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

PAC 12 Network Added (was For fans of the PAC12, plz request PAC12 Network)

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by pmjones, Aug 20, 2012.

  1. Aug 25, 2012 #41 of 240
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,940
    1,023
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Big Ten is a midwestern network ... and I suspect they made a good offer to DISH (especially as they are the only 24/7 HD RSN, plus alternate HD feeds).

    To expect the same out of all the conference networks is expecting too much. But if PAC 12 makes a good offer DISH could carry them as well. It is the networks that think too highly of themselves that will find themselves not on DISH.
     
  2. Aug 25, 2012 #42 of 240
    fudpucker

    fudpucker Godfather

    1,072
    54
    Jul 23, 2007
    NW Iowa
    Except that the word is from several sources that Dish isn't even talking with them. Ugh.
     
  3. Aug 25, 2012 #43 of 240
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,940
    1,023
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    DISH is not in negotiations with a lot of channels. If those channels want carriage they can make an offer. There is no reason for a stream of meetings if the offer isn't close to what the other side wants.
     
  4. Aug 25, 2012 #44 of 240
    Willh

    Willh Legend

    239
    8
    Jan 1, 2009
    i bet the Pac-12 channel is co-owned by ESPN, hence why they aren't negotiating right now, and it's all due to the Disney lawsuit as Disney owns ESPN. it's the same reason the The Longhorn Network isn't on Dish.
     
  5. Aug 25, 2012 #45 of 240
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I hear you... it's just that Dish had to see the writing on the wall... that other conferences would want their own channel too... so jumping on with the Big Ten and then not getting the next conference will be a slap in the face to customers in those parts of the country.

    I defend Dish on the price negotiations... but this is like the RSNs... if you get yours but your friend in the next state doesn't get his, he is going to complain... At least when other channels drop (national ones) they drop for everyone.

    I don't want name-your-price by these sports networks by any means... but when Dish used to say "we don't have sports" that kind of worked and people went to DirecTV for sports... but you pick up the Big Ten, and then people in other parts of the country figure you'll pick their network up too... and when you don't, you risk setting off a firestorm from an entire cluster of states and not just a few local markets like when LiLs are negotiated.
     
  6. Aug 25, 2012 #46 of 240
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,940
    1,023
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    So ... Midwesterners should not get Big 10 because someone else might not get their network? We might as well have DISH pull all the RSNs since YES and MSG are not carried.

    DISH will carry the channels they can get a fair contract to carry. Perhaps when the contract was written with Big 10 DISH expected other RSNs to follow suit. There have been recent improvements in the number of HD RSN feeds available (24 channels for HD RSNs) which is close to the number needed to carry all core RSNs in HD 24x7 (additional channels would be needed for the alternates). But I suspect there is an issue with the RSNs wanting more $$$ for their 24/7 HD feed than DISH is paying for game only HD (and selected game HD) carriage.

    RSNs always seem to want more $$$ ... even when their content is not improving.
     
  7. Aug 25, 2012 #47 of 240
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Not what I'm saying at all.... but that is why the NY customers are mad at Dish for carrying most other RSNs but not theirs. IF Dish carried no RSNs, then NY wouldn't complain as much.

    Similarly... Dish had to know that signing on for Big Ten was a signal to Pac-12, SEC, ACC, and whomever else that there was a market for their schools to have their own sports channel..

    Obviously they have to negotiate a fair price... but Dish can't bury their head in the sand and pretend they didn't see this coming OR the complaints from Pac-12 fans who want to know why they can see Big Ten games but not Pac-12 games.
     
  8. Aug 26, 2012 #48 of 240
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,940
    1,023
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    You make it sound like it is all DISH's fault! If AMC owned PAC-12 rights would you cut DISH a break? :D

    Big Ten Network was added September 9th, 2007. Did you really expect DISH to know that PAC-12 would start their own network five years later?

    I expect that there have been discussions over the past year with PAC-12. A seven channel network isn't the easiest to add ... especially when DISH already has obligations to carry other sports content.
     
  9. Aug 26, 2012 #49 of 240
    fudpucker

    fudpucker Godfather

    1,072
    54
    Jul 23, 2007
    NW Iowa
    I will say this about Dish and sports: they are more generous than most providers in our area when it comes to regional coverage. We are in the middle of nowhere, and we get Foxmw, which gives us KC and St. Louis coverage, Fox North, which gives us Minn coverage, and CSNCH, which give us Chicago coverage. Since we have fans of teams from all of those areas it's great. I'm a huge White Sox fan, so to live 8 hours away and still get them here is pretty awesome. By contrast, the local cable only gives you Fox North, and I'd have to check DirectTV but I doubt they are so generous.
     
