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
- - - - -

DirecTV adds local sports surcharge for some new subscribers


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#26 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:16 PM

That's more about Comcast and their shady practices. Even the Blazers are ticked at them.


That's what Directv wants you to believe. The average monthly charge per sub for CSN-NW is less than 100% owned Root Sports Northwest. Neither offer that much content.

Root has the Mariners and little else. CSN has the Blazers and little else. Pac took their sports and left. Root used to have Blazers and Supersonics and Pac 12. CSN had Oregon Ducks sports and does show some Vancouver Canucks games.

Oregon customers, by far, would prefer CSN-NW, but we don't get that option. We get 100% owned Root Sports.

No doubt Comcast is part of it all, but Directv is not innocent in all of this. Directv knows exactly what it is doing/

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

#27 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

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

Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:07 AM

That's what Directv wants you to believe. The average monthly charge per sub for CSN-NW is less than 100% owned Root Sports Northwest. Neither offer that much content.

Root has the Mariners and little else. CSN has the Blazers and little else. Pac took their sports and left. Root used to have Blazers and Supersonics and Pac 12. CSN had Oregon Ducks sports and does show some Vancouver Canucks games.

Oregon customers, by far, would prefer CSN-NW, but we don't get that option. We get 100% owned Root Sports.

No doubt Comcast is part of it all, but Directv is not innocent in all of this. Directv knows exactly what it is doing/


Having the Mariners gives them 154 games to broadcast. Having the Blazers it is about 70 (others are carried on TNT, NBA, etc). You pay for content, and that is a big differentiator.

It's not just that they each have one team, but it's how many days \ nights of programming they provide.
DIRECTV employee

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

#28 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

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

Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:10 AM

Yes, unfortunately, I know.

It's just a little disappointing when all we have up here for professional sports are 2 teams the Seattle Mariners (Root) and the Blazers (CSN-NW) and we only get one of those channels on DirecTV (I understand CSN-NW is asking a TON)
Then we have our College teams that play on a non RSN (although when they played on ROOT last year it was an RSN) so I wish there could be some middle ground where the regional channel does become an RSN so I can watch OSU play! argh!!!


I'm pretty sure D*, Dish, Charter, Uverse and others don't carry it either up there.
DIRECTV employee

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

#29 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 13 December 2012 - 07:33 AM

Having the Mariners gives them 154 games to broadcast. Having the Blazers it is about 70 (others are carried on TNT, NBA, etc). You pay for content, and that is a big differentiator.

It's not just that they each have one team, but it's how many days \ nights of programming they provide.


Yep, no dispute on the lack of content for each of them. but still, few in Oregon really care that deep about the Mariners. We'd prefer to have our local NBA team...but we cannot because Directv owns the competitor and it isn't going to happen.

#30 OFFLINE   FenixTX

FenixTX

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 476 posts
Joined: Nov 11, 2005

Posted 13 December 2012 - 07:47 AM

Yep, no dispute on the lack of content for each of them. but still, few in Oregon really care that deep about the Mariners. We'd prefer to have our local NBA team...but we cannot because Directv owns the competitor and it isn't going to happen.


I thought you had Dish? And if so, why are you complaining about DirecTV not having a channel when you should be complaining in a Dish forum that they don't have the channel.
Go Big Red!!!

#31 OFFLINE   woj027

woj027

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 851 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 13 December 2012 - 08:10 AM

I'm pretty sure D*, Dish, Charter, Uverse and others don't carry it either up there.


You're absolutely correct. I wasn't digging at DirecTV, I was bemoaning my station in life.



errrr.. lack of (TV) stations in life.

Edited by woj027, 13 December 2012 - 08:14 AM.
humor?


#32 OFFLINE   woj027

woj027

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 851 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 13 December 2012 - 08:13 AM

I thought you had Dish? And if so, why are you complaining about DirecTV not having a channel when you should be complaining in a Dish forum that they don't have the channel.


Because I sidetracked the conversation by saying we don't get squat up here in the Pacific NW because (1) we only have 2 pro sports teams not counting MSL (2) our major colleges, all pac-12, are now managed by a non-RSN RSN (3)Comcast sucks...

#33 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 14 December 2012 - 09:09 AM

I thought you had Dish? And if so, why are you complaining about DirecTV not having a channel when you should be complaining in a Dish forum that they don't have the channel.


I do have Dish - now.

Not complaining about anything, just stating the facts, that the facts stated here in this forum on the CSN-NW issues are not complete It's not all about Comcast, but Directv is in the mix as well as why it is not carried.

I have no beef with Dish Network. They do not own either CSN-NW or Root NW.

Big difference between a complaint versus making sure the facts are correct.

#34 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 14 December 2012 - 09:12 AM

I'm pretty sure D*, Dish, Charter, Uverse and others don't carry it either up there.


