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
627 replies to this topic

#51 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,289 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:10 PM

Time Warner announced yesterday a RSN fee as well, $2.25. They also are raising rates in Los Angeles at 8.2%. Directv is raising rates at 4.5%.

Now let's say the law comes down on fees like that or least the way they are being billed or say if there are billed like that people must be able to say no to them.
I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

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

#52 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

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

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:37 PM

Now let's say the law comes down on fees like that or least the way they are being billed or say if there are billed like that people must be able to say no to them.


They can say no to them. In which case, they can move to a package that doesn't have RSNs and thus they won't have the RSN fee.

Wish it wasn't like that, but this is what sports fees have done and companies are trying to find ways where someone that doesn't want to bear those extra costs can move out and not pay them (i.e. downgrade to the Entertainment package).

I harken back to a lot of industries that have changed over the years. As an example, tomorrow I get on a plane, I can pay $25 to check a bag in or bring a carry on and not pay that fee. It used to be I didn't have to pay anything for those bags AND I got a "free" meal and "free" drinks. Just one of oh so many examples.
DIRECTV employee

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

#53 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,289 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:58 PM

They can say no to them. In which case, they can move to a package that doesn't have RSNs and thus they won't have the RSN fee.

Wish it wasn't like that, but this is what sports fees have done and companies are trying to find ways where someone that doesn't want to bear those extra costs can move out and not pay them (i.e. downgrade to the Entertainment package).

I harken back to a lot of industries that have changed over the years. As an example, tomorrow I get on a plane, I can pay $25 to check a bag in or bring a carry on and not pay that fee. It used to be I didn't have to pay anything for those bags AND I got a "free" meal and "free" drinks. Just one of oh so many examples.

but it's not added bag fee it all the other hidden other forced fees that the law came down on and forced to show a upfront all in fee.
I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#54 OFFLINE   lipcrkr

lipcrkr

    Legend

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

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:49 PM

What WILL happen is just what i did. I dropped down 2 tiers from Ultimate to Choice. People who, like me, will try to offset the outrageous prices for sports by giving them less money out of my pocket for their packages.

#55 OFFLINE   acostapimps

acostapimps

    Hall Of Famer

  • Registered
  • 1,866 posts
  • LocationIllinois
Joined: Nov 05, 2011

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:38 PM

Hey Chicagoans, how would you like to pay for a channels for the Bears, another for the Cubs, another for the White Sox, another for the Bulls, another for the Blackhawks...

You're scaring me I hope that never happens, but then again IT IS HAPPENING with Lakers channel,and the EVIL VIACOM.

Directv Genie DVR HR44-700
Directv HD DVR HR24-500
Directv HD Receiver H24-200
Directv Wireless Mini Client C41W-100 (Deactivated)
Directv Standard SD Receiver D12-700 

SWM 16  SWM 8-Way Splitter  SWM 2-Way Splitter  Slimline 5LNB  

Directv Subscriber From 2009-?


#56 OFFLINE   DodgerKing

DodgerKing

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,041 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2008

Posted 31 January 2013 - 08:25 AM

I don't understand why they can't just use the current TWCSN channel, why do they need a whole new channel? Lakers in the winter, Dodgers in the summer.

Dodgers Deal Will Taste Bitter to Fans


Because the Dodgers wanted their own channel. They now own this channel and broadcast rights, including the broadcast rights of any other team than may join this channel. They would not have had this if they were on the other channel.

Plus, it is a nice way to hide revenue from revenue sharing

Edited by DodgerKing, 31 January 2013 - 08:32 AM.


#57 OFFLINE   DodgerKing

DodgerKing

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,041 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2008

Posted 31 January 2013 - 08:35 AM

According to Forbes, Dodger TV ratings averaged a 1.14 last year. How can that possibly be worth $5 a month for every LA area subscriber? I honestly think cord cutting will grow if D* doesn't put a stop to this stuff. Even presuming every single LA area viewer was also a D* subscriber, I would think D* could afford losing 1.14% of their customer base rather than give in to this.

A 1.14 in LA represents more total viewers than 2 to 5 times that in most other markets.

Advertisers care more about how many are watching and the demographics of those viewers vs the percentage of a market.

#58 ONLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,150 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 31 January 2013 - 09:30 AM

I harken back to a lot of industries that have changed over the years. As an example, tomorrow I get on a plane, I can pay $25 to check a bag in or bring a carry on and not pay that fee. It used to be I didn't have to pay anything for those bags AND I got a "free" meal and "free" drinks. Just one of oh so many examples.


Imagine my shock when I checked in to fly to LV for CES good old Spirit Airlines informed me that wanted the same fee for carry-ons.... But so far, no charge for the toilets.... should I have been grateful for that? :nono2:
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#59 OFFLINE   gully_foyle

gully_foyle

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,297 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles
Joined: Jan 17, 2007

Posted 31 January 2013 - 11:14 AM

Because the Dodgers wanted their own channel. They now own this channel and broadcast rights, including the broadcast rights of any other team than may join this channel. They would not have had this if they were on the other channel.

