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

Versus on DTV

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by kryscio23, Aug 19, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    From the article that was in the locked thread, quote by Versus President Jamie Davis:
    DirecTV does not want to keep Versus within the tier that it was in. DirecTV only offered to keep the "status quo" if they could continue negotiaions to move the channel into a higher tier LIKE EVERY OTHER NON-COMCAST provider.
     
  2. Jaspear

    Jaspear Godfather

    499
    30
    May 16, 2004
    +1

    The programming executives at Comcast and Directv need to stop acting like a bunch of spoiled six year old kids; start acting like adults and get a deal done for the entire suite of Comcast channels.

    The feud over Comcast Philly has been going on for what? Ten years? Good grief! I may not buy Extra Innings next year because of the dearth of Phillies home team feeds. I've had my fill of watching feeds and listening to announcers from places like Miami, Washington and Pittsburgh. It's way, way past the time for them to get this resolved.
     
  3. Peter305

    Peter305 Hall Of Fame

    1,214
    10
    May 24, 2006
    The Comcast Philly issue is out of DirecTV's hands. Congress gave Comcast Philly a loop hole so they wouldn't have to allow their channel to be shown on sattelite.
     
  4. Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member

    8,687
    38
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    Indeed, Peter, and you can thank Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Democrat Senator Arlen Specter for that. HE alone was the person responsible for bowing to the wishes of Comcast and creating that terrestrial loophole solely for them. For that and a myriad of other reasons, I hope that expedient, opportunistic bum gets tossed out of office next year.

    Note: Let's not stray into a political debate here. I am simply stating a historical fact, that being the reason for this Comcast exception. It is a fact that it's because of Specter.
     
  5. kikkenit2

    kikkenit2 Icon

    685
    1
    Oct 25, 2006
    Who has versus in a sports tier? Nobody dude, nobody. Not that it really matters where it is. What matters is where it is not. And that is only directv. You keep misrepresenting what programming tier versus was in. Do you work for directv or something? Directv is doing just fine without people lying for them.
     
  6. RACJ2

    RACJ2 Hall Of Fame

    3,866
    4
    Aug 2, 2008
    VS was only in the Choice Xtra package with D* and is only in the Classic Gold 250 with Dish. Those are similar levels. So if D* puts it in the Sports Pack, from what I have read, they would be the only provider doing that.
     
  7. tim99

    tim99 Legend

    160
    1
    Sep 14, 2007
    Exactly right, addicts can hardly blame the existence of a drug any more than we can blame gambling for destroying lives. In both cases people have made their own bed.

     
  8. bjlc

    bjlc Icon

    1,053
    5
    Aug 20, 2004
    now..wait a minute.. all Versus asks is that we leave status quo? and that's not good enough for Directv? something is clearly wrong with that picture..

    for that statement alone and for that agreement alone, Versus should be on the air tonight.. RIGHT NOW..

    there is no reason to force us to pay extra for Versus by putting it in a higher bracket..

    and Versus isn't asking for anything more..

    that's enough.. MORE THEN ENOUGH..

    now its clearly showing that directv is in the wrong..
     
  9. WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,090
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    You are making it all too simple. The issue is deeper than what you suggest. Comcast has been jacking Directv around on the various regional sports networks for the past year or so. They are in arbitration now over the rights fees with 40-100% increases in rights fees for the channel. You really think Comcast is so innocent in this to tell the truth?

    The fact remains that Directv has some leverage over Comcast on Versus and they are using it. It is a fact that Versus is one of the lowest watched channels on television. Directv is right to push back.




     
  10. netraa

    netraa Godfather

    483
    0
    Mar 27, 2007


    This reminds me of when a child is given something that they didn't really deserve, but for whatever reason the parents let them get it.

    They then get greedy, and decide they want what they had, and more, and then set up a stink about it and throw a temper tantrum in the middle of the store really pissing mom and dad off.

    While pissed, mom and dad realize that they should have never given the child what they did in the first place, and because 'good enough' wasn't good enough for the child they actually end up worse off than before.

    IE, versus was never worth what D* was paying for it, and now that versus wanted their cake, to eat it, and freeze the leftovers for later, D* has decided that they really don't need it.
     
  11. bjlc

    bjlc Icon

    1,053
    5
    Aug 20, 2004
    113 pages prove that Yes, Directv needs Versus, no matter how much you side with D* in this mess.

    its time to stop looking at them with rose colored glasses..
     
  12. emp275

    emp275 Cool Member

    18
    0
    Oct 11, 2009
    All this proves is that we like to complain and yes the people posting here like the Versus chanel and want it included in their programming.

    D* doesn't need this channel, they have already paid off the biggest complainers with free CI or free movie channels and credits. And are still way ahead in all this money wise.

    Now worst case for us consumers is if a deal doesn't get worked out and Versus doesn't get back D* lineup. D* will then lose a few more subscribers (because those that were really upset have already left or have dual subscriptions). That loss of revenue is nothing compared to the savings monthly on not paying for Versus. It is a very calculated business decision. Based on the ratings D* has (something 61st ranked channel out of 72 or something like that) Most D* just don't watch the channel.

