$5.00 for the new Dodgers channel.

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by lipcrkr, Jan 28, 2013.

  1. cmasia

    cmasia Icon

    1,233
    173
    Sep 18, 2007
    Las Vegas
    A couple of news items today. Neither is promising.
    Just a lot more posturing.
    The next hearing on the DOJ is not until March 13, so I doubt we'll hear any news before that date.

    Dodgers' TV blackout for thousands of fans to enter fourth season

    DirecTV Fights U.S. Antitrust Suit Over L.A. Dodgers Channel

    Here's an odd bit I did not know before:

    "The Justice Department isn’t seeking damages. Instead, it’s asking for the court to rule that the alleged sharing of negotiation strategies violates antitrust law and order AT&T and DirecTV to train and monitor their executives more carefully."

    Very odd...

    I can understand AT&T fighting this on principle alone. Admitting collusion, even without penalty, would set a very bad precedent.
    But I wonder if it's also a ploy to have the chance to clearly state their case about the greed of TW / Charter.

    And I'm still amazed this has gone this far, as collusion is usually a private, secretive activity.
    DirecTV was shouting from the rooftops about its refusal to carry the channel at TW's price.
     
  2. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,898
    1,606
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    So even if Directv loses the case it makes no difference to the odds of carriage. At least Pac 12 Network has a decent chance of being added once the current contracts expire, the Dodgers Channel has zero chance.
     
  3. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,038
    1,569
    Nov 13, 2006
    If anything the "lawsuits" or whatever you want to call it (it's a joke imho) is more reason to think it'll never show up imho.
     
  4. Mar 6, 2017 #904 of 921
    keenan

    keenan Godfather

    612
    7
    Feb 8, 2005
    For those of you that have active accounts, are Dodgers spring training games being made available via MLB-EI?

    I'm guessing the situation will be the same as last year, several games not being aired during April due to lack of space but then most every game throughout the rest of the year.

    I want to try and be sure Dodger games will be available before I re-activate my DirecTV service and purchase the MLB-EI package. Is it still just a week to cancel EI if you decide you don't want it?

    Thanks!
     
  5. Mar 6, 2017 #905 of 921
    BreadDawg

    BreadDawg Member

    108
    23
    Sep 12, 2016
    Deep South
    I know 2 summers ago when I had Directv EI, the dodgers games were on there with home announcers. I am 99% sure you can not cancel at any point after you have bought the package.
     
    keenan likes this.
  6. Mar 6, 2017 #906 of 921
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,038
    1,569
    Nov 13, 2006
    If you live in the Dodgers market extra innings will not get you Dodgers games. There is zero way around that.
     
  7. Mar 7, 2017 #907 of 921
    keenan

    keenan Godfather

    612
    7
    Feb 8, 2005
    Yes, I'm aware of that. I'm in the SF bay area so that's not a problem. I was just trying to determine if anything had changed from last season as far as DirecTV carrying the games. I haven't read of anything that would change that situation but I figured I would check here to see if anyone else has heard anything and if they were actually getting some of the ST games.
     
  8. Mar 7, 2017 #908 of 921
    schmave1

    schmave1 Active Member

    270
    55
    May 20, 2016
    Reynoldsburg...
    I can't imagine it would change during the regular season. None of the SNLA Spring Training games are carried unless MLB Network picks up the feed ... but I do think those feeds are available through MLB.TV.
     
    keenan likes this.
  9. Mar 9, 2017 #909 of 921
    sunfire9us

    sunfire9us Godfather

    438
    10
    Feb 15, 2009
    [quote name="JoeTheDragon" post="3447607" timestamp="1479409789"]The cubs are also in the place of there in market zone is covered by many different big cable co's.
    and right now CSN Chicago is able to offer dish, directv, att uverse more HD feeds then any cable system has the room for even local Comcast systems in Chicago.

    WGN / cubs did tried moving games to cltv for a very short time in the 90's that was not on all area cable systems and that did not last very long.

    Now if ATT where to pick the up the cubs rsn's and may the blackhawks as well. They can play some real hard ball and jerry reinsdorf can put the bulls and sox back on his own RSN aging. The bulls have a small in market area and I don't think many people in iowa really want the sox.[/quote]
    I believe you're correct. MLBTV is the only way for spring training games for Dodgers. You will get the SNLA telecasts via MLBEI if you're outside Dodgers territory.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  10. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,038
    1,569
    Nov 13, 2006
    So much ado about nothing, as I fully figured anyway.
     
