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

#1201 OFFLINE   lipcrkr

lipcrkr

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 285 posts
Joined: Apr 27, 2012

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:34 AM

With the 3 million potential COX, DTV, and Dish viewers watching the Clippers and not the Lakers, and now Clippers are 2-0 and Lakers are 0-3, this whole thing could backfire for the Lakers and TW. If it keeps up, the advertisers may start to pour their money onto Prime Ticket. It will be interesting to see ratings from last Wednesday Clippers-Memphis game vs Lakers-Blazer game. The next 12 Laker games are exclusively on TW, so this will be the real test.


Lakers are 0-13 and haven't won since May 18th.

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

#1202 OFFLINE   sigma1914

sigma1914

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,316 posts
  • LocationAllen, TX
Joined: Sep 05, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 07:00 AM

Lakers are 0-13 and haven't won since May 18th.


Who cares or counts preseason? It's meaningless.
If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.

#1203 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:04 AM

That doesn't mean that the money all goes to the same coffer or that the 2 entities have to get along the whole time. There are many instances where a parent company has subsidaries that have to make business decisions that aren't always logical to the other side of the business but they have to be treated as 2 different companies.


Directv owns 100% of Root. Parent can always exercise whatever it wants on it's subsidiaries and it's not even theoretically possible what you suggest. It's not two different companies when one owns 100% of another.

#1204 OFFLINE   sigma1914

sigma1914

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,316 posts
  • LocationAllen, TX
Joined: Sep 05, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:06 AM

Directv owns 100% of Root. Parent can always exercise whatever it wants on it's subsidiaries and it's not even theoretically possible what you suggest. It's not two different companies when one owns 100% of another.


Read ChicagoBlue's posts.
If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.

#1205 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,908 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:09 AM

Yes there is...but so what is your point? When both parties are the same on both sides of the transaction the whole document is self serving. So what is your point?


It means that they honor the contract to its end.

Some if you keep thinking that owned network deals are different. They are not. They are two completely different parts of large companies.
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

#1206 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:09 AM

Stop with the attitude pal. Clearly I know how it works, clearly you think you are God and a know it all.

Dish picture is fine. I have had both at alternate times throughout my life and there is no significant difference between the two. But even if there is - the fact remains that Dish charges less for the same comparable product. I do not think the picture is any less on any of the channels I watch. Now Directv has a few more HD channels for things I might watch. Dish does not have ESPNU in HD.

In NYC maybe Directv offers more sports channels. That might be a checkmark in their favor in NYC. What does that do for LA and the rest of the nation? Last I checked both Directv and Dish offer the same in LA, except Dish offers Pac 12 and Directv does not.

Your statement of "told you guys it will be done by next week." And HOW would you even know this? You don't. That's noting more than your bantering.

But let me ask this - how is that Pac 12 on Directv? That picture isn't clear at all is it?

Now wouldn't it be really humorous to see if Dish beat Directv to the punch on the Lakers?


Again, because you don't really know how this works. I'm being kind.

First off, Dish picture isn't as good. You pay for quality just as you pay for content. I'd love to know what your programming package is and hardware you have to be paying $15 less. Do you have one of those horrid receivers that serves two televisions off of one to save hardware fees?

You analogy on DTV and sports is flawed. If you live in NYC, you get YES, SNY, MSG, MSG +...if you had DISH in NYC you get......crickets chirping. Other examples like this with all providers. You can't just make blanket statements like you make.

Finally, on this Lakers deal I told you guys it will be done by next week. One thing none of you are factoring is the national nature of DTV vs a local \ regional cable \ telco provider. A DISH or DTV has a much more detailed deal to do than the local cable provider. Cox simply has to cut a deal for the Lakers in market rights and decide if $3.95 is worth it (it's not). Secondly, Cox, Fios, Uverse, etc all have more ability to take a loss in video because they gouge you guys every day for data and phone and yet you happily pay it each month. Margins sometimes 70%, they're just fat, dumb and happy to get people to pay for that without even missing a beat.

For a national video only player, however, they have to cut a deal that not only addresses the in market situation but the outer market (note, I didn't say OUT OF MARKET, I said OUTER MARKET). DTV has to address things like Santa Barbara, Hawaii, Las Vegas, etc that are "Lakers Outer Market" territory but not Out of market territory. FIOS, Uverse, Cox, Comcast, etc, don't have to do that. That makes a HUGE DIFFERENCE in negotiating rates, packaging, total cost, etc.

So when you say such and such "figured it out"....no they didn't. Those other entities don't even have to deal with those issues. It is a totally different deal.

The Lakers and DTV will have a deal next week. A horridly over priced channel for a bad basketball team. Enjoy the price hike everyone.

