Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Lakers New Regional TV Network - NOW ON THE AIR


  • Please log in to reply
2096 replies to this topic

#326 ONLINE   TheRatPatrol

TheRatPatrol

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,895 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ
Joined: Oct 01, 2003

Posted 19 September 2012 - 10:43 PM

With the launch of two Los Angeles regional sports networks — Time Warner SportsNet and the Spanish-language Time Warner Deportes — only a few weeks away, Time Warner Cable chief financial officer Irene Esteves told an investor conference last week the main driver for starting the network was to limit costs, not rake in RSN cash.

What a crock of ....... :nono2:

Link

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#327 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,317 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 20 September 2012 - 10:31 AM

Link:

http://twcsportsnet....ramming-lineup/

More proof that the channels aren't just a part time channel like how Fox Sports San Diego is or just a "Laker channel" only.


Fox Sports San Diego is only part time on Directv.

on cable they just show stuff from prime ticket / west to fill in. Directv has prime ticket and west full time.
I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#328 OFFLINE   TJNash

TJNash

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 170 posts
  • LocationSan Diego
Joined: Jun 05, 2012

Posted 20 September 2012 - 11:22 AM

What a crock of ....... :nono2:

Link

Indeed.

It will be interesting to see how Time Warner justifies charging exorbitant rates for this channel while it plays hardball with other RSNs over cost/placement issues. TWC can't come to a deal with FSSD, thus blacking out the Padres from a large portion of San Diego County. Perhaps Cox will give them a taste of their own medicine with this Lakers channel?

#329 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,617 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 20 September 2012 - 11:25 AM

The Lakers will play nice publicly with TWC, but I'm sure they are going to pretty annoyed behind the scenes if TWC doesn't get these channels distributed.

#330 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,936 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 20 September 2012 - 01:32 PM

What a crock of ....... :nono2:

Link


Link doesn't work for me.
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#331 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 5,615 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:31 PM

Link doesn't work for me.


See here for instance ...

http://www.multichan...sn-owner/133495

From:

Esteves: TWC A Reluctant RSN Owner

... At the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Media, Communications and Entertainment conference in Beverly Hills, Calif. Wednesday, Esteves said the company was excited about the RSN launch, but added the sports business is one the MSO would prefer not to be in.
“We’re very excited about both of them,” Esteves said of the channels.. “We think this is going to be terrific for our customers. As we’ve always said, our only reason for being in this business is to ensure long-term access at reasonable rates for important sports programming. We prefer not to be in this business and if we had been charged more reasonable rates for important sports programming, we probably wouldn’t be in this position. But now that we are we’re going to make it a successful business.”



#332 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 5,615 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:56 PM

Or here for the specific mention of "not rake in RSN cash"; :lol:

http://www.multichan...st-hedge/133570

#333 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,936 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:58 PM

See here for instance ...

http://www.multichan...sn-owner/133495

From:

Esteves: TWC A Reluctant RSN Owner


Thanks.

Quite a stretch. We decided to contain costs we will try to make a ton of money.
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#334 ONLINE   TheRatPatrol

TheRatPatrol

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,895 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ
Joined: Oct 01, 2003

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:48 PM

Sounds like hes talking out of both sides of his mouth.

#335 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 5,615 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 20 September 2012 - 04:04 PM

Sounds like hes talking out of both sides of his mouth.


She ... :)

"Irene Esteves"--TWC CFO

#336 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,326 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:32 PM

I debate that if FOX had gotten the Lakers again they would have asked for more than $6 for their two channels... I think they would have.


I think they will pay a lot less to these teams than they would have ever had to pay FOX to carry their RSNs over the next 20 years, so actually, I do believe that was a major part of the motivation to get into it. But of course they want to make money on the channels too... I think they needed to see the potential to do both those things before they launched it.

#337 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,936 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:49 PM

I debate that if FOX had gotten the Lakers again they would have asked for more than $6 for their two channels... I think they would have.


