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?