Incidentally, if TWC gets the Dodgers, that's an incremental cost on top of it and you will all absorb that one, even the 1/2 plus of Los Angelinos that don't care one iota about the Doyers.



#1207 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,908 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:09 AM

Root Sports Network is owned by DirecTV sports network, which is a subsidiary of DirecTV.


I am well aware of that.
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

#1208 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,908 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:14 AM

Directv owns 100% of Root. Parent can always exercise whatever it wants on it's subsidiaries and it's not even theoretically possible what you suggest. It's not two different companies when one owns 100% of another.


Man. You really don't know what you are talking about. Subsidiaries are legal entities.

I will give you an example. Our IT services are a wholly owned sub that provides services only to the main company. There are CONTRACTS in place and the IT sub runs its own business. The main company does NOT dictate terms.
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

#1209 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:15 AM

It means that they honor the contract to its end.

Some if you keep thinking that owned network deals are different. They are not. They are two completely different parts of large companies.


Tontyd79, with all due respect, you are wrong. Moving money from the left pocket to the right pocket is not a separate interest.

This is exactly why under SEC rules, under GAAP accounting rules, under IRS rules, under regulatory rules, 100% owned subsidiaries are considered to be their own. WHY? Because the legal side has already figured out that a 100% owned subsidiary is not a separate entity. Bankers as well will disregard this.

The reality is they are set up this way for state law purposes and liability purposes. But smart lawyers always find a way to pierce the veil on a 100% owned entity

#1210 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:18 AM

Man. You really don't know what you are talking about. Subsidiaries are legal entities.

I will give you an example. Our IT services are a wholly owned sub that provides services only to the main company. There are CONTRACTS in place and the IT sub runs its own business. The main company does NOT dictate terms.


You are so wrong. Tony, you may know IT, but you sure are not well versed in the legal and accounting aspects of business entities and the combinations. In your example, the main company absolutely dictates terms. It made the business decision to split a company into two, but with full control. Sure it has managers in place, and of course, has budgets and costs it needs to contain. But if parent owns 100% of sub then the same guy sits on both sides of the transaction.

Anyone can write a contract between themselves any way they want. That's lawyer 101.

Argue that a 100% owned sub isn't controlled by the parent....argue that before any court, regulatory agency, the SEC, IRS, etc. and you will be laughed right out of the building.

When subs are less than 50% owned then they generally are not considered controlled, depending on the issue in question.....but 51% and over is a controlled entity in every legal situation I can even think of. 49% guy has little power, except the power to persuade....but that's it.

Edited by WebTraveler, 03 November 2012 - 09:24 AM.


#1211 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,908 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:41 AM

You are so wrong. Tony, you may know IT, but you sure are not well versed in the legal and accounting aspects of business entities and the combinations. In your example, the main company absolutely dictates terms. It made the business decision to split a company into two, but with full control. Sure it has managers in place, and of course, has budgets and costs it needs to contain. But if parent owns 100% of sub then the same guy sits on both sides of the transaction.

Anyone can write a contract between themselves any way they want. That's lawyer 101.

Argue that a 100% owned sub isn't controlled by the parent....argue that before any court, regulatory agency, the SEC, IRS, etc. and you will be laughed right out of the building.

When subs are less than 50% owned then they generally are not considered controlled, depending on the issue in question.....but 51% and over is a controlled entity in every legal situation I can even think of. 49% guy has little power, except the power to persuade....but that's it.


"Subsidiaries are separate, distinct legal entities for the purposes of taxation, regulation, and liability. For this reason, they differ from divisions, which are businesses fully integrated within the main company, and not legally or otherwise distinct from it."
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

#1212 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,042 posts
Joined: Dec 06, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:51 AM

All I can say is that when NewsCorp owned us dealing with them or Fox you might as well have been dealing with Comcast or Viacom or Disney. People have this assumption that because you are owned by a parent company it should make things easier. LOL. So far from the truth, at least in my experience here. All are separate business \ legal entities and operate in silos essentially.
DIRECTV employee

All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#1213 ONLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,549 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:46 AM

And even though a lender might look to a subsidiary's cash and operations, they can't willy nilly raid it. (Loan agreements usually allow that, or pledge the sub's assets.)

Big diff. between practice and what you believe, Mr. Traveler.
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#1214 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:59 AM

"Subsidiaries are separate, distinct legal entities for the purposes of taxation, regulation, and liability. For this reason, they differ from divisions, which are businesses fully integrated within the main company, and not legally or otherwise distinct from it."


Tonyd79, not sure where that definition comes from, but it's misleading. Under the Internal Revenue Code a controlled subsidiary's income is taxed as it's own. Call it whatever you want, but it is absolutely true. Same goes for brother-sister companies (i.e. two companies owned by the same person or group of persons) For GAAP accounting purposes the entity is considered to be it's own. You are pretty naive if you believe this statement.

