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

#841 OFFLINE   kevintheoman

kevintheoman

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 27 posts
Joined: Mar 14, 2012

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:12 PM

So, there are 1.7 M DirecTV customers in the LA market but only 271,000 watch Lakers games (and most of them are not DirecTV customers). If half of the 271,000 who watch Lakers games are DirecTV customers (and I doubt DirecTV penetration in the LA area is 50%), that would be about 8% of the 9% of DirecTV customers who live in LA, or about 0.8% of the entire DirecTV customer base that care about the Lakers Channel.


You need to understand also that the Lakers territory extends into San Diego and Las Vegas. Half of San Diego and all of Las Vegas are cox cable. Part of Orange County is cox cable. I think there are pockets of cablevision somewhere in there too.

Point is, there are many homes in the Lakers territory that have no access to the channel. Time Warner needs DirecTV more than DirecTV needs Time Warner.

I suppose I'm agreeing with you actually....but your math just happens to be way off base.

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#842 OFFLINE   sdk009

sdk009

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 684 posts
  • LocationStanislaus County Farmland
Joined: Jan 19, 2007

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:46 PM

Ad that's average. There where a few games home and away as I recall that get a lot more, literally a million in a couple cases. Lets face it, people don't generally mind missing games against Toronto, but they do against ok'd, the celtics, Miami, etc...


That 271,000 represent the number of tuners set to FS West during a Laker game. You could say that that represents about 400,000 people maybe more. The Heat, Celtics, and the other top games and all of the playoffs are going to be on nationally on NBA TV, TNT and/or ESPN.

#843 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,089 posts
Joined: Apr 09, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:03 PM

You are assuming DirecTV doesn't plan on changing that as new contracts come up for renegotiation.


I don't think so. CBS and Directv just re-upped themselves in a deal announced a few days ago. http://www.chicagotr...0,6809781.story It included CBS Sports Network. So no mention of that channel going to a sports tier.

Didn't Pursuit just re-up as well a month or so ago?

Not sports, but ION just signed a new deal as well. They didn't get relegated to a higher tier.

So no, based upon all of this I do not think so. So again, if they all go on a sports tier then it makes sense to push one away.

It's also fair for the provider to say that they are making a business decision to not to carry the Lakers, Pac 12, or anyone else. But that is not what is being said from the highest levels of Directv.

#844 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,089 posts
Joined: Apr 09, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:13 PM

So, you don't have any proof or a source to support your claims. Got it.


I do have my own proof, which is my direct (no pun intended) conversions with the President's office of Directv as well as higher level Pac 12 folks, not to mention everything else in the public domain about the Lakers, Pac 12, and other things. I have also talked to some higher levels in the Blazers organization over the years about the TV deals they have.

That may not be proof for you and that is fine. That is your choice. I don't have the power of deposition and subpoena, so we'll never get a court room proof (and by the way a blog is not proof, nor even real journalism....)

For that matter you have no proof whatsoever that Directv is telling the truth.

I know Directv is not telling the truth about the sports channels. They dragged the Pac 12 out all summer with silly comments about how they would have an update as school starts. When pointed out to them that school had already started for several Pac 12 schools they ignored their earlier comment. Then on the eve of the season starting Directv walked away completely. Yes, they have offered some silly deal about PPV and a sports tier, but that's just self serving statements in the media.

The same thing is now happening with the Laker channel, they've spun it for months now and push is about to come to shove to see how Directv acts in the next few weeks.

It is OK for a company to walk away and decide whatever channel, including sports, is not in their business model. That is perfectly fine. It's a different thing to lie.

Hey, I left Directv, I am all fine with that. As I told them when I terminated you and I are just not compatible. Directv kept wanting to continue the relationship despite the fact I made it quite clear I needed to leave because they didn't offer what I want and their competitors do. I was offered $25 off for two years, free equipment upgrades, free NFL Sunday Ticket, free HBO and the others, free Sports Pack, I think Gameplan came up in the discussion as well. Despite all of that I said NO. They didn't want to let go.

A company can be honest and forthcoming with it's customers.

And there is another side to all of this - Directv owns Root Sports. Root Sports NW had Pac 12 last year. Root Sports NW is showing what this year? Some Big Sky games and high school football games from Seattle area. Really, being in Oregon it's great for the Seattle area kids to get on TV, but seriously? In theory without the content my bill should be substantially less - but did I get any give back there? Nope. That giveback on lower content costs could have been passed on to other channels.