Uverse is not here.....others do carry it, Frontier, Bend Broadband and a host of others to actually carry it. Charter is primarily in Southern Oregon and while technically its a Trail Blazer market fan interest starts falling outside of Portland metro, and I can understand why the channels not on in southern Oregon.

#35 OFFLINE   fireponcoal

fireponcoal

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 737 posts
Joined: Sep 26, 2009

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:01 PM

Having the Mariners gives them 154 games to broadcast. Having the Blazers it is about 70 (others are carried on TNT, NBA, etc). You pay for content, and that is a big differentiator.

It's not just that they each have one team, but it's how many days \ nights of programming they provide.


So true. ROOT NW also gets you the timbers. That is a ton of content in my eyes.. Philly gets no content so be thankful for what pro sports you do receive.

#36 OFFLINE   Joe Spears

Joe Spears

    Duplicate User (Account Closed)

  • Banned User
  • 109 posts
Joined: Dec 23, 2010

Posted 14 December 2012 - 04:33 PM

Uverse is not here.....others do carry it, Frontier, Bend Broadband and a host of others to actually carry it. Charter is primarily in Southern Oregon and while technically its a Trail Blazer market fan interest starts falling outside of Portland metro, and I can understand why the channels not on in southern Oregon.

http://www.csnnw.com...annellocations/

#37 OFFLINE   TravelFan1

TravelFan1

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 226 posts
Joined: Apr 01, 2009

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:59 PM

Pac 12 is not a RSN, just as the Big Ten Network is not a RSN and neither was the Mtn. West channel when it was around.

You're not being charged a RSN fee in your area.

That may be technically correct, but the whole reason why B1G added RU and Md was to get b1g charged as a local rsn in md and ru media markets.

Rip: Comcast: July 2005 - April 2009 & Dish Network: April 2009-July 2011
Directv since June 2011 and loving it!
Directv wish list:BBC World News, Fox Deportes HD, WatchEspn, FoxSports2Go


#38 ONLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,838 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:49 PM

Yep, no dispute on the lack of content for each of them. but still, few in Oregon really care that deep about the Mariners. We'd prefer to have our local NBA team...but we cannot because Directv owns the competitor and it isn't going to happen.


!rolling

I think its hilarious you still think that roots is thew reason that Directv doesn't have the Blazers. They don't compete for the same eyes at all, so there is zero reason to actually think that no matter how you slice it. Its all about price of the Comcast channel, period, end of story.

#39 OFFLINE   TXD16

TXD16

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 876 posts
Joined: Oct 29, 2008

Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:59 PM

DirecTV adds local sports surcharge for some new subscribers...


Those in the Houston DMA have been paying a $2.00/mo. "Regional Sports Fee" for quite some time. Quite frankly, given the absence of CSN Houston, it's beginning to somewhat grate upon me more than a bit.

"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." - Ayn Rand


#40 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 15 December 2012 - 07:33 AM

!rolling

I think its hilarious you still think that roots is thew reason that Directv doesn't have the Blazers. They don't compete for the same eyes at all, so there is zero reason to actually think that no matter how you slice it. Its all about price of the Comcast channel, period, end of story.


Go laugh all you want, but you are wrong. It's partly about price, and it's partly about the fact that Directv owns the competitor channel in the market.

Considering the average Root charge is substantially higher than the average CSN charge it's hard to fall back solely on the fact that CSN "charges too much." The rate differential between the two easily differentiates the fact that Root has 150+ baseball games and CSN has 70+ basketball games. CSN also covers PSU sports, Root covers some Timbers games, etc. By keeping CSN off its customers TVs Root is able to restrict them as a competitor in bidding for some sports. It's a competitive environment. Conversly, Comcast has customers that might be with Directv if Directv carried the channel.

It's not as simple as you think it is. Laugh and think it's hilarious if you want. Your method of self-medication is up to you. Regards.

#41 ONLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,838 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 15 December 2012 - 01:33 PM

Go laugh all you want, but you are wrong. It's partly about price, and it's partly about the fact that Directv owns the competitor channel in the market.

Considering the average Root charge is substantially higher than the average CSN charge it's hard to fall back solely on the fact that CSN "charges too much." The rate differential between the two easily differentiates the fact that Root has 150+ baseball games and CSN has 70+ basketball games. CSN also covers PSU sports, Root covers some Timbers games, etc. By keeping CSN off its customers TVs Root is able to restrict them as a competitor in bidding for some sports. It's a competitive environment. Conversly, Comcast has customers that might be with Directv if Directv carried the channel.

It's not as simple as you think it is. Laugh and think it's hilarious if you want. Your method of self-medication is up to you. Regards.


