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

The official Pac-12 discussion thread


  • Please log in to reply
830 replies to this topic

#421 OFFLINE   sum_random_dork

sum_random_dork

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 890 posts
Joined: Aug 21, 2008

Posted 08 October 2012 - 02:51 PM

With that kind of philosophy, maybe we'll all "get lucky" and our kids sports teams will decide to sell tickets to games and shut out parents from getting them if they don't get their demands met for equipment and profits.

Nobody is giving kudos to the Big Ten or the SEC for their big money wins. True, the conferences would be irresponsible not to obtain funding for tv rights. But obtaining funding and generating billions, and forcing blackouts if financial goals aren't met, means Larry Scott has lost all perspective, and needs to wander off to professional sports where there are no publicly funded institutions depending on him to provide access to everybody.


You obviously have an issue with Larry Scott, but Larry Scott is doing exactly what the schools wanted him to do. Go out and get a better deal for them to help support all their athletic programs. It's exactly what the B1G10 and SEC do. You're request to sign an online petition won't accomplish much....remember 4 of the 5 largest providers already have Pac 12. Where I live every major provider besides DirecTV, ATT Uverse, and Suddenlink already carry the channel. Of that list, only DirecTV has any real customer #s to matter. There have been many posts about the cost per sub that Pac12 has asked for, if you find that's unfair that's fine.

FYI-Suddenlink is a member of the NTCT so I am sure if they want to carry the channel everything is already in place, as other members are carrying the Pac12 Network becuase the Pac12 Network signed a deal with their group.

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

#422 OFFLINE   Gloria_Chavez

Gloria_Chavez

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 423 posts
Joined: Aug 11, 2008

Posted 08 October 2012 - 04:02 PM

Nobody is giving kudos to the Big Ten or the SEC for their big money wins. True, the conferences would be irresponsible not to obtain funding for tv rights. But obtaining funding and generating billions, and forcing blackouts if financial goals aren't met, means Larry Scott has lost all perspective, and needs to wander off to professional sports where there are no publicly funded institutions depending on him to provide access to everybody.


Preposterous.

Larry Scott's mandate is to get at least as good a deal for the Pac12 as the Big10. And if the carriers resist, I say, hold out.

I also ask, how is ND a 9-pt favorite over the Cardinal?
Since 1995 the average cable bill has increased 122%, while TV consumption per household just 13%.

http://www.multichan...1_Per_Month.php

http://blog.nielsen....-all-time-high/

#423 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 39,593 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 08 October 2012 - 04:14 PM

A reminder ...
Links to online petitions or calls for class action lawsuits are not allowed.

Instructions on where to find a petition and/or encouragement to sign such will be treated as a link. Please follow the forum rules and leave petitions OFF of our forums.

#424 OFFLINE   kick4fun

kick4fun

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 467 posts
Joined: Aug 09, 2006

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:21 PM

Pac12 Networks lands another carrier, just not Directv..

http://www.dtvusafor...o-deal-yet.html

#425 OFFLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Fortuna! Fameux des Halles

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 11,967 posts
  • LocationWinters, California
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:39 PM

That was taken from the link...
http://www.pacificta...ctv-larry-scott


Ah, so a Pac12 website is the one describing Scott's wants as "a fair deal". And saying "rumored" 90 cents.

Have you any connection with the Pac12 besides that of a fan or an alumnus?
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#426 OFFLINE   Mike Bertelson

Mike Bertelson

    6EQUJ5 WOW!

  • Moderators
  • 13,859 posts
Joined: Jan 24, 2007

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:47 PM

Let's not start getting personal. Keep to the topic and not each other.

Mike

µß
Since it costs 2.4¢ to produce a penny, my 2¢ worth is really 4.8¢ worth.  That 4.8¢ is my own and not the 4.8¢ of DIRECTV, Dish, or anyone else for that matter.


#427 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 11 October 2012 - 06:04 AM

Yes, I saw that, another good catch. Directv just has another focus right now, just wish they'd be honest about it - they have no intention whatsoever of carrying the Pac 12.

So far things with Dish are going quite well. I have fewer channels (missing many channels I didn't watch anyway or even care about) but pay substantially less (and save even more for the 1st 12 months), brand new equipment, and have access to Pac 12.

The ONLY things really missing are ESPNU HD and CSN Northwest (but Directv does not have it either, so this is a neutral comparison)

Overall happy.


Pac12 Networks lands another carrier, just not Directv..

http://www.dtvusafor...o-deal-yet.html



#428 OFFLINE   kick4fun

kick4fun

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 467 posts
Joined: Aug 09, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:41 AM

Yes, I saw that, another good catch. Directv just has another focus right now, just wish they'd be honest about it - they have no intention whatsoever of carrying the Pac 12.

