1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lakers New Regional TV Network - NOW ON THE AIR

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by kb24sd, Jul 1, 2012.

  1. Oct 11, 2012 #821 of 2097
    silkypimp

    silkypimp Cool Member

    21
    0
    Sep 30, 2012
    Kinda of funny how everyone that joins a forum is suddenly a expert on Channel pricing and negotiations. This thread should be renamed Laker Channel predictions.
     
  2. Oct 11, 2012 #822 of 2097
    Hutchinshouse

    Hutchinshouse Hall Of Fame

    4,632
    0
    Sep 27, 2006
    Also check the cost of going to a game. I dropped $750 last year just to take my son to one game. We also spent $24 bucks for two value meals at McDonald's. Two! :nono2: :eek2: Lastly, $20 bucks for parking. I'd rather pay $3.95 a month and watch it at home. :D
     
  3. Oct 11, 2012 #823 of 2097
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    1. The Lakers already sell out

    2. The people who will not be seeing the games is in the millions

    3. Games are advertising for your product, which is more than just ticket sales. It includes all branding, like jerseys, t-shirts, caps, etc.

    It has been proven time and time again that TV exposure means money beyond ticket sales.
     
  4. Oct 11, 2012 #824 of 2097
    Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    37,060
    287
    Jun 18, 2006
    I respectfully acknowledge your points, and without disagreeing, what are the actual numbers for how many people actually watch Lakers games?
     
  5. Oct 11, 2012 #825 of 2097
    sdk009

    sdk009 Icon

    695
    19
    Jan 19, 2007
    Kihei, Maui, HI
    The Lakers averaged 271,000 viewers last season on FS West. KCAL numbers were probably higher.
    http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2011/04/18/Media/NBA-RSN-ratings.aspx
     
  6. Oct 11, 2012 #826 of 2097
    FenixTX

    FenixTX Godfather

    480
    6
    Nov 11, 2005
    Could DirecTV add a RSN charge of let's say $2.00 to each subscriber that is in the Los Angeles DMA that receives this channel? Then they would really only be paying $1.95 per subscriber. If the Lakers are as popular in Los Angeles as some are saying I doubt anyone would have a problem with a little fee each month right?
     
  7. Oct 11, 2012 #827 of 2097
    Sandra

    Sandra Legend

    325
    25
    Apr 16, 2012
    Personally I would like to see DirecTV move their line in the sand back a little further so they come to an agreement and get this darn TWC channel on the air. I pay so much for sports right now, I honestly do not care if my bill goes up because they meet the demands of TWC.

    That's my opinion.


    Sandra
     
  8. Oct 11, 2012 #828 of 2097
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,091
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    Proof? Follow the whole dialogue on the Pac-12. Follow how the line changed from "we'll have an update when school starts..." to they walked completely from the table.

    My written communication with them says they want to carry the channel and are negotiating to carry it. Then, we find out right before the opener Pac 12 got up from the table and walked away.

    Dude, the facts are all hitting you in the head. Call it whatever you want, it doesn't matter. No one has to prove anything to you at all.

    Go ahead and believe that somehow Pac 12 is causing all the rift when the deal is substantially the same with every competing provider in the marketplace. Yea, like Directv is going to somehow get a substantially better deal? Please.
     
  9. Oct 11, 2012 #829 of 2097
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,091
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    You are free to believe whatever you want.

    I've seem some reports that show 1.7M of Directv's US customers are in the Los Angeles area. If so, LA-based customers would represent about 9% of Directv's total US customers. I don't know if it is true or not and I do not care.

    I am also sure you've got the whole thing all figured out from your knowledge of the Pac 12, west coast viewers and customers, and so forth, all from the metropolis of Cary, NC. Plenty of Pac 12 alumni all over the country have an interest, so your statement that "no one cares east of the rockies" is ridiculous at best. Does it have a 100% viewership, nope. Is the viewership thinner than on the west coast? More than likely. But the offer is to put the package as a RSN in Pac 12 markets and rest of the country in the sports pack, same as Dish Network. So there is no loss whatsoever, except bandwidth by having it back east if it is not turned on for the east coast customers.

    Fact is many providers are now offering the channel and for Directv to say that it's causing a big rift on their bottom line is self serving at best. No doubt it is, but Directv also carries so many sports channels in it's tiers that have very low viewership, so what's up with Pac 12? Speed, Fuel, Pursuit, Sportsman, NBC Sports/Versus, CBS Sports/CSTV, Fox College Sports, Big Ten, etc. Do all of those have incredible followings? Nope. Are they in sports tiers? Nope. You can successfully argue for sports tiers if you put them all in sports tiers, but that is not what Directv has done and that's not what they are doing.