I think they will pay a lot less to these teams than they would have ever had to pay FOX to carry their RSNs over the next 20 years, so actually, I do believe that was a major part of the motivation to get into it. But of course they want to make money on the channels too... I think they needed to see the potential to do both those things before they launched it.


Didn't the Fox channels in LA carry Dodgers, Angels, Kings, Ducks, Lakers, Clippers and more?

TWC is only getting Lakers.
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#338 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 5,615 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:51 PM

I debate that if FOX had gotten the Lakers again they would have asked for more than $6 for their two channels... I think they would have. ...


I assume you mean if given the same circumstances as TWC SN of course where FOX would have broadcast rights to both Lakers home and road games.

Since FOX could hardly justify such an exorbitant fee under their former model of carrying only Lakers' home games with local KCAL 9 having the road ones.

#339 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,326 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:55 PM

Didn't the Fox channels in LA carry Dodgers, Angels, Kings, Ducks, Lakers, Clippers and more?

TWC is only getting Lakers.


Yes, and I am saying their fees will keep escalating like crazy, even faster than twc. They might have even been after $7 or $8 or more.

if you look at a third party costs for all the RSNs together, like dtv or cox, I would have to wonder if the price is going to be the same or less with twc having the Lakers and having both FOX RSNs, than if FOX had re signed with the Lakers with a similar styled deal as twc has and just had continued on with the two FOX RSNs.

FOX took forever to get deals with primeticket when they started it, but eventually they got it done. The problem was they where asking astronomical prices for just dodger games when they started that channel...... Gee, sound familiar... ;)

#340 OFFLINE   kb24sd

kb24sd

    The Specialist

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 189 posts
Joined: Jun 21, 2012

Posted 20 September 2012 - 09:34 PM

Time Warner Cable is seeking $3.95 per subscriber, per month for its SportsNet and Deportes channels, which are scheduled to launch Oct. 1. While Time Warner Cable will obviously carry the service on its systems in the region, it still has not struck deals with DirecTV, Dish Network and other pay-TV distributors.

While Time Warner Cable tries to get its sports channels carried here, in San Diego it is refusing to carry a Fox-owned sports channel that has the Padres baseball team. At issue is the price tag Fox is seeking, which is said to be more than $5.00 per subscriber, per month. Interestingly, one reason the price tag is so high is that Time Warner Cable tried to acquire Padres rights, which led to a bidding war that drove up the cost.



Link:

http://www.latimes.c...0,7090219.story

If that price about Fox Sports San Diego is true and if that is what Directv is being charged to have it on D*.Then it's just flat out stupid that D* are willing to charge us D* customers $5 a month for Fox Sports San Diego when the channel is a part time channel.Yet D* intends to hold out is not willing to pay $3.95 or more for these two new Laker RSN channel which will be full time 24/7 channels and has more programming and other sports and local teams :mad:

#341 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,617 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 20 September 2012 - 09:41 PM

Link:

http://www.latimes.c...0,7090219.story

If that price about Fox Sports San Diego is true and if that is what Directv is being charged to have it on D*.Then it's just flat out stupid that D* are willing to charge us D* customers $5 a month for Fox Sports San Diego when the channel is a part time channel.Yet D* intends to hold out is not willing to pay $3.95 or more for these two new Laker RSN channel which will be full time 24/7 channels and has more programming and other sports and local teams :mad:


You keep claiming that DirecTV is holding out, yet the channels haven't even launched and there isn't a single provider who has signed a retrans deal.
DTV = Digital Television

#342 OFFLINE   kb24sd

kb24sd

    The Specialist

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 189 posts
Joined: Jun 21, 2012

Posted 20 September 2012 - 09:53 PM

You keep claiming that DirecTV is holding out, yet the channels haven't even launched and there isn't a single provider who has signed a retrans deal.


Listen we are 12 days away from when the channel is launching and all indications & signs are pointing to D* holding out and not having it by October 1st.A lot of us know and have seen how D* handles these situations.Look what's going on with the Pac 12 Network.Look what happened during the Viacom situation where people lost the channels for about a week.

