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

Pac-12 Networks confident, even without DirecTV

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Athlon646464, Jun 29, 2013.

  1. Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    DirecTV's losses are negligible, as I postulated.

    So yes, DirecTV not carrying this channel is a wise move. The point I'm trying to make is that any backtracking now would be foolish as any debt, small as it may be, has already been paid.
     
  2. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Assuming that DirecTV is losing customers over not having PAC-12 there are two ways to lose customers.

    The first way is having current customers leave. Their contract is up and they look elsewhere to spend their money. The second way is lost new customers. They are considering DirecTV but refuse to pull the trigger because DirecTV does not have all the content they are looking for.

    Looking at the past seven years (not just PAC-12) the first category has been slowly increasing. Over 2.9 million subscribers left DirecTV in 2006 ... over 3.6 million left in 2012. Over the past seven years DirecTV has lost over 23 million subscribers - which sounds pretty bad. Fortunately over the past seven years DirecTV added over 28 million subscribers (some have come and left more than once over those years). Added subscribers were down last year ... but not too far off the average.

    So what effect did not having PAC-12 have on DirecTV? Lost customers or lost new subscribers? Those who want to push the "lost customer" argument would be happy to report that DirecTV lost 1.10 million subscribers 3Q 2012. But they would be annoyed to see that DirecTV added 1.17 million subscribers in the same quarter.

    At the end of the day it is hard to prove that DirecTV lost a significant number of old customers or new customers due to PAC-12 or any other specific decision. It seems to be a wash.

    DirecTV will add PAC-12 when it makes sense for them to add PAC-12. Right now both sides seem to be doing fine without each other. Perhaps some day peanut butter and chocolate will be better together but that does not diminish the current status that both are fine without the combination.
     
  3. tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Any business that looks at it that way is foolish. A decision should be made on the now and the future, not a previous decision. There is no "face saving" in business decisions. If the deal is good, it is good and you make it. The deals, in directv AND the PAC 12, were not good until now. If the deals change, and move into good, you make them.
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    That's assuming concessions are made by the conference, which won't happen.

    So if DirecTV initially balks, loses x customers, then signs three years later at the same deal initially offered, that wouldn't look foolish to you? Hindsight is great, isn't it?
     
  5. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    21,973
    1,016
    Nov 13, 2006
    That's assuming concessions are made by the conference, which won't happen.

    So if DirecTV initially balks, loses x customers, then signs three years later at the same deal initially offered, that wouldn't look foolish to you? Hindsight is great, isn't it?
    no not in there part because they didn't spend money for three years that they evidently didn't need to and waited till the channel had more value. If that's what happens anyway.


    Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk
     
  6. chillyfl

    chillyfl Cool Member

    74
    6
    Sep 11, 2012
    There is another cost of the PAC-12 network to DirecTV. The cost of retention programs specifically to hold on to PAC-12 fans. Every PAC-12 game I've watched this year, DirecTV seems to have more commercial spots than any other advertiser. And, all you have to mention is PAC-12 network to the DirecTV retention department, and people are offered huge number of freebies. There are a lot of PAC-12 fans that have been holding out with DirecTV in hope that a deal gets done, but there is a cost to DirecTV to keep them from switching.
     
  7. tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Not if other conditions change. I do t know what all those conditions are and neither do you. And assuming the conference has to concede to make the deal work is also an assumption. Maybe someone comes up with something clever that both get what they want.

    Or maybe the value changes. What if the PAC 12 suddenly becomes more popular or the dynamic of game choices with espn and fox changes and the channel gets more marquee games.

    But, again, looking foolish is never a consideration in pure business decisions made by well run companies. I consider directv well run.

    I think your reasoning is based too much on losing face.
     
  8. Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    Well, the Pac-12 is a second-rate conference; it can't hold a candle to the SEC, ACC or Big 10. How would that value change?

    I bet more a lot more people are watching the LSU game over the Oregon game right now. In regards to overall viewership, I agree with you, Pac-12 Network isn't good.

    In regards to "losing face," if you don't think that isn't a long-term business decision as well, then tell that to other negotiators when they come calling on DirecTV's door in the future. Besides, it is a business choice, losing customers over nothing at all is pointless. However, stand your ground and you seve notice in future talks.
     
  9. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    So are they "losing customers over nothing at all" or are the losses "negligible"?

    It seems the more negligible the losses the less they have to worry about how many customers they lost while holding out for a better deal. If I understand your theory correctly, if DirecTV lost customers each month they held out and then agreed to a deal you would say that the loss of those customers was unneeded. But if, as you say, the losses are negligible then it is not a big deal. DirecTV can move on to a future with the PAC-12 or without the PAC-12 and it makes little difference at all. You are sweating the small stuff if the losses are negligible.
     