Plus, it is a nice way to hide revenue from revenue sharing


The players will figure that out soon enough and it will come up during the next contract negotiation. Very short term.

What is more long-term is that this supposed $5 is intended to have TWC being the only carrier of Dodger baseball in SoCal. A fee that TWC won't really be paying since it co-owns the channel. If they set the fee high enough, other carriers will balk and they get more subscribers. Or maybe they pay the high fee. Win-win.

Pretty much what DirecTV does with Sunday Ticket.
DirecTV since 1994 // 2014Q2 Setup here

#60 OFFLINE   gully_foyle

gully_foyle

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,297 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles
Joined: Jan 17, 2007

Posted 31 January 2013 - 11:22 AM

If there is any silver lining, it will be to set sports programming in a separate tier of service. There are a lot of DirecTV customers who, like me, watch almost no sports and will resist paying big price jumps to subsidize those that do. It's been tolerable, to an extent, but looks like the brown stuff is nearing the fan.
DirecTV since 1994 // 2014Q2 Setup here

#61 OFFLINE   FenixTX

FenixTX

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 476 posts
Joined: Nov 11, 2005

Posted 31 January 2013 - 11:53 AM

A 1.14 in LA represents more total viewers than 2 to 5 times that in most other markets.

Advertisers care more about how many are watching and the demographics of those viewers vs the percentage of a market.


I believe a 1.14 rating equals only 100,000 viewers which isn't that many especially compared to how much TWC paid for this channel. The Lakers, on the other hand, averaged 3 or 4 times that many viewers for their games if I remember reading correctly.
Go Big Red!!!

#62 OFFLINE   lokar

lokar

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 710 posts
Joined: Oct 07, 2006

Posted 31 January 2013 - 12:09 PM

A 1.14 in LA represents more total viewers than 2 to 5 times that in most other markets.

Advertisers care more about how many are watching and the demographics of those viewers vs the percentage of a market.


True but that is irrelevant to D*, who only cares about subscribers. Say half of that 1.14 rating are D* subscribers which I think is probably being generous. Probably only a portion of that portion will be mad enough to leave D* over not having the Dodgers. I don't know the numbers but it seems like D* would be better off to say to places like TWC that we are putting your channel on the sports tier or not at all and take the subscriber loss than continue this trend that will eventually bring very bad things to D*. Since D* gave in to the Lakers, I am guessing the numbers don't work out like I would think they would.

#63 OFFLINE   Mark Holtz

Mark Holtz

    Day Sleeper

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 9,986 posts
  • LocationSacramento, CA
Joined: Mar 23, 2002

Posted 31 January 2013 - 06:55 PM

I think that we are looking at different things....

For Football, you are looking at a team that plays once a week (assuming the week runs from Tuesday until Monday), with most teams on a Sunday. Its easier for Football fans to keep track of their teams.

Contrast that with Baseball, Basketball, and Hockey. Those sports play multiple times per week, making it harder for the fan to follow every game. And, until the advent of the regional sports network, only select games were broadcast on television. The bad part now is that, with the Regional Sports Network, 99.5% of the games are only on cable television.

And then, you have to combine that with the fact that sports programming is something that people that people prefer to watch lives, and not DVR for later viewing. The advertisers love that part.

This makes me want to cancel my subscription TV service.

"In an effort to increase your cable and satellite bills beyond the point of affordability and to further pad the pockets of our executives..."
Check out my list of links.


#64 OFFLINE   lokar

lokar

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 710 posts
Joined: Oct 07, 2006

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:03 AM

And then, you have to combine that with the fact that sports programming is something that people that people prefer to watch lives, and not DVR for later viewing. The advertisers love that part.

This makes me want to cancel my subscription TV service.


I watch everything on DVR including sports. With sports events, I start watching the event 1-2 hours after it starts and can usually catch up to the live event or be somewhat close by the end of the game. I can't imagine sitting through 18 minute hockey intermissions or football's absolutely ridiculous amount of commercials.

#65 OFFLINE   FLWingNut

FLWingNut

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 427 posts
Joined: Nov 19, 2005

Posted 01 February 2013 - 05:50 PM

+1

#66 ONLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,150 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 01 February 2013 - 09:52 PM

I watch everything on DVR including sports. With sports events, I start watching the event 1-2 hours after it starts and can usually catch up to the live event or be somewhat close by the end of the game. I can't imagine sitting through 18 minute hockey intermissions or football's absolutely ridiculous amount of commercials.


