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
750 replies to this topic

#226 OFFLINE   harsh

harsh

    Beware the Attack Basset

  • Registered
  • 20,727 posts
  • LocationSalem, OR
Joined: Jun 14, 2003

Posted 28 March 2014 - 08:12 AM

I don't know what lipcrkr is talking about.  Chances are it is illegal.

There aren't any special conditions under which reception, possession or use of stolen goods is permitted.

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. -- JFK


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

#227 OFFLINE   woj027

woj027

    Icon

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

Posted 28 March 2014 - 10:24 AM

There aren't any special conditions under which reception, possession or use of stolen goods is permitted.

I was just holding it for my friend.



#228 OFFLINE   milton

milton

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 262 posts
Joined: Mar 12, 2011

Posted 31 March 2014 - 07:10 AM

Question: At what point will we see networks and distributors begin to have contract terms be contingent upon channel ratings?

 

For example, Directv could agree to carry Sportsnet LA for a fixed lower price but then the price rises for next year if the ratings for that channel are above X.



#229 ONLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 5,713 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 31 March 2014 - 10:38 AM

Question: At what point will we see networks and distributors begin to have contract terms be contingent upon channel ratings?

 

For example, Directv could agree to carry Sportsnet LA for a fixed lower price but then the price rises for next year if the ratings for that channel are above X.

The problem I see there is that unless the Dodgers would agree to such a thing as well under a new contract arrangement (if that's even possible to do now that the current one has been signed) TWC cannot afford to gamble that way since under their current deal the Dodgers are guaranteed their money irrespective of SNLA's seasonal ratings.

 

Therefore TWC has to have assurance to recoup their investment (at a profit of course) regardless of how SNLA's TV ratings pan out over the years.   


DIRECTV sub. since Sep. of '95


#230 OFFLINE   ejbvt

ejbvt

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 879 posts
  • LocationVT
Joined: Aug 14, 2011

Posted 31 March 2014 - 08:11 PM

Didn't TWCSN (The Lakers Channel) start off this way? The Lakers season started and TWC wanted some ridiculous rate and then, all of a sudden, TWCSN and TWC Deportes were there a little while into the season. Does anyone feel that will happen this time?


TV: Directv HR44/AM21, Terk HDTVo, Comcast Broadcast, LG 42" 3D, 2 Samsung TVs
Internet: Xfinity/Comcast 
Phone: AT&T Samsung Galaxy 3
Other: Denon AVR591, Panasonic 3D BluRay, Panasonic DVD w/tuner, Phillips VCR

#231 ONLINE   Stuart Sweet

Stuart Sweet

    The Shadow Knows!

  • Super Moderators
  • 37,030 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 31 March 2014 - 08:55 PM

I think this is different. TWC Sportsnet started at about half the asking price of Sportsnet LA. TWC would have to drop the Dodgers channel price about 75% to get the value proposition where it needs to be.
Opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily reflect
those of DBSTalk.com, DIRECTV, DISH, The Signal Group, or any other company.

#232 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,659 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 31 March 2014 - 10:13 PM

Not only that but the Lakers channel was two channels and has a dedicated Spanish version and has the Galaxy and some other sports. I've yet to see anything in regards to the Dodgers string anything else. Although in sure eventually they will but nothing yet.

Heck the Lakers channel even has the d league games and well the Lakers girls shows. ;)

Plus I think that there was some tweaking of the deal before it actually got on the air in terms of how much for out of DMA by in Lakers market pricing etc.

#233 OFFLINE   JohnDG

JohnDG

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 217 posts
Joined: Aug 16, 2006

Posted 01 April 2014 - 04:41 PM

Dodgers broadcast just popped up on DTV.

Jdg

#234 OFFLINE   keenan

keenan

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 564 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2005

Posted 01 April 2014 - 04:48 PM

Any guess what channel number Sport Net LA might be? Or is it just being carried as a MLBEI channel, 721?



#235 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,952 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 01 April 2014 - 05:26 PM

Any guess what channel number Sport Net LA might be? Or is it just being carried as a MLBEI channel, 721?


EI.
  • keenan likes this
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

#236 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,952 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 01 April 2014 - 07:54 PM

It's an odd world. Non LA folks can watch the dodgers and LA folks can't.
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

#237 OFFLINE   TheRatPatrol

TheRatPatrol

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,916 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ
Joined: Oct 01, 2003

Posted 01 April 2014 - 08:03 PM

Any guess what channel number Sport Net LA might be?


If it gets added full time I would guess 690.

It's an odd world. Non LA folks can watch the dodgers and LA folks can't.


It is isn't it? Let the willing fans pay for the games if they want them. Make some money instead of no money at all.