  10. Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    I would quote myself, but that too is pointless. Go re-read my first post a page back and I'm quoting DirecTV itself in it.

    It doesn't matter how small the losses are, negligible as they may be, what does matter is that backing out now would mean those losses, no matter how SMALL they may be, would have been for absolutely nothing.
     
  11. chillyfl

    chillyfl Cool Member

    74
    6
    Sep 11, 2012
    I realize this was just a troll comment, but I had to chuckle that you picked two conferences in the ACC and Big 10 that combined don't have the number of top 4 finishes during the BCS era as the PAC-10/12. But the reality is that the quality of the product is irrelevant to the discussion of college networks, as it is all about the fan bases and the demand to see the product (even if it is not good). From that standpoint, Big 10 and SEC do reign supreme.
     
  12. chillyfl

    chillyfl Cool Member

    74
    6
    Sep 11, 2012
    Your mistake is thinking most PAC-12 fans have left DirecTV. Most that I know are still holding on, but they're definitely frustrated. The trump card is always Sunday ticket, though, as most PAC-12 fans I know are also big NFL fans, making it hard to leave when DirecTV gives it away for free. D* is continuing to spend money to keep PAC-12 fans. If the price were right, it would make more sense for D* to add the P12N than to continue to bleed thru slow Pac-12 customer attrtition and the costs to keep the ones they still have.
     
  13. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I do not see you attributing any of your recent comments to DirecTV.

    Twice nothing is still nothing. It still seems that you are stuck on a battle of egos. DirecTV cannot give in now because they did not agree to a contract last year? Are they forever forbidden from carrying PAC-12 unless PAC-12 somehow changes their offer (details confidential) to an offer DirecTV cannot refuse?

    If you're looking for something DirecTV has gained by not carrying PAC-12 then look at the fees DirecTV has not paid PAC-12. That is not nothing ... and DirecTV will be able to keep their past savings even if they agree to carry PAC-12 in the future.

    The best choice going forward is one that serves DirecTV in the future - not one that fears a decision made in the past. If not paying PAC-12 for their channel(s) is the best decision going forward then status quo reigns. Give the customers who complain a few consolation prizes and be happy. If carrying PAC-12 serves DirecTV in the future then the channel(s) should be carried - no holding on to the past to protect "negligible losses". That would be foolish.
     
  14. Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    I don't believe the Pac-12 will ever change their offer.

    The whole point I was trying to make is that IF the Pac doesn't change their offer and IF DirecTV caves to that offer, whenever, the losses (yes, small) incurred to-date would have been for nothing. It has nothing to do with egos, it's weakening your position for future negotiations at the expense of "negligible" losses. What will they gain by signing now other than more costs and whatever negative "negligible" churn incurred because of it?

    How many different ways can I explain this? There are two IFs there and I tried to make that clear in my previous posts.
     
  15. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Worst case scenario if DirecTV accepts an unmodified offer is that DirecTV saves what they have not spent on PAC-12 over the past year (less any consolation given to customers who complained). Then they continue on as if they had been carrying PAC-12 since day one. No big loss.

    If it makes sense for DirecTV to carry the channel in the future they will ... no holding on to the past.
     
  16. Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    I think one of the biggest reasons programming costs have risen so high is not so much on the programmers, but the fact that companies such as DirecTV are willing to pay that price for that programming.

    These companies have to realize that if they want to temper programming costs they have to stand their ground and accept customer losses. Some small, some large, but there's no other way around it.

    If you don't look at the past, the decisions made and results from them, you're turning down a great asset. Ignore them at your own peril I say.

    If DirecTV backs down now, shouldn't someone be asking the question, was it worth it? Assess those past choices and repercussions from them? That's not ego, that's smart business planning. No idea where this, "hold on to the past" stuff is coming from.

    And as I was saying, they should NOT sign. Not now, not ever.
     
  17. chillyfl

    chillyfl Cool Member

    74
    6
    Sep 11, 2012
    BTW, best game on TV right now is Stanford at Utah on P12N. This has been a physical punch you in the mouth (you know, the old SEC style) football game so far.
     
  18. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I believe you have answered that question about the past by noting DirecTV's loss is negligible.
    The question of what DirecTV does in the future should not be limited by the past.
    DirecTV needs to make the best decisions possible for their future.
    If that means carrying PAC-12 is worth the cost in the future so be it.
     
  19. sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,583
    369
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    I guess you're not watching Michigan and PSU.
     
  20. Bambler

    Bambler Legend

    412
    16
    May 30, 2006
    Don't you think if the Pac all of sudden becomes valuable for their future, someone should ask why now and why we didn't see it earlier? What would change to justify that and what happened to DirecTV's Promise?

    What's that famous saying? "Those that cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Not exactly sure who said that, but it's a good quote.
     

Share This Page