  10. Aug 26, 2012 #50 of 240
    zippyfrog

    zippyfrog Mentor

    145
    2
    Jul 14, 2010
  11. Aug 26, 2012 #51 of 240
    tampa8

    tampa8 Godfather/Supporter

    2,007
    33
    Mar 30, 2002
    I would say there is no way in H*ll Dish will pay those kind of prices for the Pac 10, Pac 12, or Pac anything..... Just how many expensive channels can carriers keep carrying and still keep prices down? Let Direct TV carry them, and keep their cost higher. That gives a choice to us all. I don't want to pay what my friends do for Direct because I can live without alot of the expensive sports channels. On the other side, they are willing to pay more to get them. So there is the choice.
     
  12. Aug 26, 2012 #52 of 240
    dstout

    dstout Legend

    278
    1
    Jul 19, 2005
    Are the only channels we are sure won't lose the infomercial channels?
     
  13. Aug 26, 2012 #53 of 240
    Willh

    Willh Legend

    239
    8
    Jan 1, 2009
    well when it comes to the Big Ten network pending dispute, just let you know, it's co-owned by Fox and the Big Ten Conference, so that means we are in for yet another blackout dispute, and after the one we went thought in 2010 with Fox, which co-owns this network, we clearly will lose the Big Ten Network. if the Pac-12 network isn't co-owned by Disney, it might be co-owned by Fox, which would be their way to bundle Pac-12 Network with the Big Ten Network. meanwhile Disney/ESPN co-owns the The Longhorn Network with the University of Texas in Austin, which is pretty much the closest the Big XII has to it's own 24/7 RSN channel.

    one story short, it's gonna be a long college football season for fans of the Texas Longhorns, a Big Ten or Pac-12 school or anyone who wants to see any game on ESPN-U in HD.
     
  14. Aug 26, 2012 #54 of 240
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    You're really overly exaggerating the cost difference between DirecTV & Dish. When you're not receiving new sub discounts, the prices are very similar for similar packages and fees...off by a couple dollars.
     
  15. Aug 26, 2012 #55 of 240
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    There's no "fault" here... but Dish can't be surprised that Big Ten starts a network, and the other conferences see that and think "I want mine"... so whether they predicted the date or not, they have to have seen this coming.

    Per the other thread, it looks like Dish might be considering the option of dropping Big Ten rather than picking up Pac-12!

    It would at least be consistent.
     
  16. Aug 26, 2012 #56 of 240
    sum_random_dork

    sum_random_dork Icon

    911
    18
    Aug 21, 2008
    FYI, The PAC 12 owns 100% of the channel, Disney, FOX, TWC, Comcast have no ownership stake.
     
  17. Aug 26, 2012 #57 of 240
    dstout

    dstout Legend

    278
    1
    Jul 19, 2005



    You are correct. I think what it means is DISH puts more in THEIR pocket.
     
  18. Aug 26, 2012 #58 of 240
    inazsully

    inazsully Icon

    862
    13
    Oct 3, 2006
    I think we'll see both the BTN and the Pac-10 Network on both "D" and "E. Why? Because if "E" doesn't have them both you will see a sub exodus that will dwarf anything they've experienced from all of their other channel screw ups combined.
     
  19. Aug 26, 2012 #59 of 240
    dstout

    dstout Legend

    278
    1
    Jul 19, 2005
    It hasn't stopped Dish in New York. I know they don't have the Yankees or Mets there, not sure about MSG.
     
  20. Aug 26, 2012 #60 of 240
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,940
    1,023
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    If he did he would be incorrect ...

    DirecTV charged an average $94.40 per customer per month 2Q12 vs $78.11 for DISH.
    DirecTV made $20.35 per customer per month 2Q12 vs $5.35 for DISH.
    (Note: Single quarter results. Over the past six years, DISH has averaged $6.04 and DirecTV has averaged $12.90 profit per month per customer.)

    Nothing wrong with being profitable, but when one company is now making $15 more per customer than the other and currently charges $16.29 more per average customer it is fair to say that the customer's wallet is the source of the profit.
     

Share This Page