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
- - - - -

$5.00 for the new Dodgers channel.


  • Please log in to reply
570 replies to this topic

#181 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,391 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 05 March 2014 - 03:59 PM

What should Congress do? If they want to be pro-consumer, they could require sports be on a separate tier. So how do they implement that? What about March Madness when even stations like TruTV have basketball games on? You need to come up with regulations for what counts as a "sports" channel. If they have to have sports all the time, then RSNs will put reality shows on late at night and in the early morning when people aren't watching so they claim they aren't sports channels and still push to get included in the basic tiers.

 

Of course the idea that Congress would do something that's pro-consumer is laughable, because they get their campaign money from Disney/ESPN, Fox, and billionaire team owners who want to keep things the way they are. Everyone from team owners to college presidents will plead poverty and line up at the trough if Congress changes the law in a way that hurts them, or that they can claim hurts them.

 

Best to stay out of it, and let things solve themselves eventually. It may take a lot longer, but I'd rather have Congress attempting to deal with more important problems than worrying about disputes that keep the Dodgers off TV.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


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

#182 OFFLINE   woj027

woj027

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 823 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 05 March 2014 - 04:15 PM

What should Congress do? If they want to be pro-consumer, they could require sports be on a separate tier. So how do they implement that? What about March Madness when even stations like TruTV have basketball games on? You need to come up with regulations for what counts as a "sports" channel. If they have to have sports all the time, then RSNs will put reality shows on late at night and in the early morning when people aren't watching so they claim they aren't sports channels and still push to get included in the basic tiers.

 

Of course the idea that Congress would do something that's pro-consumer is laughable, because they get their campaign money from Disney/ESPN, Fox, and billionaire team owners who want to keep things the way they are. Everyone from team owners to college presidents will plead poverty and line up at the trough if Congress changes the law in a way that hurts them, or that they can claim hurts them.

 

Best to stay out of it, and let things solve themselves eventually. It may take a lot longer, but I'd rather have Congress attempting to deal with more important problems than worrying about disputes that keep the Dodgers off TV.

Oh I completely agree, thats why I put "act of Congress" in quotes.  some people commented in the latimes article about essentially boycotting the Dodgers, and putting pressure on the team and TW not the distributors  Without trying to make another poor comparison, but the people need to make their voices be heard. one voice is rarely heard in a corporation, but tens of thousands...



#183 OFFLINE   Devo1237

Devo1237

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 385 posts
Joined: Apr 22, 2008

Posted 05 March 2014 - 04:30 PM

Oh I completely agree, thats why I put "act of Congress" in quotes.  some people commented in the latimes article about essentially boycotting the Dodgers, and putting pressure on the team and TW not the distributors  Without trying to make another poor comparison, but the people need to make their voices be heard. one voice is rarely heard in a corporation, but tens of thousands...

I'm happy to boycott the Dodgers permanently.  Who's with me?! :)  



#184 OFFLINE   trainman

trainman

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,464 posts
  • LocationSherman Oaks, CA
Joined: Jan 09, 2008

Posted 05 March 2014 - 05:52 PM

DirecTV tweeted this yesterday afternoon...

3N8NFy0.jpg

...and I couldn't help but respond with something like "this could be the only chance people have to see the Dodgers on DirecTV all year."

(But I was being tongue-in-cheek -- I'm on DirecTV's side on this one.)
trainman is Jim Ellwanger

HR34-700 | Linksys WGA-600N | Samsung 46" LCD | Slimline-5 dish

#185 OFFLINE   sunfire9us

sunfire9us

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 371 posts
Joined: Feb 15, 2009

Posted 05 March 2014 - 07:15 PM

I hope all the cable companies and DTV will stand up and refuse to carry this new RSN. I think this would truly set a precedent on these wild RSN's getting out of hands with their prices. Unlike the Astros, now you're talking a "marquee" team. When they find out all the distributors will refuse to carry, these RSN's will fold just like CSN Houston did and they will learn this crap isn't going to work.



Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk
  • capnp72 likes this

#186 OFFLINE   Devo1237

Devo1237

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 385 posts
Joined: Apr 22, 2008

Posted 05 March 2014 - 07:19 PM

I hope all the cable companies and DTV will stand up and refuse to carry this new RSN. I think this would truly set a precedent on these wild RSN's getting out of hands with their prices. Unlike the Astros, now you're talking a "marquee" team. When they find out all the distributors will refuse to carry, these RSN's will fold just like CSN Houston did and they will learn this crap isn't going to work.



Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk

+1



#187 OFFLINE   chevyguy559

chevyguy559

    Fresno State Bulldog!

  • Registered
  • 710 posts
  • LocationFresno, CA
Joined: Sep 19, 2008

Posted 05 March 2014 - 10:11 PM

I'm happy to boycott the Dodgers permanently.  Who's with me?! :)

 

I second that!  :righton:



DirecTV Subscriber Since 11/2008
Choice Ultimate - HD Extra - RZC
(2) HR22-100
(1) HR22-100 (Owned)
(1) HR21-100 (Owned)


#188 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 39,739 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 05 March 2014 - 11:47 PM

I hope all the cable companies and DTV will stand up and refuse to carry this new RSN.


There is a chance with this particular one that such a "boycott" will work. The channel is not backed by a company with a lot of leverage to get their way (such as SEC / Longhorns backed by ESPN). Watching the channel NOT get distributed probably warms the hearts of the corporations competing with Time Warner. :)
Welcome to DBS Talk - Let's talk about DBS! (The Digital Bit Stream)
DISH Network vs DirecTV: HD Channel List - DISH Network HD Capacity, HD Conversion and more.
DISH Network complete channel lists and lists by satellite location are in The Uplink Activity Center.
Unless otherwise noted, I speak for myself. Content is not controlled by DISH Network, DirecTV or any other company.

#189 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 15,114 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 06 March 2014 - 02:20 AM

There is a chance with this particular one that such a "boycott" will work. The channel is not backed by a company with a lot of leverage to get their way (such as SEC / Longhorns backed by ESPN). Watching the channel NOT get distributed probably warms the hearts of the corporations competing with Time Warner. :)


Until their deal with Comcast goes through and then later on at some point they will have the leverage.

#190 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 39,739 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 06 March 2014 - 04:44 AM

Until their deal with Comcast goes through and then later on at some point they will have the leverage.


They will also have the FCC oversight. NBC Universal will remain under scrutiny for how they deal with cable and satellite providers compared to how they deal with Comcast. The merger may require them to agree to bundle less than their competing organizations.
Welcome to DBS Talk - Let's talk about DBS! (The Digital Bit Stream)
DISH Network vs DirecTV: HD Channel List - DISH Network HD Capacity, HD Conversion and more.
DISH Network complete channel lists and lists by satellite location are in The Uplink Activity Center.
Unless otherwise noted, I speak for myself. Content is not controlled by DISH Network, DirecTV or any other company.

#191 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,391 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 06 March 2014 - 12:21 PM

Until their deal with Comcast goes through and then later on at some point they will have the leverage.

 

You assume it will go through without any change. The government never has issues with merging two horizontal market companies operating in different areas merging, unless they'd combine to a large majority of the market. They often have issues with merging two vertical market companies. TWC doesn't have much aside from a few RSNs, but Comcast owns NBC and they may well have a big problem with letting them merge while holding onto those assets.

 

I'm willing to bet they have to divest some assets to be permitted to merge. Ideally they'd have to divest all of them, and be prevented from owning any content providers for a while, but they probably wouldn't go that far.

 

Even if it goes through without change, there will almost certainly be an oversight period like James said. They won't be able to throw their weight around right away, and the bigger you are the more you have to worry about antitrust issues.

 

Lobbying will only get them so far - think about all those pro teams that have extorted hundreds of millions from their cities for new stadiums. Do you think those cities are going to stand still if half their citizens are prevented from watching that team's games because that team made an exclusive agreement with Comcast+TWC and they happen to be the only provider in town that offers them?


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#192 OFFLINE   trainman

trainman

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,464 posts
  • LocationSherman Oaks, CA
Joined: Jan 09, 2008

Posted 06 March 2014 - 04:48 PM

I hope all the cable companies and DTV will stand up and refuse to carry this new RSN.