From a liability perspective they normally are separate and this is WHY companies consistently hold things in multiple entities. Any competent attorney can tell you that. Where things get complicated is when there are loan or other agreements cross collaterizing assets or the mixing of transactions between entities.

FACT is when the same people sit on both sides of the transaction then it's simply just a self serving document. In these cases you look beyond the transaction to see if it's terms are really at "arm's length."

Edited by WebTraveler, 03 November 2012 - 11:04 AM.


#1215 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:08 AM

And even though a lender might look to a subsidiary's cash and operations, they can't willy nilly raid it. (Loan agreements usually allow that, or pledge the sub's assets.)

Big diff. between practice and what you believe, Mr. Traveler.


Oh you are so so wrong.

If entity A owns 100% of entity B, entity A installs its own board of directors which install its own management team.

Entity A can also decide to liquidate entity B and absorb it into entity A all by itself with no action by anyone else. So yes if entity A wants to raid its sub entity B it can do just that. (there may be tax consequences to that).

There may be bank covenants or other regulatory issues that might cause some issues that need to be addressed. But bank covenants are all voluntarily entered into whereas regulatory issues are restrictions that may be imposed some some regulatory authority for the pleasure of doing business in whatever industry or regulated environment.

#1216 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:10 AM

All I can say is that when NewsCorp owned us dealing with them or Fox you might as well have been dealing with Comcast or Viacom or Disney. People have this assumption that because you are owned by a parent company it should make things easier. LOL. So far from the truth, at least in my experience here. All are separate business \ legal entities and operate in silos essentially.


Because NewsCorp views its subs as profit centers and when it no longer serves their larger purpose, they unload it.

An intact entity is easier to sell than a division that's integrated within a larger company.

#1217 OFFLINE   TheRatPatrol

TheRatPatrol

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,891 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ
Joined: Oct 01, 2003

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:27 AM

It seems like the costs for sports programing have skyrocketed over the past decade, but the sports networks keep refusing to allow their channels to go into a separate sports tier, or allow for al la carte.

If you were in charge for a day, how would you change the delivery and availability of sports programing, including your local teams?

#1218 ONLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,549 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:34 AM

Again, webtraveler, you conflate what's legally possible with normal practice in industry.
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#1219 ONLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,259 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:15 PM

What do you mean? UCLA and USC have been on plenty this year. A few games have been on Pac 12 network, not all of them. Not even most of them.


Well, half the games have been on the PAC 12 networks, including a week with both of them. Maybe two.

Also, wait till basketball season. it will be even more lopsided. Most games will be on the pac12 networks.

#1220 ONLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,259 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:19 PM

Lakers are 0-13 and haven't won since May 18th.


Their current record is completely meaningless in these negotiations.

#1221 OFFLINE   iceturkee

iceturkee

    DINFOS Trained Killer

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 1,205 posts
  • Locationdaytona beach, fl
Joined: Apr 01, 2007

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:33 PM

i have to admit i cringe because my cable company has pac 12 and soon will have twc sports net. right now, they have 211 hd channels. the picture quality sucks. but its depressing that they can get channels but we can't. i know a lot is tied to how much room is available on a satellite.

but.........................

#1222 OFFLINE   sigma1914

sigma1914

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,316 posts
  • LocationAllen, TX
Joined: Sep 05, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:37 PM

i have to admit i cringe because my cable company has pac 12 and soon will have twc sports net. right now, they have 211 hd channels. the picture quality sucks. but its depressing that they can get channels but we can't. i know a lot is tied to how much room is available on a satellite.

but.........................


It's cheaper for your cable company...less subscribers.
If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.

#1223 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:00 PM

Again, webtraveler, you conflate what's legally possible with normal practice in industry.


I think your perception is very skewed on what is a "normal practice in industry." To the contrary, a 100% controlled subsidiary is operated in a fashion that benefits the parent, especially when they have complementary product lines. I will concede to you that a guy at the lower level of a corporate empire may not see this.

#1224 OFFLINE   Hutchinshouse

Hutchinshouse

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,632 posts
Joined: Sep 27, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:01 PM

It's cheaper for your cable company...less subscribers.


Isn't it a wash? Less subscribers mean they also have less money to spend than DIRECTV.

#1225 OFFLINE   sigma1914

sigma1914

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,316 posts
  • LocationAllen, TX
Joined: Sep 05, 2006

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:06 PM

I think your perception is very skewed on what is a "normal practice in industry." To the contrary, a 100% controlled subsidiary is operated in a fashion that benefits the parent, especially when they have complementary product lines. I will concede to you that a guy at the lower level of a corporate empire may not see this.


You've got people in the industry (SatelliteRacer & ChicagoBlue) how this works, what's the issue?
If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.




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