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
- - - - -

Comcast Sports Northwest


  • Please log in to reply
924 replies to this topic

#141 OFFLINE   pbg

pbg

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 435 posts
Joined: Oct 11, 2007

Posted 25 August 2008 - 09:57 PM

It sounds like FSN NW will be absorbed by CSN NW at some point much like FSN Bay Area was absorbed by CSN Bay Area. If a deal isn't struck before then, this move will probably solve the distribution problem. I'm not sure what the timeframe is on this happening. It could be a year or two, or next week. Who knows?


Where did that come from?

Not that I know squat, but I would think that FSN NW which is owned by Liberty and has the Mariners isn’t going anywhere.

The Fox Bay Area was a different situation. I believe Comcast actually always had owned the majority of the FOX Bay Area, and just renamed it.

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

#142 OFFLINE   jefbal99

jefbal99

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,838 posts
Joined: Sep 07, 2007

Posted 26 August 2008 - 01:47 PM

Where did that come from?

Not that I know squat, but I would think that FSN NW which is owned by Liberty and has the Mariners isn’t going anywhere.

The Fox Bay Area was a different situation. I believe Comcast actually always had owned the majority of the FOX Bay Area, and just renamed it.


This is correct... Comcast SportsNet would need to outright purchase or buy into FSN Northwest for any of this to happen.
Receiving Equipment: AU9 Slimline w/Zinwell WB68 & SWM 8 | Winegard MS-2000 w/PS-1503 Power Injector
Living Room: HR22-100 w/AM-21 | Samsung HL-S4266W (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV | Pioneer HTS-GS1 5.1 | Yamaha DV-S6160 (Component/Digital Coaxial)
Bedroom: H21-200 w/AM-21 | Westinghouse LVM-42w2 (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV
Home Theatre: HR20-100 | Sanyo PLV-Z60 (Component/Optical) | Flexio 16:9 100" Screen | Ethernet MRV |Yamaha YHT-690 | XBox 360 (Component) | Harmony 880

#143 OFFLINE   ChileDuck

ChileDuck

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 28 posts
Joined: Aug 26, 2008

Posted 26 August 2008 - 09:15 PM

So about once a month I write DirecTV, Comcast and the Blazers to see whats up. DirecTV doesn't comment on current negotiations, Comcast rarely replies, and the Blazers would say we are hoping a solution will come, but we already got paid.


So the OSN deal has just been announced and I bet there will be a lot of message board discussion. How can we best direct the noise to ears that matter?

#144 OFFLINE   Eksynyt

Eksynyt

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 833 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2008

Posted 27 August 2008 - 02:47 PM

Yep, so as expected, the OSN Duck games will all be on CSNNW only and anyone outside of the I-5 corridor won't be able to see the games even if they wanted to get Comcast because it's not available. I will get to see about 6 games this year...looks like I'll be listening to the radio a lot. Or driving over 50 miles to the sports bar.

#145 OFFLINE   ajc68

ajc68

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 667 posts
Joined: Jan 23, 2008

Posted 27 August 2008 - 03:31 PM

Well, take this for what it's worth, but the word is the Blazers have taken over the rights negotiations and have been adamant they will have a deal in place before the season starts, probably the end of October at the latest. If that's the case, that would get the Ducks on satellite for the second half of football season and all of basketball season. Apparently, the Ducks entered into their new Comcast agreement with the understanding that a deal was going to get done with the satellite companies. Again, take it for what it’s worth, but everything is sounding much more positive than it did a month ago. Let’s keep our fingers crossed.

#146 OFFLINE   jefbal99

jefbal99

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,838 posts
Joined: Sep 07, 2007

Posted 27 August 2008 - 06:57 PM

My understanding is the parent company of Comcast SportsNet now is also the parent company of the FSN regionals.


That is incorrect.

Comcast is the parent company of the Comcast SportsNet channels, they also have a share in SportsNet New York and Sun Sports out of Florida.

Liberty Media owns many of the Fox Sports Net RSNs.