    I am guessing that based on this ranking D* wants the right to package it into a higher package were it probably belongs, based on were it ranks in their viewership tracking, or for a much lower price to keep it were it is.
     
  13. doabbs

    doabbs Cool Member

    27
    0
    Oct 18, 2009
    It's on the highest tier package with our local cable provider up here as well. When I talk to people at work about it, even the die hard hockey fans, they don't pay the extra money just for versus.
     
  14. bonscott87

    bonscott87 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '07

    9,809
    2
    Jan 21, 2003
    Well actually that's what DirecTV offered in the first place, status quo and they would continue to carry Versus while they keep negotiating a new contract.

    Comcast told them to pound sand and thus DirecTV had to remove Versus since they legally could no longer carry it.

    Now that DirecTV has put the screws to Comcast and they are now feeling the hurt because of this Comcast all of a sudden says "oh, ya know that status quo thing? Yea, that's fine by us". But now it's too late since DirecTV obviously has the upper hand now and want to use Versus as leverage to get Comcast from screwing DirecTV on the regional sports channels.

    So basically now Versus is caught up in the wash of a greater problem between Comcast and DirecTV and I doubt DirecTV will back down now what with 3 FSN's they own soon whose contracts are up on Comcast. It will be a big old fight but if DirecTV can do it right they will actually benefit *all* of us by breaking the Comcast loophole on various sports networks.

    Sure it hurts Versus customers now, but if DirecTV can finally break Comcast's back on this it will be big benefit to a lot more customers to finally get CSN Philly and NW.
     
  15. Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
    113 pages does not mean that at all. If D* were losing a ton customers over it, then yes, but a 113 page thread does not prove Yes in my opinion. It would be like saying a local congressman got 1000 calls today on an issue but when the calls are analyzed and it's 100 people calling 10 times each, well it puts a different spin on it. Not only that, but how many of those calls support the congressman's position? Same with this thread, it's 113 pages with views on both sides. It's hardly 113 pages against Comcast or 113 pages against D*.

    No doubt some people are negatively affected, that's the case whenever something like this happens. On the other hand, how often does a channel come down on D* over the years? Very rarely. D* doesn't like to do this so if it's happening, you can bet that there is a very good reason to do it.
     
  16. Jaspear

    Jaspear Godfather

    499
    30
    May 16, 2004
    The loophole doesn't prevent Comcast from including it in a deal if they so choose. And wasn't the loophole created back at the beginning of this Hatfield & McCoy style feud between D* and C*?

    When all parties start acting like adults, a deal that benefits everyone including subscribers will get down. Until then, this childish pissing match will continue.
     
  17. Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member

    8,687
    38
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    The loophole was created years ago by one person, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, at the request of Comcast, whose corporate HQ is in his state. I commented on that above.
     
  18. Crow159

    Crow159 Member

    525
    15
    May 23, 2007
    I'm just curious, and I'm not singling you out Bonscott, how are some of the people in this thread in the know of these negotiations? I mean in another thread, specifically the more HD thread, several people say that no one knows of the progress of negotiations for more national HD, but in this thread, those same people know about the negotiations enough to say that they know it's not Directv's fault. This puzzles me. I have no side in this, I'm not a viewer of Versus, and I also have no love of Comcast. I'm just seriously wondering how anyone, with the exception of Sat Racer, can be both ignorant (as in not knowing the facts) and knowledgeable at the same time.

    I think for some of these people, it's more about defending Directv than accepting that it "takes two to tango" as it's very often stated in the other thread.
     
  19. kikkenit2

    kikkenit2 Icon

    685
    1
    Oct 25, 2006
    I agree with everything except the bold. Please present some evidence to support this opinion. From my pov the sports pack and regional sports channels are almost useless. For the most part these channels just provide customers their own teams that cable provides and the expensive subscription packages for the few. There are very few critical channels to watch in this package. The choice extra package has more and better sports for most people

    Living in la there is no gameplay I will be able to watch on the portland and philadelphia regional sports channels. They are worthless for the general base. I just watched nhl on all kinds of these channels yesterday that are worthless today because free center ice shut off. No, adding these few regional sports channels will mainly help directv grow the base in those cities much more than they are losing by dropping versus nationwide. Financially I agree that this is more profitable in the long run. The tradeoff is damage to their reputation of NOT dropping channels like the sat dish competition. Does anybody have any real projection of gains/losses?
     
  20. bonscott87

    bonscott87 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '07

    9,809
    2
    Jan 21, 2003
    There have been many links posted in this thread with the above info. Many are just pieces which some people in this thread are putting together just like some of the articles.

    I've never said it wasn't DirecTV's "fault". Frankly I could care less whose "fault" it is. We know for a fact that DirecTV offered to carry Vs. at the current deal while negotiations continued. Comcast said no. Now it's just back and forth between Comcast and DirecTV in much bigger issues then just Vs.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page