And to boot we don't even get the NBA Trail Blazers on Directv to begin with up here. They walked from that deal long ago. Whether that hold up is on Comcast's end or Directv's end is not really know. Each says their own thing. Bottom line is that Directv made a business decision not to pick up the channel.

Edited by WebTraveler, 11 October 2012 - 07:20 PM.


#845 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,089 posts
Joined: Apr 09, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:16 PM

That 271,000 represent the number of tuners set to FS West during a Laker game. You could say that that represents about 400,000 people maybe more. The Heat, Celtics, and the other top games and all of the playoffs are going to be on nationally on NBA TV, TNT and/or ESPN.


Maybe, I don't know. But doesn't the Laker territory span all the way from San Diego to the middle of CA, include Hawaii, and Nevada as well? I don't know exactly where it all cuts off.

#846 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,089 posts
Joined: Apr 09, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:17 PM

Those groups where not negotiating more half the time during their disputes, but that's not even the same. Directv does not need the channels to survive. The NHL needs its players to survive. (And if you think the nfl didn't need its refs, just ask Green Bay. :) ) Circumstances are vastly different. DirecTV obviously made a final offer to PAC 12 and then just said that's it, we are done negotiating. I am starting to think they may have done the same with twc. At some point negotiations endgame status quo is there is a contract on the table, sign it or don't attitude from one side or the other. When two sides need each other in order for both to exists, you are always still negotiating. When one side does and the other doesn't, its tricky, but when neither side feels they need the other (especially if they actually don't need each other) like the twc and the pac12 right now......


Directv has obviously made a calculated risk by not carrying the Pac 12 Network they will not lose too many subscribers. We will have to see if that holds true and they do the same with the Lakers.

#847 OFFLINE   Bambler

Bambler

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 405 posts
Joined: May 30, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:12 PM

Directv has obviously made a calculated risk by not carrying the Pac 12 Network they will not lose too many subscribers. We will have to see if that holds true and they do the same with the Lakers.


Web is right. Why argue what's apparent? Let's see what unfolds in terms of subscriber numbers over the next few years and we'll see if DirecTV is right.

Ultimately, direcTV screwed itself in their negotiation stance. No matter what they do now, they're going to piss off anti lakers and anti pac-12 fans no matter where they put it and indiscriminately charge.

Reap what your big mouth sows....

#848 OFFLINE   Bambler

Bambler

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 405 posts
Joined: May 30, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:34 PM

If that's the case, I have no interest in the Big 10 network, why am I paying for that???

#849 OFFLINE   Bambler

Bambler

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 405 posts
Joined: May 30, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:47 PM

Actually, 3/4ths of their entire "sports package" falls into my no interest category. I don't want to subsidize what I don't want to watch.

#850 OFFLINE   Bambler

Bambler

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 405 posts
Joined: May 30, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:53 PM

So I'm sorry Laker's fan. Schadenfreude. Can't have it both ways.

#851 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,798 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 12 October 2012 - 12:11 AM

I don't want to subsidize what I don't want to watch.


There's a good chance that 90% of the programming you have is "what I don't want to watch", and you pick and choose the good stuff from the remaining 10%.
[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.

#852 OFFLINE   fleckrj

fleckrj

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,132 posts
  • LocationCary, NC
Joined: Sep 04, 2009

Posted 12 October 2012 - 06:57 AM

Directv has obviously made a calculated risk by not carrying the Pac 12 Network they will not lose too many subscribers. We will have to see if that holds true and they do the same with the Lakers.


Exactly. DirecTV knows what the channel is worth to them. If they can get it for that price, they will take it. If not, they will accept the fact that they will lose some subscribers. If they pay more than what they feel it is worth to them, they will not be able to make up the difference by the number of customers they retain or gain.

Web is right. Why argue what's apparent? Let's see what unfolds in terms of subscriber numbers over the next few years and we'll see if DirecTV is right.

Ultimately, direcTV screwed itself in their negotiation stance. No matter what they do now, they're going to piss off anti lakers and anti pac-12 fans no matter where they put it and indiscriminately charge.

Reap what your big mouth sows....


It is not necessarily going to piss off anti Lakers and anti PAC 12 fans as long as what DirecTV pays for the channels is offset by the number of Lakers or PAC 12 fans they either retain or gain by adding the channels.