Your the one trying to simplify something to a point of illogicality. Not having Comcast channel on DIRECTV will not keep them from bidding on any sports, or getting sports to agree with them. If it did, Huston would not have signed up for the new channel there knowing what Comcast has been doing and their inability to get dtv to pick up there sports channels any more. Any thought that it would is short sighted. Did you not read about the Time Warner Cable sports net channels that got the Lakers without any distribution agreements?

They are not core competitors. Period. And even if they where, that would not keep DIRECTV from picking up the station if the price was right.

The issue I am sure has to do with how much Comcast wants for out of main market customers, where they likely want the same pricing as customers in the core market, something that DIRECTV does not do for any channels. It was even mentioned this was part of the reason that DIRECTV took so long to get the Time Warner Cable channels. That can make these channels far more expensive than what many think at first glance. Its likely how Comcast is trying to keep a monopoly in the areas they can. The one that doesn't want these channels on DIRECTV is Comcast, unless they can get a very large fee for the channels. I know you know that distribution on a neighboring cable company is not at all the same as getting pricing the same on a sat company.


In relation to this thread, frankly, I have no issue with DIRECTV charging a little extra in ever market that has more than one RSN. In fact, I'm surprised they don't charge an extra 2 or 3 for each additional channel beyond the first. Los Angeles and NY both have more than two correct?

#42 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,288 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 15 December 2012 - 02:00 PM

Your the one trying to simplify something to a point of illogicality. Not having Comcast channel on DIRECTV will not keep them from bidding on any sports, or getting sports to agree with them. If it did, Huston would not have signed up for the new channel there knowing what Comcast has been doing and their inability to get dtv to pick up there sports channels any more. Any thought that it would is short sighted. Did you not read about the Time Warner Cable sports net channels that got the Lakers without any distribution agreements?

They are not core competitors. Period. And even if they where, that would not keep DIRECTV from picking up the station if the price was right.

The issue I am sure has to do with how much Comcast wants for out of main market customers, where they likely want the same pricing as customers in the core market, something that DIRECTV does not do for any channels. It was even mentioned this was part of the reason that DIRECTV took so long to get the Time Warner Cable channels. That can make these channels far more expensive than what many think at first glance. Its likely how Comcast is trying to keep a monopoly in the areas they can. The one that doesn't want these channels on DIRECTV is Comcast, unless they can get a very large fee for the channels. I know you know that distribution on a neighboring cable company is not at all the same as getting pricing the same on a sat company.


In relation to this thread, frankly, I have no issue with DIRECTV charging a little extra in ever market that has more than one RSN. In fact, I'm surprised they don't charge an extra 2 or 3 for each additional channel beyond the first. Los Angeles and NY both have more than two correct?


well some areas have 2 fsn feeds / a FS feed + a SUB one so that is really only 1 channel. FS SD is just a sub feed of WEST / prime ticket.

MSG / MSG + and alt's I think count as 1 but NY also has YES and SNY.

CSN has the part time over flow + feeds.

Las Vegas gets a lot of RSN's (with some blackouts on the CSN's)


Directv RSN look up tool does not seem to have TWCSN in it yet
I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#43 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

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

Posted 15 December 2012 - 04:27 PM

That may be technically correct, but the whole reason why B1G added RU and Md was to get b1g charged as a local rsn in md and ru media markets.


Respectfully disagree. The packaging components of the Big 10, Pac 12, even the old Mountain West Channel are not like an RSN.
DIRECTV employee

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

#44 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

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

Posted 15 December 2012 - 04:35 PM

!rolling

I think its hilarious you still think that roots is thew reason that Directv doesn't have the Blazers. They don't compete for the same eyes at all, so there is zero reason to actually think that no matter how you slice it. Its all about price of the Comcast channel, period, end of story.



I would concur...look at the timing. Comcast Sports Northwest launched in November of 2007 and D* (and many others) have not carried it. D* did not obtain Root Sports until 2009 that Liberty and the DIRECTV Group merged together, long after CSN NW was launched.
DIRECTV employee

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

#45 OFFLINE   WebTraveler

WebTraveler

    Icon

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

Posted 16 December 2012 - 12:39 PM

I would concur...look at the timing. Comcast Sports Northwest launched in November of 2007 and D* (and many others) have not carried it. D* did not obtain Root Sports until 2009 that Liberty and the DIRECTV Group merged together, long after CSN NW was launched.


Directv and FSN NW (now Root Sports) were both in the same controlled group of News Corp prior to the spin off.

#46 OFFLINE   ActiveHDdave

ActiveHDdave

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 461 posts
Joined: Sep 15, 2007

Posted 16 December 2012 - 08:59 PM

:nono::nono:Mmmmm...Surcharges for watching NHL Hockey.:mad:




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