  11. Gloria_Chavez

    Gloria_Chavez Godfather

    562
    33
    Aug 11, 2008
    I believe you're correct. MLBTV is the only way for spring training games for Dodgers. You will get the SNLA telecasts via MLBEI if you're outside Dodgers territory.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]


    Why would ATT want to charge their customers 6 dollars more a month for Cubs games?

    Hardball? The other distributors would tell ATT what the other distributors in Los Angeles told TimeWarnerCable: Your financial commitment, your problem. We are not going to make our subscribers pay for your mistake.
     
  12. JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    5,225
    110
    Jul 21, 2008

    Why would ATT want to charge their customers 6 dollars more a month for Cubs games?

    Hardball? The other distributors would tell ATT what the other distributors in Los Angeles told TimeWarnerCable: Your financial commitment, your problem. We are not going to make our subscribers pay for your mistake.[/QUOTE]
    Comcast subs losing the cubs and maybe the hawks will be very bad for them and Comcast may just shell out $6+ a sub to keep them.
     
  13. Jason Nipp

    Jason Nipp Analog Geek in a Digital World Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    10,079
    5
    Jun 10, 2004
    Northern...
    This forum does not allow discussion on how to circumvent conditional access or things bordering on or in direct violation of TOS.

    I have removed some posts. Please do not restart that dialogue.
     
  14. Grafixguy

    Grafixguy Godfather

    857
    156
    Mar 15, 2008
    New Jersey
    My apologies.
     
  15. Apr 3, 2017 #916 of 921
    jeret

    jeret Mentor

    78
    4
    Apr 22, 2007
    Hypothetical Question

    If D* and SNLA came together and agreed on a $3.00/month for each subscriber in the LA DMA, would D* immediately add the $3.00 plus their profit margin for the channel to the LA DMA RSN fee. Would D* spread the fee to all of the D* subs by raising the price of whatever basic package you happen to have or maybe make the channel subscription based. In other words, how would D* recoup the millions they would be paying to who ever owns the channel now?

    Just curious.
     
  16. Apr 4, 2017 #917 of 921
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,038
    1,569
    Nov 13, 2006
    They'd probably just bump up the Los Angeles RSN fee the next time their regular yearly increase came around. But don't worry, it's not happening. We are past the point where they would have needed to even worry about losing subs. They don't understand that Los Angeles has to much to do that we don't get beholden to teams in general like this. It's why the new rams stadiums is all private funding. They can't get tax dollars for teams in Los Angeles.

    The Dodgers have a huge stadium. People just go to the games. And they are on tv a few times a month anyway. And all playoffs are on tv which is what most fans care about anyway out here.

    They aren't the Lakers either these days, which is sad considering they have kershaw who may end up being one of the greatest pitchers ever and Lakers are rebuilding and two years from being truly competitive if everything goes perfectly.
     
  17. Apr 4, 2017 #918 of 921
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    8,020
    307
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Yep, sure seems that way ...

    Ever since TWC officially hoisted the white flag on being able to sell SNLA just prior to the merger. And now Charter took over responsibility for the RSN, they appeared to be resigned to the fact that SNLA will never be picked up by the other providers. And it's just going to have to be written off as a loss.

    The old days of majority access to Dodger telecasts are simply over now ...

    Thanks for the memories ...

    Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk
     
  18. Apr 4, 2017 #919 of 921
    JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    5,225
    110
    Jul 21, 2008
    More likely they give into a price cut for the outer rings / let directv make you get sports pack for some of them.

    Now D* may just pay about $3-$4.50 inner market. But not the full MLB Zone.
     
  19. Apr 5, 2017 #920 of 921
    cmasia

    cmasia Icon

    1,233
    173
    Sep 18, 2007
    Las Vegas
    Here's a bit of perspective.

    This is Year 4 of the Dodgers' 8.3 billion / 25 year deal with TW / Charter / Spectrum.
    The channel launched February, 2014.

    DirecTV has 20,000,000 subscribers.
    At even one dollar per sub for the 38 months the channel has been on the air, TW/C/S is out $760,000,000 already.
    9% of the value of the entire contract.
    With 22 years remaining.
    Over 25 years, that $1 per month from DirecTV alone would add up to $6,000,000,000.

    I'm not suggesting Spectrum should ask for $1, nor am I suggesting DirecTV should offer $1, but the above numbers are eye watering.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements