again, until it's re-thought, I don't see the Longhorn Network getting wide carriage. But ESPN has put a lot of money into this thing and those of us in the business end of it keep hearing that Longhorn Network carriage could indeed be a condition of keeping ESPN on any distributor come contract time.

    And THAT....is why I really hate crap like this.
     
  12. Oct 8, 2011 #392 of 691
    Davenlr

    Davenlr Geek til I die

    9,136
    27
    Sep 16, 2006
    Adios ESPN. They lose DirecTv, they might as well pack it in. The money lost will certainly not be recovered by those other regional cable systems which are already maxed out, IMHO.
     
  13. Oct 8, 2011 #393 of 691
    Shades228

    Shades228 DaBears

    6,081
    45
    Mar 18, 2008
    On the contary there are more people who don't want this than there are who do. Just like if USC, UofM, Ohio State, or any other "big" school created a channel. In the grand scheme of things it's a very small % of the total population. I can understand the passion for those who went to the school or live in the region but it's a non factor for the majority of people outside of those 2 things.

    Many schools use a PPV system for in state games. The fact that they didn't I think says more about their lack of confidence in broadcasting changes. There are also only 2 games that are specific to the network this year that others can't see. How many boosters live out of state? If they make a deal that cuts the boosters off from watching games guess what happens. ESPN is using them as the test run to see what works and what doesn't with college specific channels. This is basically the test run to see how well ESPN can get into the RSN market.
     
  14. Oct 8, 2011 #394 of 691
    mnassour

    mnassour Icon

    859
    9
    Apr 23, 2002
    What we've got here is a major game of chicken. There's no way on God's Green Earth that DirecTV can begin to market itself to sports-types without ESPN. Done-set-match. The End. Disney (NOT ESPN, remember we're dealing with the mega-conglomerate) on the other hand, doesn't want to lose the revenue OR be seen as the bad guy in negotiations over by yanking the channel over a REGIONAL sports network.

    Remember now, Disney is paying $300 million over 20 years PLUS 70% of any profits in excess of that amount to UT-Austin for the privilege of broadcasting UT athletics and other UT oriented programming. Disney doesn't lose in this kind of negotiation. One way or another, it will make that money back.

    And that's why I call it a game of chicken.
     
  15. Oct 8, 2011 #395 of 691
    ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    303
    0
    Apr 29, 2011
    That cuts both ways. ESPN needs DIRECTV more than DIRECTV needs ESPN. In almost every survey I have seen in this industry, the amount of people that want ESPN is around 50%, yet about 90% pay for it because the channel is in most base packages around the country.

    If ESPN requires DTV to carry Longhorn and DTV says no, ESPN would lose 19 million paying customers. Now, certainly some of those DTV customers would switch, but not 19 million. Say 2 million switched, or let's even say some unrealistic number like 5 million, ESPN still takes a bath.

    I'm betting every major carrier is cheering on DISH right now hoping they do this and hoping it works out.

    Most of the industry is seeing 10% to 15% annual programming cost increases, yet they are only raising your bill by about 5% each year. That means these companies margins continue to go down and down each year. Based on recent comments by many of the MSO's, looks like they've had enough.
     
  16. Oct 8, 2011 #396 of 691
    mnassour

    mnassour Icon

    859
    9
    Apr 23, 2002
    While I understand your assumption that if you didn't have an association with UT-Austin, then you don't want to see the Longhorn Network, I can't quite buy it. Heck, I watch Big 10 football on their network all the time. I can't even NAME the Big 10 schools!:D Frankly, I think that this annoys a lot of folks simply because 1) they didn't come up with it first and 2) their home-town school doesn't have the national fan base. Just my opinion, of course. Shoot, were I on the other side of the fence I'd be spitting blood as well.

    And it's more than just two football games.

    http://espn.go.com/longhornnetwork/

    I personally think the above program schedule has a lot to offer anyone in this part of the country. Whether it deserves national carriage on the same tier as ESPN, well, :sure:.

    And you have to remember, ESPN had carriage issues coming even before the Longhorn Network mess. The cable companies, as well as Dish and Direct, will all be pushing to move ESPN off basic service and onto a sports package. THAT may be the big argument next time around. The distributors are simply tired of paying ESPN's inflated rates.

    Yes sir!

    Disney has way overpaid for its ESPN rights and wants to make that money back.

    Imagine, if you would for a minute, that you're renting your house from your brother-in-law. Each year, he's been going up on the rent until it's the most expensive house in the neighborhood, but you stay because it's the only house available where you want to send your kids to school. NOW he presents you with a new lease that says not ONLY does the rent go up, but you have to let HIS KIDS live with you as well!

    Yea, maybe I'm stretching it a bit, but that's not far off from what Disney is trying to do to the distributors. The costs involved in program distribution, not only from Disney, but all the providers are staggering and escalating all the time. I'm truly afraid that we are today living in a Golden Era, where all the cablecos and all the satellite guys had pretty much the same lineup. It would not surprise me that if in ten years you had to have Direct for sports, Dish for movies and local cable for your local stations.

    I do hope I'm wrong.
     
  17. Oct 8, 2011 #397 of 691
    ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    303
    0
    Apr 29, 2011
    DTV did do a survey. I know, because I know the folks that did it. When you do a survey, you don't ask 19 million customers. You ask a statistically significant sample. It can be just a few thousand people. The numbers overwhelmingly supported NOT carrying Longhorn Network when the question was asked properly.

    For example.

    a) Would you be interested in the Longhorn Network which carries University of Texas third rate football games (two games that no one wants), women's sports, a few men's basketball games, men's baseball.

    Some level of interest

    or

    b) Would you be interested in the Longhorn Network which carries all the above, but it also means another $1 added to your bill each month moving forward?


    The interest level for question a is fairly low. The interest level when the cost is put in, drops to rock bottom.
     
  18. Oct 8, 2011 #398 of 691
    mnassour

    mnassour Icon

    859
    9
    Apr 23, 2002
    That makes sense to me, with the exception of the fact that the programming described simply does not accurately describe the programming on the channel. If those are the exact questions asked, then this is a survey designed to show that the customers did not want the Longhorn Network.

    And once again, I'm not saying this is programming for which people in Idaho are clamoring. :lol: But the so-called negotiations over Longhorn Network are only a prelude to the main match over next couple of years, and the survey questions you just described to me seem designed to bolster DirecTV's position in those negotiations.

    It's an ugly, ugly scene that's about to happen. And we the viewers are simply the pawns.
     
  19. Oct 8, 2011 #399 of 691
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,582
    369
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    I hope that's not how they worded the questions because it's extremely flawed, and the survey writers should be fired.
     
  20. Oct 8, 2011 #400 of 691
    mnassour

    mnassour Icon

    859
    9
    Apr 23, 2002
    Oh no, no, no, that's exactly how you would word the questions....if you were trying to prove that no one wanted the Longhorn Network. Don't think for a moment that DirecTV was trying to get an honest appraisal of customer desires...it's simply trying to bolster a negotiating position, IHMO.

    One more thing and then I'll let this go for a while...there was recently an excellent article in The Atlantic about college football and the cesspool it has become. Before you go rah-rah for your favorite team, you might want to take a look at it.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/8643/

    pax...mn
     

Share This Page