Unfortunately, it's too late, since Time Warner Cable is carrying it (obviously, since they own it). It would be a different story if the Dodgers had started the new RSN completely on their own and no one was carrying it.
trainman is Jim Ellwanger

HR34-700 | Linksys WGA-600N | Samsung 46" LCD | Slimline-5 dish

#193 OFFLINE   sunfire9us

sunfire9us

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 371 posts
Joined: Feb 15, 2009

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:22 PM

Unfortunately, it's too late, since Time Warner Cable is carrying it (obviously, since they own it). It would be a different story if the Dodgers had started the new RSN completely on their own and no one was carrying it.

No surprise they are the only one to sign, after all they are the one trying to sell the channel to the other distributors.


Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk

#194 OFFLINE   JohnDG

JohnDG

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 200 posts
Joined: Aug 16, 2006

Posted 14 March 2014 - 01:47 PM

Well, it looks like DTV's answer for out-of-area viewers is to bundle in MLB.TV to their MLB EI offering (see the MLB EI threads). This leaves the local viewers still on hold.

I would imagine that DTV will take a wait and see stance to measure the level of subscriber loss in SoCal before making a final decision.

Jdg

#195 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,542 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 15 March 2014 - 02:36 PM

Well, it looks like DTV's answer for out-of-area viewers is to bundle in MLB.TV to their MLB EI offering (see the MLB EI threads). This leaves the local viewers still on hold.

I would imagine that DTV will take a wait and see stance to measure the level of subscriber loss in SoCal before making a final decision.

Jdg


Don't think they are related as other EI carriers are doing MLB.tv as well. And directv has had rsn coverage in EI of channels they don't have (CSN Philly as an example).
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

#196 OFFLINE   Rob37

Rob37

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 157 posts
Joined: Jul 10, 2013

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:15 PM

In my opinion the Dodgers didn’t need a new channel. Hell they had a good channel already that they were on FOX Sports Prime Ticket. All they want to do is to try & squeeze more money out of us consumers by creating these new RSN’s & it is high time these TV providers fight back & say no. My Cubs in a few years might be in the same boat. I have heard talk that they may try to create a new Cubs Network if WGN does not Re-Up. I will just watch the Cubs from the other teams RSN.


Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk mobile app

#197 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,211 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 24 March 2014 - 02:50 PM

In my opinion the Dodgers didn’t need a new channel. Hell they had a good channel already that they were on FOX Sports Prime Ticket. All they want to do is to try & squeeze more money out of us consumers by creating these new RSN’s & it is high time these TV providers fight back & say no. My Cubs in a few years might be in the same boat. I have heard talk that they may try to create a new Cubs Network if WGN does not Re-Up. I will just watch the Cubs from the other teams RSN.


Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk mobile app

the cubs can just move more of there games to CSN but then CSN + 2 better go HD and they may need a +3 feed as well.

 

or move the games over to CLTV and that will get CLTV picked up on more systems.

 

or maybe hope that blackout rules change and they can have there own cubs channle that can show the games any where. some how wgn america has very few blackouts.


I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#198 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,391 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 24 March 2014 - 04:22 PM

The Cubs and every other big city MLB team is probably watching the Dodgers Channel closely to see how that turns out. If providers cave and pay the Dodgers $5 a head, look out! Given how much more Chicago residents are into sports, if the Dodgers can get $5, the Cubs and White Sox would probably decide they can get $10. Each!


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#199 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,211 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 24 March 2014 - 05:13 PM

The Cubs and every other big city MLB team is probably watching the Dodgers Channel closely to see how that turns out. If providers cave and pay the Dodgers $5 a head, look out! Given how much more Chicago residents are into sports, if the Dodgers can get $5, the Cubs and White Sox would probably decide they can get $10. Each!

why just dump Comcast and make sports vision go on it's own. Maybe even sell it standalone.


I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#200 OFFLINE   lipcrkr

lipcrkr

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 276 posts
Joined: Apr 27, 2012

Posted 24 March 2014 - 05:31 PM

The Cubs and every other big city MLB team is probably watching the Dodgers Channel closely to see how that turns out. If providers cave and pay the Dodgers $5 a head, look out! Given how much more Chicago residents are into sports, if the Dodgers can get $5, the Cubs and White Sox would probably decide they can get $10. Each!

I have DirecTV, i also wouldn't pay for the Dodgers, why? Because i live in LA and can watch every game for free on my HDTV courtesy of TWC. I watched the Dodgers live from Australia this past weekend. It's the same broadcast as TWC.

There is an easy way to maintain DirecTV (which i love) AND watch live Dodger games here in LA. 






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