     
  10. Oct 11, 2012 #830 of 2097
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,680
    1,105
    Nov 13, 2006
    Games are sold out, so that doesn't really work for millions of fans, especially when half of them are more than two hours away without traffic.
     
  11. Oct 11, 2012 #831 of 2097
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,680
    1,105
    Nov 13, 2006
    I don't think you can. All you can say is that the first brick in the foundation is the same, and that's about it. The rest is so different it's not worth attempting to draw any parallels.
     
  12. Oct 11, 2012 #832 of 2097
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    Can you keep the Pac12 discussion in it's thread please? We're discussing the Lakers channel here.
     
  13. Oct 11, 2012 #833 of 2097
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,680
    1,105
    Nov 13, 2006
    You are assuming DirecTV doesn't plan on changing that as new contracts come up for renegotiation.
     
  14. Oct 11, 2012 #834 of 2097
    fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,569
    146
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    So, there are 1.7 M DirecTV customers in the LA market but only 271,000 watch Lakers games (and most of them are not DirecTV customers). If half of the 271,000 who watch Lakers games are DirecTV customers (and I doubt DirecTV penetration in the LA area is 50%), that would be about 8% of the 9% of DirecTV customers who live in LA, or about 0.8% of the entire DirecTV customer base that care about the Lakers Channel.
     
  15. Oct 11, 2012 #835 of 2097
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,680
    1,105
    Nov 13, 2006
    Negotiations do not take this much time. They aren't negotiating right now, they are waiting. I am sure both sides have made an offer, and are just letting it sit their to see which will blink first. That's not negotiating, that's playing chicken. And thats when one or both sides start saying publicly that they are close to a deal. But at this point, everyone wants to be optimistic. It easy to say they are close, because they both have probably made several offers and are probably fairly close, the problem is, at the end, one of them wants a little more, and I think that's where we are at now. Which is basically screwed if you are like me and don't live in a twc market. And I'm putting it mildly in comparison to how I really feel.

    That's pretty much what happened with the pac12 too. The PAC 12 felt that the last offers made by each side where very close to each other, so they kept saying we are close, figuring DirecTV would fold based in the content of the channel. Did not happen. May not happen here. Either way, I'm not happy at all about it.

    My biggest problem is I need to find one of my friends who lives in a twc area that will let me log in and stream the channel. However, all my friends live in cox or FIOS country, and I am in charter, so i can't even go to a friends house to watch games, much less stream them!
     
  16. Oct 11, 2012 #836 of 2097
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,680
    1,105
    Nov 13, 2006
    Ad that's average. There where a few games home and away as I recall that get a lot more, literally a million in a couple cases. Lets face it, people don't generally mind missing games against Toronto, but they do against ok'd, the celtics, Miami, etc...
     
  17. Oct 11, 2012 #837 of 2097
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,680
    1,105
    Nov 13, 2006
    You are assuming its the exact same people are watching every time. And your forgetting about the fact that this year for the first time ever, there will be no over the air games, which where half the good games.
     
  18. Oct 11, 2012 #838 of 2097
    fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,569
    146
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    Not much different from how the NHL and their players are negotiating or how the NFL and its officials negotiated, or how the NBA and its players negotiated, or . . .
     
  19. Oct 11, 2012 #839 of 2097
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    So, you don't have any proof or a source to support your claims. Got it.
     
  20. Oct 11, 2012 #840 of 2097
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,680
    1,105
    Nov 13, 2006
    Those groups where not negotiating more half the time during their disputes, but that's not even the same. Directv does not need the channels to survive. The NHL needs its players to survive. (And if you think the nfl didn't need its refs, just ask Green Bay. :) ) Circumstances are vastly different. DirecTV obviously made a final offer to PAC 12 and then just said that's it, we are done negotiating. I am starting to think they may have done the same with twc. At some point negotiations endgame status quo is there is a contract on the table, sign it or don't attitude from one side or the other. When two sides need each other in order for both to exists, you are always still negotiating. When one side does and the other doesn't, its tricky, but when neither side feels they need the other (especially if they actually don't need each other) like the twc and the pac12 right now......
     

Share This Page