If that's the case, I have no interest in the Big 10 network, why am I paying for that???


The biggest difference between the Big 10 network and the PAC 12 network is that the Big 10 network only requires one CONUS slot, but the PAC 12 wants seven CONUS slots. The other difference is that the Big 10 carriage was negotiated years ago when the costs to carry were not as great. Dish dropped the Big 10 when their contract expired. Let's see what happens when DirecTV's contract is up for renewal.

The big difference between the Big 10 network and the Lakers channel is that the Big 10 games are not be blacked out in 90% of the country, but the Lakers games will be.

#853 OFFLINE   TJNash

TJNash

    AllStar

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

Posted 12 October 2012 - 08:37 AM

Web is right. Why argue what's apparent? Let's see what unfolds in terms of subscriber numbers over the next few years and we'll see if DirecTV is right.

Ultimately, direcTV screwed itself in their negotiation stance. No matter what they do now, they're going to piss off anti lakers and anti pac-12 fans no matter where they put it and indiscriminately charge.

Reap what your big mouth sows....


I must have missed the press release confirming that Directv will not be carrying TWC/Lakers. I must have missed the numerous press releases announcing all the other carriers that have signed on to take the channel.

But, hey, guys, don't let FACTS get in the way of your ill informed conclusions.

#854 OFFLINE   silkypimp

silkypimp

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 21 posts
Joined: Sep 29, 2012

Posted 12 October 2012 - 09:25 AM

I agree, It's amusing to read all of the posts by Forum Members who somehow have greater knowledge over everyone else. :hurah:

#855 OFFLINE   silkypimp

silkypimp

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 21 posts
Joined: Sep 29, 2012

Posted 12 October 2012 - 09:27 AM

Web is right. Why argue what's apparent? Let's see what unfolds in terms of subscriber numbers over the next few years and we'll see if DirecTV is right.

Ultimately, direcTV screwed itself in their negotiation stance. No matter what they do now, they're going to piss off anti lakers and anti pac-12 fans no matter where they put it and indiscriminately charge.

Reap what your big mouth sows....


Bambler's Source: I read other forums on the internet and watch Directv(even though I hate it).

#856 OFFLINE   Bambler

Bambler

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 405 posts
Joined: May 30, 2006

Posted 12 October 2012 - 09:44 AM

Personally, I find your statement(s)--especially about me--rather ironic. But that's beside the point.

I think DirecTV kind backed themselves into a hole with some of their statements and some of the reasoning sprayed here on whether DirecTV should or should not carry this channel.

By their own doing, this issue has galvanized people on both sides, especially IF they ultimately carry this channel, which would go against the essence of their argument to not carry this and other sport's channel.

#857 OFFLINE   silkypimp

silkypimp

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 21 posts
Joined: Sep 29, 2012

Posted 12 October 2012 - 10:03 AM

"yawn"

#858 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,798 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 12 October 2012 - 10:16 AM

Dish dropped the Big 10 when their contract expired.


No they didn't. BIG10 went dark when they couldn't reach a deal, but they did eventually come to terms. They weren't "dropped" like they dropped AMC, they just fought about it like DirecTV did with Viacom.

They also had a short-term agreement for the first 2 weeks, and negotiated a permanent deal in week 3. All in all BIG-10 was black on Dish for no more than a few days.
[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.

#859 OFFLINE   Bambler

Bambler

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 405 posts
Joined: May 30, 2006

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:27 AM

Instead of trying to invoke a "value-conscious" approach to these negotiations, DirecTV would have been better off going a different, more neutral route in regards to their public statements. Unless, of course, they have no intention at all in carrying this (and other) channels, which could very well be the case.

I know it's a cliche', but the position DirecTV is taking (at least publicly) means they're going to piss off people no matter what they do; damned if you, damned if you don't.

#860 OFFLINE   mshaw2715

mshaw2715

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 834 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:31 AM

Which is why it is time for two providers. One al carte provider that might not have any sports and a provider than bundles everything and includes sports and you know that coming in. I think if that was to happen networks like TWCS LA would be available already.

Instead of trying to invoke a "value-conscious" approach to these negotiations, DirecTV would have been better off going a different, more neutral route in regards to their public statements. Unless, of course, they have no intention at all in carrying this (and other) channels, which could very well be the case.

I know it's a cliche', but the position DirecTV is taking (at least publicly) means they're going to piss off people no matter what they do; damned if you, damned if you don't.






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