The independent RSNs are usually owned by the teams that are broadcast on them: NESN (Red Sox and Bruins) YES (Yankees and Nets (not sure if the Nets still have a stake)) SportsTime Ohio (Indians) MSG (Knicks) etc.
Receiving Equipment: AU9 Slimline w/Zinwell WB68 & SWM 8 | Winegard MS-2000 w/PS-1503 Power Injector
Living Room: HR22-100 w/AM-21 | Samsung HL-S4266W (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV | Pioneer HTS-GS1 5.1 | Yamaha DV-S6160 (Component/Digital Coaxial)
Bedroom: H21-200 w/AM-21 | Westinghouse LVM-42w2 (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV
Home Theatre: HR20-100 | Sanyo PLV-Z60 (Component/Optical) | Flexio 16:9 100" Screen | Ethernet MRV |Yamaha YHT-690 | XBox 360 (Component) | Harmony 880

#147 OFFLINE   DCSholtis

DCSholtis

    Up The Irons!

  • Registered
  • 5,727 posts
Joined: Aug 07, 2002

Posted 27 August 2008 - 07:21 PM

That is incorrect.

Comcast is the parent company of the Comcast SportsNet channels, they also have a share in SportsNet New York and Sun Sports out of Florida.

Liberty Media owns many of the Fox Sports Net RSNs.

The independent RSNs are usually owned by the teams that are broadcast on them: NESN (Red Sox and Bruins) YES (Yankees and Nets (not sure if the Nets still have a stake)) SportsTime Ohio (Indians) MSG (Knicks) etc.


Slight correction, Liberty Media owns 3 of the FSNs as part of the purchase of D* those are FSN Pittsburgh, FSN Rocky Mountain and FSN Northwest. The rest of the FSNs are still under the control of Fox Sports.
Dan Sholtis
"The Raiders will be back. I have unshakable confidence, the will to win, and I just know that the fire that burns brightest in this building is the will to win. And we will win. We will win."---Al Davis. Rest In Peace, Al

#148 OFFLINE   TheRatPatrol

TheRatPatrol

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,720 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ
Joined: Oct 01, 2003

Posted 27 August 2008 - 07:35 PM

The independent RSNs are usually owned by the teams that are broadcast on them: NESN (Red Sox and Bruins) YES (Yankees and Nets (not sure if the Nets still have a stake)) SportsTime Ohio (Indians) MSG (Knicks) etc.

And this is the way it should be with all sports nets, the TEAMS should own the channels and provide them to any TV provider who wants them. Cable companys should not be allowed to own cable networks, its a conflict of interest and creates a monopoly. Just my opinion. ;)

#149 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 15,042 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 28 August 2008 - 02:48 AM

And this is the way it should be with all sports nets, the TEAMS should own the channels and provide them to any TV provider who wants them. Cable companys should not be allowed to own cable networks, its a conflict of interest and creates a monopoly. Just my opinion. ;)


I see your point... But teams can force stations hands... Either give me this, or I'll start my own channels kind of things... and that includes carriage on multiple platforms... The Los Angles Angles of Anaheim just did that last summer, I believe it was. Owner wanted to start his own cable channel, and Fox figured out he wasn't bluffing, they said, ah what do you want, and he said, and they gave...

Also, not allowing cable companies to own channels wouldn't necessarily fix the issue.. ... There was a big fiasco in LA when Fox created Fox Sports West 2 many years ago... No one wanted to carry it, so Fox put the Dodgers there exclusively, and they *&^(*&^ a lot of people for a while when that station was not being carried. No one wanted to pick it up partly because of how much Fox was demanding for it... Also, they questioned the need for the second RSN for our area (yes it was needed as it turns out. There is still only ONE pro team in LA that has EVERY game available on TV in our market, and that's the Lakers (and we still don't have a pro football team!)) , and said they had no bandwidth for it (yet miraculously found it after they finally agreed to carry the channel, EVERYWHERE)... Any of that sound familiar? :D

#150 OFFLINE   jefbal99

jefbal99

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,838 posts
Joined: Sep 07, 2007

Posted 28 August 2008 - 08:17 AM

Slight correction, Liberty Media owns 3 of the FSNs as part of the purchase of D* those are FSN Pittsburgh, FSN Rocky Mountain and FSN Northwest. The rest of the FSNs are still under the control of Fox Sports.