Are you really in denial that nasty negotiations and a hold out isn't going to happen over this between D* and Time Warner?

Like others have stated in this thread that D* could have reached an agreement with Time Warner before the new RSN is set to launch.Same goes for the Pac 12 networks.

My gripe is how can D* justify in agreeing to carry Fox Sports San Diego at a $5 per customer price tag and yet hold out on the Lakers new RSN channels when the Lakers RSN channels will have more programming, more pro & college sports coverage and is a full time 24/7 channel. When on the other hand FSN San Diego is a part time channel.

#343 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,617 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 20 September 2012 - 10:02 PM

Listen we are 12 days away from when the channel is launching and all indications & signs are pointing to D* holding out and not having it by October 1st.A lot of us know and have seen how D* handles these situations.Look what's going on with the Pac 12 Network.Look what happened during the Viacom situation where people lost the channels for about a week.

Are you really in denial that nasty negotiations and a hold out isn't going to happen over this between D* and Time Warner?

Like others have stated in this thread that D* could have reached an agreement with Time Warner before the new RSN is set to launch.Same goes for the Pac 12 networks.

My gripe is how can D* justify in agreeing to carry Fox Sports San Diego at a $5 per customer price tag and yet hold out on the Lakers new RSN channels when the Lakers RSN channels will have more programming, more pro & college sports coverage and is a full time 24/7 channel. When on the other hand FSN San Diego is a part time channel.


DirecTV actually has a very solid record of getting a ton of retrans agreements done each year without there ever being a public dispute. There are occasional exceptions to that. It's Dish who is notorious for numerous nasty, lengthy battles.

Regardless, no one has a deal for these channels. No one. That's a failure by TWC.

That $5.00 rate is a rumor and in regards to an entirely different provider, not a deal with DirecTV.
DTV = Digital Television

#344 OFFLINE   kb24sd

kb24sd

    The Specialist

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 189 posts
Joined: Jun 21, 2012

Posted 20 September 2012 - 10:08 PM

DirecTV actually has a very solid record of getting a ton of retrans agreements done each year without there ever being a public dispute. There are occasional exceptions to that. It's Dish who is notorious for numerous nasty, lengthy battles.

Regardless, no one has a deal for these channels. No one. That's a failure by TWC.

That $5.00 rate is a rumor and in regards to an entirely different provider, not a deal with DirecTV.


Both FSN San Diego and Time Warner SportsNet fall under the RSN' category and D* made a deal to be one of the providers to have it.

#345 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,326 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 20 September 2012 - 10:12 PM

Link:

http://www.latimes.c...0,7090219.story

If that price about Fox Sports San Diego is true and if that is what Directv is being charged to have it on D*.Then it's just flat out stupid that D* are willing to charge us D* customers $5 a month for Fox Sports San Diego when the channel is a part time channel.Yet D* intends to hold out is not willing to pay $3.95 or more for these two new Laker RSN channel which will be full time 24/7 channels and has more programming and other sports and local teams :mad:


You realize the part your missing on that is that DirecTV signed a massive contract with FOX for all their stations last year. I doubt they are paying that much for the channel, especially since they are only caring it part time and most it's programing was already online with prime ticket. Really not good to compare the two to much...

But it is funny what they are evidently asking twc to pay for the channel!

Again, goes to show, assuming that's right, that twc probably was in the Lakers to keep from having to pay such ridiculous prices... Wait till they go after the Dodgers...

#346 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,317 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 20 September 2012 - 10:13 PM

Listen we are 12 days away from when the channel is launching and all indications & signs are pointing to D* holding out and not having it by October 1st.A lot of us know and have seen how D* handles these situations.Look what's going on with the Pac 12 Network.Look what happened during the Viacom situation where people lost the channels for about a week.

Are you really in denial that nasty negotiations and a hold out isn't going to happen over this between D* and Time Warner?

Like others have stated in this thread that D* could have reached an agreement with Time Warner before the new RSN is set to launch.Same goes for the Pac 12 networks.