So far things with Dish are going quite well. I have fewer channels (missing many channels I didn't watch anyway or even care about) but pay substantially less (and save even more for the 1st 12 months), brand new equipment, and have access to Pac 12.

The ONLY things really missing are ESPNU HD and CSN Northwest (but Directv does not have it either, so this is a neutral comparison)

Overall happy.


You know, If Directv had the Pac12, I probably wouldn't have made the switch. But that being said, I too am satisfied for now with Dish. At least we have access to more than just football games. I really like the recap games in 60 seconds as well.

#429 OFFLINE   sdk009

sdk009

    Icon

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

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:34 AM

I still don't get D*'s position on this. If indeed the $.90 figure is accurate, and is in line with other sports nets & what other carriers are paying, what's the hang-up?
A PPV on a per game basis doesn't work, because of basketball.
Who's going to pay an extra fee to see Wofford-Colorado or Willamette at Utah on 11/9? That's just ridiculous and D* is just offering up something that they know is not palatable. Why then would they clear carriage space for something NOBODY is going to subscribe to. I don't get it and its very frustrating to read that D* has become so obstinate about adding sports programming.

#430 OFFLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Fortuna! Fameux des Halles

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 11,967 posts
  • LocationWinters, California
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:40 AM

IF 90 cents is correct, I sure as hell don't want my bill to increase by that plus a markup! I get all the Pac12 I need, and most of what I want already. It helps that I don't watch BB until March.
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#431 OFFLINE   kick4fun

kick4fun

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 467 posts
Joined: Aug 09, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:45 AM

I still don't get D*'s position on this. If indeed the $.90 figure is accurate, and is in line with other sports nets & what other carriers are paying, what's the hang-up?
A PPV on a per game basis doesn't work, because of basketball.
Who's going to pay an extra fee to see Wofford-Colorado or Willamette at Utah on 11/9? That's just ridiculous and D* is just offering up something that they know is not palatable. Why then would they clear carriage space for something NOBODY is going to subscribe to. I don't get it and its very frustrating to read that D* has become so obstinate about adding sports programming.


I totally agree. Some will argue that they are willing to pay 90cents for Big10, Root Sports and others, but not Pac12. They will try to convince others that Pac12 doesn't have a following and Directv can do no wrong.. I shrug my shoulders.. :nono2:

#432 OFFLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Fortuna! Fameux des Halles

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 11,967 posts
  • LocationWinters, California
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:52 AM

I totally agree. Some will argue that they are willing to pay 90cents for Big10, Root Sports and others, but not Pac12. They will try to convince others that Pac12 doesn't have a following and Directv can do no wrong.. I shrug my shoulders.. :nono2:


Of course! But I have never seen a credible source for what's paid to Big10 or "others".

And DIRECTV does make mistakes, and there are clearly those who are frantic for Pac12, but entry is denied when the price is too high. I'd like to see it, but not at a big price.

Please do tell us if you have a connection with Pac12, or not.
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#433 OFFLINE   bnwrx

bnwrx

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 947 posts
  • Locationcolorado, in the mountains.....
Joined: Dec 29, 2007

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:54 AM

I still don't get D*'s position on this. If indeed the $.90 figure is accurate, and is in line with other sports nets & what other carriers are paying, what's the hang-up?
A PPV on a per game basis doesn't work, because of basketball.
Who's going to pay an extra fee to see Wofford-Colorado or Willamette at Utah on 11/9? That's just ridiculous and D* is just offering up something that they know is not palatable. Why then would they clear carriage space for something NOBODY is going to subscribe to. I don't get it and its very frustrating to read that D* has become so obstinate about adding sports programming.


Maybe you answered you own question here...How many of the millions who would be charged that $.90, would actually watch that or many of the other games on PAC12? A few games this Fall in football(already concluded by the way) have not been available and some basketball games this winter, which won't be on another network is all we've missed. Like it or not it is a numbers game. I doubt few outside of the conference are interested in PAC12 volleyball or any other sport other than football or basketball. There just isn't an attraction to it yet you would have us all pay for this network. DTV is still in talks. I feel eventually this channel will be on the system, but until that time, despite how passionate some are about its carriage, most in this country could care less about it.

HR44-500 HDMI to 42"Toshiba
HR21-100 HDMI to 32" LG and 20" AOC

Directv since 1996(the USSB,Pegasus days...)
...sometimes, there is no answer...
http://woodlandweather.org/


#434 OFFLINE   sdk009

sdk009

    Icon

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

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:21 AM

Maybe you answered you own question here...How many of the millions who would be charged that $.90, would actually watch that or many of the other games on PAC12? A few games this Fall in football(already concluded by the way) have not been available and some basketball games this winter, which won't be on another network is all we've missed. Like it or not it is a numbers game. I doubt few outside of the conference are interested in PAC12 volleyball or any other sport other than football or basketball. There just isn't an attraction to it yet you would have us all pay for this network. DTV is still in talks. I feel eventually this channel will be on the system, but until that time, despite how passionate some are about its carriage, most in this country could care less about it.