Edited by TheRatPatrol, 01 April 2014 - 08:04 PM.


#238 OFFLINE   milton

milton

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 262 posts
Joined: Mar 12, 2011

Posted 02 April 2014 - 06:03 AM

The problem I see there is that unless the Dodgers would agree to such a thing as well under a new contract arrangement (if that's even possible to do now that the current one has been signed) TWC cannot afford to gamble that way since under their current deal the Dodgers are guaranteed their money irrespective of SNLA's seasonal ratings.

 

Therefore TWC has to have assurance to recoup their investment (at a profit of course) regardless of how SNLA's TV ratings pan out over the years.   

 

But that is a sunk cost.  They have to pay the Dodgers regardless, and Directv, Dish, Charter, etc. know that.



#239 OFFLINE   matty8199

matty8199

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 751 posts
Joined: Dec 04, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 09:51 AM

well, that didn't take long (to figure out TWC's true intentions in asking for such a ridiculous price for sportsnet LA)...just saw a commercial on KTLA for TWC.  showing highlights of all LA sports...all teams included.  "we're the ONLY place where you can get this...and this... (as the different teams flip through)...and this..."  then, wait for it...the dodgers come up.  the voiceover says... "and ESPECIALLY this."



#240 OFFLINE   keenan

keenan

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 564 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 10:22 AM



well, that didn't take long (to figure out TWC's true intentions in asking for such a ridiculous price for sportsnet LA)...just saw a commercial on KTLA for TWC.  showing highlights of all LA sports...all teams included.  "we're the ONLY place where you can get this...and this... (as the different teams flip through)...and this..."  then, wait for it...the dodgers come up.  the voiceover says... "and ESPECIALLY this."

That seems to be just a bit of passive/aggressive advertising as TWC must have more carriage for it than just their own 1.5 million subscribers, it will fail unless it does.



#241 OFFLINE   matty8199

matty8199

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 751 posts
Joined: Dec 04, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 10:51 AM

That seems to be just a bit of passive/aggressive advertising as TWC must have more carriage for it than just their own 1.5 million subscribers, it will fail unless it does.

 

i don't disagree...but how many customers might they gain if they continue asking for a ridiculous price for just a little while longer into the baseball season before being reasonable?



#242 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,046 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 03 April 2014 - 12:06 PM

That seems to be just a bit of passive/aggressive advertising as TWC must have more carriage for it than just their own 1.5 million subscribers, it will fail unless it does.

 

How will TWC fail over this? Lose a lot of money yes, but not enough to drive them bankrupt or anything like that. Just enough to scare off anyone from signing a deal anything like that for sports rights for a long long time - which would benefit sports fans everywhere.


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


#243 OFFLINE   keenan

keenan

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 564 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 12:10 PM

i don't disagree...but how many customers might they gain if they continue asking for a ridiculous price for just a little while longer into the baseball season before being reasonable?

I think they'll eventually get carriage on DIRECTV, probably not on Dish, most likely yes on the big telcos, AT&T and Verizon, but it will be at a price the market will bear. They may be asking $5 per sub but could eventually settle for less and/or a tier with lesser exposure. It's a negotiation and providers like DIRECTV are in the driver's seat as no other carrier is carrying it either. I believe if either of the two telcos agree to carriage DIRECTV will follow very soon after, but until then they can all force TWC to accept a lower rate. TWC will get desperate for carriage at some point as the channel is certain to fail if it's forced to survive on TWC subs alone. TWC does have the leverage of the Dodgers being extremely popular, and if the team does very well in the first part of the season TWC could gain a bit more negotiating leverage, but they can't hold out forever.



#244 OFFLINE   keenan

keenan

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 564 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 12:18 PM

How will TWC fail over this? Lose a lot of money yes, but not enough to drive them bankrupt or anything like that. Just enough to scare off anyone from signing a deal anything like that for sports rights for a long long time - which would benefit sports fans everywhere.

I'm not saying TWC will fail, but the channel could. Different market and a far different team, but the Comcast Astros channel went into bankruptcy because no one would carry it at the price Comcast was asking. Hard to imagine something like that would happen in this market with this team, but you really don't want to run a channel in the red for very long. TWC will need to make a $220 mil payment to the Dodgers this season, I'm not sure current subs and ads will even cover that amount.

 

I agree that it's good for sports fans to start driving down prices for these channels as they are really getting out of hand, but again, it's what ever the market will bear, maybe not $5 but it could be $4.25 or even less. In any case, it's not going to be cheap.

 

 

I'm just happy the channel is available via the MLB-EI package.


Edited by keenan, 03 April 2014 - 12:20 PM.