Possibly the majority sentiment among this group. With Baseball I often start when they're in the 8th inning. Football about halftime. Tomorrow will be an exception, and not because of the commercials....
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#67 OFFLINE   tjguitar

tjguitar

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 156 posts
Joined: Aug 23, 2006

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:23 AM

I wonder if the Dodgers/TWC will try to pick up Clippers or Kings rights. Then FSW would probably drop one of their channels and we'd be back to 3 full time RSN's.


edit: Kings are with FSW through 2024. Ducks will be available after next season though.

http://www.anaheimca...rts-time-warner

Edited by tjguitar, 08 April 2013 - 11:20 AM.


#68 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

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

Posted 08 April 2013 - 03:02 PM

http://adage.com/art...estment/240749/
DIRECTV employee

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

#69 OFFLINE   PCampbell

PCampbell

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,464 posts
Joined: Nov 18, 2006

Posted 08 April 2013 - 03:33 PM

Athletes are payed way too much money and it has to come from some place and that place is us.

DirecTV since 1996

Slimline 5 SWM 16
HR24-100
HR24-500
HR24-500

HR44-500
ATT uverse internet


#70 OFFLINE   chevyguy559

chevyguy559

    Fresno State Bulldog!

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

Posted 08 April 2013 - 09:56 PM

All I know is I live over 200 miles from LA but I'm getting dinged $2.00 a month for the Lakers channel, if I get charged $5.00 for a team I despise (Doyers) I'll really be forced to look at my other options, which means less per month for DirecTV or even $0 a month from me....really the only thing keeping me from "cutting the cord" is sports....well I'm tech savvy enough to know I can find any sporting event online....that's the thing, I'm more than willing to pay a fair price for my sports, but when it goes too far, I pay nothing and still enjoy my sports.....same as how I enjoy my music these days :rolleyes:

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


#71 OFFLINE   lipcrkr

lipcrkr

    Legend

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

Posted 09 April 2013 - 02:25 AM

ESPN has ruined sports and hopefully people will begin to wake up.

#72 ONLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,150 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:42 AM

ESPN has ruined sports and hopefully people will begin to wake up.


That's a wide indictment. Yes, there are things many don't like about the way sports have evolved, but what upsets you most?

What do you think will "wake up" the people?
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#73 OFFLINE   sum_random_dork

sum_random_dork

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 893 posts
Joined: Aug 21, 2008

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:55 AM

ESPN has ruined sports and hopefully people will begin to wake up.


I don't think you can say they ruined sports they just changed how it is viewed. Most sports use to be the morning paper, the 6pm sports report on the news and a radio update. You would see local MLB games a few nights a week on an OTA station, NBA games were the same way. The only teams you'd see every week for sure were the NFL teams because of their Nat'l contract. ESPN changed a lot of that, people that weere into sports could flip on Sports Center and get an hr of sports instead of 2 mins on the news. RSN's then came along and started to broadcast most if not all MLB, NHL, and NBA games.

I think you could say Cable has changed sports but it's not just ESPN, they are the leader (for good and/or bad) but NFL Network, TNT, TBS, Fox Sports all had a hand in it too.

I have resigned myself to the fact we will be paying more for the sports we want to see. I hope Dodger fans get to see their team play next year (as a Giants fan hard to say the D word). I really hope that DirecTV and TWC/Dodgers, CSN Northwest, CSN Houston, CSN Phily, and Pac 12 networks can all work out deals soon. It'd be for the best of all "us" sports fans to have the options to watch what we want and price compare from one cable/sat company to another.

#74 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,865 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 09 April 2013 - 12:16 PM

I don't think you can say they ruined sports they just changed how it is viewed.


They have had a more profound effect than just changing how it is viewed. ESPN led the charge in highlighting big hits in football and players then tried to make the highlight film. They have done this in many ways. They have made the dunk extremely popular and focused on home runs in baseball. Players have changed what they do to make the highlight reel (witness that the ESPN dum-dum theme is often played).

ESPN glorifies the winning over all else. They have helped destroy any sense of sportsmanship. All of it because they want to make money on the programs they push. So, a player or a team can be guilty as sin of things and they keep pushing them and ignore the bad side.

They are not the only ones but they do set the tone and the standard. And they play favorites and glorify many of the wrong things.
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

#75 OFFLINE   TJNash

TJNash

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 163 posts
  • LocationSan Diego
Joined: Jun 05, 2012

Posted 09 April 2013 - 01:38 PM

They have had a more profound effect than just changing how it is viewed. ESPN led the charge in highlighting big hits in football and players then tried to make the highlight film. They have done this in many ways. They have made the dunk extremely popular and focused on home runs in baseball. Players have changed what they do to make the highlight reel (witness that the ESPN dum-dum theme is often played).

ESPN glorifies the winning over all else. They have helped destroy any sense of sportsmanship. All of it because they want to make money on the programs they push. So, a player or a team can be guilty as sin of things and they keep pushing them and ignore the bad side.

They are not the only ones but they do set the tone and the standard. And they play favorites and glorify many of the wrong things.


Testify, Brother!!:icon_bb:




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