I thought that Liberty already owned a half dozen others...

However, I could easily be mistaken :)
Receiving Equipment: AU9 Slimline w/Zinwell WB68 & SWM 8 | Winegard MS-2000 w/PS-1503 Power Injector
Living Room: HR22-100 w/AM-21 | Samsung HL-S4266W (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV | Pioneer HTS-GS1 5.1 | Yamaha DV-S6160 (Component/Digital Coaxial)
Bedroom: H21-200 w/AM-21 | Westinghouse LVM-42w2 (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV
Home Theatre: HR20-100 | Sanyo PLV-Z60 (Component/Optical) | Flexio 16:9 100" Screen | Ethernet MRV |Yamaha YHT-690 | XBox 360 (Component) | Harmony 880

#151 OFFLINE   jefbal99

jefbal99

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,838 posts
Joined: Sep 07, 2007

Posted 28 August 2008 - 08:19 AM

Well, take this for what it's worth, but the word is the Blazers have taken over the rights negotiations and have been adamant they will have a deal in place before the season starts, probably the end of October at the latest.


Is there a source for this rumor...Newspaper article, radio show archive, blog, podcast?
Receiving Equipment: AU9 Slimline w/Zinwell WB68 & SWM 8 | Winegard MS-2000 w/PS-1503 Power Injector
Living Room: HR22-100 w/AM-21 | Samsung HL-S4266W (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV | Pioneer HTS-GS1 5.1 | Yamaha DV-S6160 (Component/Digital Coaxial)
Bedroom: H21-200 w/AM-21 | Westinghouse LVM-42w2 (HDMI) | Ethernet MRV
Home Theatre: HR20-100 | Sanyo PLV-Z60 (Component/Optical) | Flexio 16:9 100" Screen | Ethernet MRV |Yamaha YHT-690 | XBox 360 (Component) | Harmony 880

#152 OFFLINE   Eksynyt

Eksynyt

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 833 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2008

Posted 28 August 2008 - 12:20 PM

Yes please tell me where u are getting this info because if it's true I am going to be extremely hopeful...get this deal done!!!!

#153 OFFLINE   pbg

pbg

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 435 posts
Joined: Oct 11, 2007

Posted 28 August 2008 - 01:44 PM

Well, take this for what it's worth, but the word is the Blazers have taken over the rights negotiations and have been adamant they will have a deal in place before the season starts, probably the end of October at the latest. .


Comcast pays Blazers 10M for the broadcasts rights. Comcast then turns over negotiation rights between Comcast and other providers to the Blazers?

Sounds a bit farfetched to me, but who knows. I think it would be appropriate if you'd occasionally substantiate your posts.

Without a doubt the Blazers and Ducks want a deal done. However, they made a pact with the Devil and I’m guessing they’re roll is limited more to just cheerleading at this point

#154 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 15,042 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 28 August 2008 - 03:40 PM

Comcast pays Blazers 10M for the broadcasts rights. Comcast then turns over negotiation rights between Comcast and other providers to the Blazers?

Sounds a bit farfetched to me, but who knows. I think it would be appropriate if you'd occasionally substantiate your posts.

Without a doubt the Blazers and Ducks want a deal done. However, they made a pact with the Devil and I’m guessing they’re roll is limited more to just cheerleading at this point


Maybe there contratct states that they must have a certain amount of subscribers able to get the channel by certain a certain time.

#155 OFFLINE   mshaw2715

mshaw2715

    Slow but steady.

  • Registered
  • 834 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 28 August 2008 - 03:42 PM

I doubt it comcast like other cable companies likes total control over these channels. The price they want of probably over 2 dollars is probably plus an arm and leg. They like items that force people to get comcast.

Maybe there contratct states that they must have a certain amount of subscribers able to get the channel by certain a certain time.