#245 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,659 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 03 April 2014 - 01:45 PM

It shouldn't even be $2. It's one sports team and that's it. It's not like the channel they left had a price drop.

It's almost lie they are trying to break even with just fees and make profit only from advertising it's so out of line.

#246 OFFLINE   matty8199

matty8199

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 751 posts
Joined: Dec 04, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 01:57 PM

I think they'll eventually get carriage on DIRECTV, probably not on Dish, most likely yes on the big telcos, AT&T and Verizon, but it will be at a price the market will bear. They may be asking $5 per sub but could eventually settle for less and/or a tier with lesser exposure. It's a negotiation and providers like DIRECTV are in the driver's seat as no other carrier is carrying it either. I believe if either of the two telcos agree to carriage DIRECTV will follow very soon after, but until then they can all force TWC to accept a lower rate. TWC will get desperate for carriage at some point as the channel is certain to fail if it's forced to survive on TWC subs alone. TWC does have the leverage of the Dodgers being extremely popular, and if the team does very well in the first part of the season TWC could gain a bit more negotiating leverage, but they can't hold out forever.

 

but, they can use it in the meanwhile to gain subs and then much later on down the line take a lower price.  they're getting both the additional subs now, and then more distribution later.  double-dipping, of sorts.



#247 OFFLINE   KyL416

KyL416

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 2,752 posts
  • LocationTobyhanna, PA
Joined: Nov 10, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 02:00 PM

but the Comcast Astros channel went into bankruptcy because no one would carry it at the price Comcast was asking.

Actually DirecTV and some other providers DID have an agreement on a price that Comcast and the Rockets agreed to, but because of the ownership structure giving everyone the power of veto, the Astros demanded more money causing the deal to fall apart. The bankruptcy will hopefully result in either a majority rule when it comes to contract neogtiations, the Astros being forced out of the network and it continuing with just the Rockets and Dynamo leaving the Astros to fend for themselves, or the channel folding completely.

#248 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,046 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 03 April 2014 - 02:36 PM

I'm not saying TWC will fail, but the channel could. Different market and a far different team, but the Comcast Astros channel went into bankruptcy because no one would carry it at the price Comcast was asking. Hard to imagine something like that would happen in this market with this team, but you really don't want to run a channel in the red for very long. TWC will need to make a $220 mil payment to the Dodgers this season, I'm not sure current subs and ads will even cover that amount.

 

I guess it depends on whether the Dodgers have a contract with TWC, or with some subsidiary that runs the channel. If the Dodgers were smart, the deal is with TWC, in which case the channel can't fail because they'll need to have it to show to their own subscribers, whether or not anyone else ever picks it up. If the deal is with a subsidiary then that subsidiary can go bankrupt and the Dodgers can resell their rights.


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


#249 OFFLINE   BigJ52

BigJ52

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 313 posts
Joined: Jul 29, 2007

Posted 03 April 2014 - 03:45 PM

@Ourand_SBJ:

TWC: "DirecTV...will not carry the Dodgers this year, and they have walked away from the negotiating table." http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-time-warner-cable-says-talks-with-directv-for-dodger-channel-are-over-20140403,0,6994648.story#axzz2xrUvZsRL 



#250 OFFLINE   keenan

keenan

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 564 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2005

Posted 03 April 2014 - 04:05 PM

@Ourand_SBJ:

TWC: "DirecTV...will not carry the Dodgers this year, and they have walked away from the negotiating table." http://www.latimes.c...axzz2xrUvZsRL …

I wouldn't put a lot of weight into that sensationalist headline, that's just TWC trying to stir up resentment among DIRECTV subs so they'll pressure the satco to carry the channel. TWC is famous for stirring the pot this way when it comes to channel carriage negotiations.

 

OTOH, I'd tell DIRECTV to pound sand as well for wanting the following condition in the contract,

 

 

Among the other demands Witmer said DirecTV made was one that would allow the satellite broadcaster to stop carrying the channel if the Dodgers went into a prolonged slump.

"I refer to this as the `fair weather fan plan,' " Witmer said, adding that under that standard, DirecTV would have stopped carrying its own Seattle Mariners network years ago.



http://www.latimes.c...y#ixzz2xrZpr1nQ

 

Again though, this is coming from TWC so who knows if it's true or not.

 

 

This below sounds like TWC made a very poor deal to get the Dodger contract,

 

 

 

A condition of the Dodgers contract, according to people familiar with the transaction, is that Time Warner Cable has to cover the subscription fees for any distributor that does not sign on to carry the network. 

http://www.latimes.c...y#ixzz2xraV6y5p

 

I don't know if that is standard in the industry or not, but it's got to hurt TWC pretty hard to have to do that if they turn out not to get any expanded carriage.






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