My gripe is how can D* justify in agreeing to carry Fox Sports San Diego at a $5 per customer price tag and yet hold out on the Lakers new RSN channels when the Lakers RSN channels will have more programming, more pro & college sports coverage and is a full time 24/7 channel. When on the other hand FSN San Diego is a part time channel.


Are they really paying $5 per customer for FS SD or are they getting it as part of the cost of FS west and prime ticket?
I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#347 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,617 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 20 September 2012 - 10:14 PM

Both FSN San Diego and Time Warner SportsNet fall under the RSN' category and D* made a deal to be one of the providers to have it.


And? They have their own deal. DirecTV has been carrying it since March and negotiated their own terms.
DTV = Digital Television

#348 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,326 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 20 September 2012 - 10:15 PM

Listen we are 12 days away from when the channel is launching and all indications & signs are pointing to D* holding out and not having it by October 1st.A lot of us know and have seen how D* handles these situations.Look what's going on with the Pac 12 Network.Look what happened during the Viacom situation where people lost the channels for about a week.

Are you really in denial that nasty negotiations and a hold out isn't going to happen over this between D* and Time Warner?

Like others have stated in this thread that D* could have reached an agreement with Time Warner before the new RSN is set to launch.Same goes for the Pac 12 networks.

My gripe is how can D* justify in agreeing to carry Fox Sports San Diego at a $5 per customer price tag and yet hold out on the Lakers new RSN channels when the Lakers RSN channels will have more programming, more pro & college sports coverage and is a full time 24/7 channel. When on the other hand FSN San Diego is a part time channel.


The PAC 12 channel and this are so different in every way... I would not at all look at how DirecTV approached those channels as to how they will approach these. And even if they did, if I where twc I'd be fine with DirecTV picking up this channel a la cart. They'd have most subs pick it up.

#349 OFFLINE   TJNash

TJNash

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 170 posts
  • LocationSan Diego
Joined: Jun 05, 2012

Posted 21 September 2012 - 09:11 AM

Are they really paying $5 per customer for FS SD or are they getting it as part of the cost of FS west and prime ticket?


Great point.

Also, it has to be clarified that FSSD is only a part time channel for D*, but at least on Cox in San Diego, it is a 24 hour channel that also brought the Clippers, Chivas, etc to Cox for the first time. Cox was not carrying Prime Ticket, so it in essence added another full time RSN, with the Padres. Obviously, Cox sees $5 a month as a reasonable price.

I agree that comparing the cost of FSSD on D* to whatever TWC is asking for the Lakers is a poor comparison. Totally different set of circumstances.

EDIT: TWC and NFL Network reach deal: http://www.bloomberg...rk-redzone.html

TWC getting its negotiating ducks in a row?

Edited by TJNash, 21 September 2012 - 09:18 AM.
New information


#350 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,826 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 21 September 2012 - 10:15 AM

My gripe is how can D* justify in agreeing to carry Fox Sports San Diego at a $5 per customer price tag and yet hold out on the Lakers new RSN channels when the Lakers RSN channels will have more programming, more pro & college sports coverage and is a full time 24/7 channel. When on the other hand FSN San Diego is a part time channel.


What is your source for the $5 number?

Besides, the deal probably included Prime Ticket, and the deal was probably signed before TWC had bought the Lakers rights and as such were to be shown in San Diego as part of the DMA. They also get Clippers, Kings, Ducks, Galaxy and Chivas as SD only has a NFL and MLB team. (If you have sports pack, FSWest may not be blacked out when any of the above teams play on it).

Also, TWC Sportsnet Los Angeles may be called that, but they market to the entire Lakers DMA including Hawaii, San Diego, Nevada. Might make it a bit more interesting, as that means DirecTV has to pay a lot of money for the people in Hawaii and Nevada as well to receive it as part of their DMA, while there are probably LESS Lakers fans out there than in L.A. and San Diego.

Looking at PAC12, I can almost guarantee you that DirecTV won't have the networks on October 1st. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say you will NOT see any pre-season games on DirecTV.
[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.




Protected By... spam firewall...And...