#156 OFFLINE   Newshawk

Newshawk

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 2,427 posts
Joined: Sep 02, 2004

Posted 28 August 2008 - 03:54 PM

And this is the way it should be with all sports nets, the TEAMS should own the channels and provide them to any TV provider who wants them. Cable companys should not be allowed to own cable networks, its a conflict of interest and creates a monopoly. Just my opinion. ;)


So you'd have separate RSNs for each team? Just think of New York City... with the Yankees RSN, the Mets RSN, the Knicks RSN, the Nets RSN, the Rangers RSN, the Devils RSN, the Islanders RSN, the WNBA Liberty RSN-and that doesn't even account for minor league teams! That would be 8 RSNs, each owned by the team. Not to mention the expense of each team maintaining separate production and transmission facilities. It'd mean work for people like me (I worked in video production for years) but the costs would be daunting.

What should be done is for the FCC to abolish all loopholes and enforce open access universally. That would eliminate situations like Comcra... er, Comcast SportsNet Philadelphia.

DIRECTV employee April 2004-November 2012.
The above comments are my own because I don't know if anyone would care about my opinions anymore.


#157 OFFLINE   tuckerdog

tuckerdog

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 132 posts
Joined: Sep 22, 2007

Posted 28 August 2008 - 04:04 PM

It seems that as the Blazers record improves this year and Odin, Bayless and Fernandez start to play, the fact that a good portion of their fan base can't receive the games on T.V. will become a bigger and bigger local story with the Blazers not happy with all the negative publicity.

I would also assume the Blazer advertisers and corporate sponsors will not be pleased with the current situation.

Like others I would appreciate a source for the rumors about negotiations heating up.

#158 OFFLINE   6tv's

6tv's

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 68 posts
Joined: Mar 01, 2008

Posted 28 August 2008 - 04:24 PM

I might be thinking to far ahead but. if and when DirecTV picks up CCNW(Comcast Sports Northwest) will it be a natural RSN for us who live in the Seattle area,meaning not having to subscribe to the sports pack and to be able to see the pro sports i.e. Blazers ,since we no longer have the Sonics.?

#159 OFFLINE   pbg

pbg

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 435 posts
Joined: Oct 11, 2007

Posted 28 August 2008 - 11:26 PM

I might be thinking to far ahead but. if and when DirecTV picks up CCNW(Comcast Sports Northwest) will it be a natural RSN for us who live in the Seattle area,meaning not having to subscribe to the sports pack and to be able to see the pro sports i.e. Blazers ,since we no longer have the Sonics.?


good point. So much has happened around here over the last several weeks with the big vacancy in Seattle (BTW, thanks David Stern- jerk) and more recently the Ducks signing with Comcast, you wonder what influence it may have on the negotiations. Unfortunately, they all seem stacked in Comcast’s favor.

But who knows; The flipside may be they’ve become a bigger player, and it may now be more of a priorty for Direct to loosen the purse strings and deal.

#160 OFFLINE   TheRatPatrol

TheRatPatrol

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,720 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ
Joined: Oct 01, 2003

Posted 29 August 2008 - 08:30 AM

So you'd have separate RSNs for each team? Just think of New York City... with the Yankees RSN, the Mets RSN, the Knicks RSN, the Nets RSN, the Rangers RSN, the Devils RSN, the Islanders RSN, the WNBA Liberty RSN-and that doesn't even account for minor league teams! That would be 8 RSNs, each owned by the team. Not to mention the expense of each team maintaining separate production and transmission facilities. It'd mean work for people like me (I worked in video production for years) but the costs would be daunting.


Yeah I see your point. But isn't that what they have now? The Yankees are on YES, the Mets are on SNY, the Rangers and Knicks are on MSG, the Islanders, Devils, Nets are on MSG Plus, etc. I'm not saying each team have their own channel, I'm saying that the teams in that area join together to share the ownership in a channel or two to broadcast their games on, like the Bruins and Red Sox do with NESN (who I think has had it right all along).

What should be done is for the FCC to abolish all loopholes and enforce open access universally. That would eliminate situations like Comcra... er, Comcast SportsNet Philadelphia.

I agree. The leagues themselves really need to get more involved in situations like this and stop this from happening.

But then again what do I know, just my opinion. ;)




spam firewall