Three questions then:
1) Why have all the other carriers nationwide agreed to the $.90 but not D*?
2) What makes the PAC-12 less desirable nationwide than the Big 10 Net (if what we are lead to believe that the rights fees paid for the Big 10 are comparable to what the PAC-12 is asking)?
I could care less about Big 10 olympic sports, but they're shown and since the PAC 12 has been far more successful in these sports than the Big 10, there is even less of an attraction than those of the PAC 12.

3) Why does D* appear to be more like what Dish used to be by passing on sports channels and now Dish is signing them?

#435 ONLINE   sigma1914

sigma1914

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 13,915 posts
  • LocationAllen, TX
Joined: Sep 05, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:35 AM

Three questions then:
1) Why have all the other carriers nationwide agreed to the $.90 but not D*?
2) What makes the PAC-12 less desirable nationwide than the Big 10 Net (if what we are lead to believe that the rights fees paid for the Big 10 are comparable to what the PAC-12 is asking)?
I could care less about Big 10 olympic sports, but they're shown and since the PAC 12 has been far more successful in these sports than the Big 10, there is even less of an attraction than those of the PAC 12.

3) Why does D* appear to be more like what Dish used to be by passing on sports channels and now Dish is signing them?


1.) Every carrier doesn't have it.
2.) It's not always about you.
3.) Has Dish signed any NY sports stations? Why can't they sign them like every other carrier that has?
If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.

#436 OFFLINE   stevester23

stevester23

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 38 posts
Joined: Sep 04, 2011

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:41 AM

Maybe you answered you own question here...How many of the millions who would be charged that $.90, would actually watch that or many of the other games on PAC12? A few games this Fall in football(already concluded by the way) have not been available and some basketball games this winter, which won't be on another network is all we've missed. Like it or not it is a numbers game. I doubt few outside of the conference are interested in PAC12 volleyball or any other sport other than football or basketball. There just isn't an attraction to it yet you would have us all pay for this network. DTV is still in talks. I feel eventually this channel will be on the system, but until that time, despite how passionate some are about its carriage, most in this country could care less about it.


I sure there are channels that I pay much more than .90 cents that I never watch. Until we go to a true a la carte system (not likely to happen anytime soon), we will all pay for channels we seldom, if ever watch. I have not watched a Viacom channel in years, but I'm almost certain that since the last agreement I will be paying more.

#437 OFFLINE   sdk009

sdk009

    Icon

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

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:03 AM

1.) Every carrier doesn't have it.
2.) It's not always about you.
3.) Has Dish signed any NY sports stations? Why can't they sign them like every other carrier that has?


1) I meant all carriers that have has agreed
3) Ask Dish, because I dont' know nor do I care (see #2 below).

2) It is about me because I'm the customer (first rule of sales and service).

#438 ONLINE   sigma1914

sigma1914

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 13,915 posts
  • LocationAllen, TX
Joined: Sep 05, 2006

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:06 AM

...
2) It is about me because I'm the customer (first rule of sales and service).


So, DirecTV has to add it because you want it? :lol::rolleyes:
If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.

#439 OFFLINE   Gloria_Chavez

Gloria_Chavez

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 423 posts
Joined: Aug 11, 2008

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:38 AM

I sure there are channels that I pay much more than .90 cents that I never watch. Until we go to a true a la carte system (not likely to happen anytime soon), we will all pay for channels we seldom, if ever watch. I have not watched a Viacom channel in years, but I'm almost certain that since the last agreement I will be paying more.


Will be interested in your take in a couple of years, when Univision will ask for and receive 1.50 a month.


****************************************
http://tvbythenumber...s-18-34/151205/

Univision out-delivered one or more of the English-language Broadcast Networks (ABC, CBS, NBC or FOX) on Five out of Seven Nights Last Week among Adults 18-34

Univision is the #2 Network among Adults 18-34 during the 10 p.m. Hour Monday- Friday
****************************************
Since 1995 the average cable bill has increased 122%, while TV consumption per household just 13%.

http://www.multichan...1_Per_Month.php

http://blog.nielsen....-all-time-high/

#440 OFFLINE   sdk009

sdk009

    Icon

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

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:45 AM

So, DirecTV has to add it because you want it? :lol::rolleyes:


If they want to keep me as a customer :money: then yes




spam firewall