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

Pac-12 Networks confident, even without DirecTV

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Athlon646464, Jun 29, 2013.

  1. Aug 21, 2013 #781 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    I actually think it was a smart move. If you have a weakness against a competitor (BTN with DirecTV at the time), you either strengthen the weakness or you exploit your competitors weakness. DirecTV was far from a PAC 12 deal, so Dish supplemented their inventory with it. DIsh could take a western strategy if they "lost" the Midwest. They are not the same. BTN is a better product sales wise and Dish may have overpaid, but it was a smart move.
     
  2. Aug 21, 2013 #782 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Hahahaha!
     
  3. Aug 21, 2013 #783 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Sigh. You are fixating on the 80 cents marker.

    What does it mean? What is in-market?

    If DirecTV has been defining in-market in a certain way and PAC 12 is wanting it bigger but changes its mind, how is that a cave?

    We have won (unconfirmed) "fact" in the terms of 80 cents. But we do not have a clue what it means? Is 80 cents in the markets of the schools or is it all across California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Arizona and Utah? What about border states near the schools?

    What is the rest of the deal? How many channels? What about out-of-market.

    But wave around that 80 cents like it means everything. It means very little without further definition and NOBODY on either side has confirmed the number. One blogger trotted that out and the internet bought into it.

    And I am not sure that business as big as DirecTV are run on "looking foolish" to an internet forum poster.
     
  4. Aug 21, 2013 #784 of 3040
    damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    233
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    He is way to risky for me, and I do agree it was a little smart, but turning his back on a market of well over 8 million customers sports was not , and no matter what low ranking RSNs he makes a deal with will never fill that gap..

    Not just NY, Parts of PA, NJ and CT are in that NY RSN DMA.

    Just saying !
     
  5. Aug 21, 2013 #785 of 3040
    Sandra

    Sandra Legend

    329
    25
    Apr 16, 2012
    I think there is a lot of truth in this statement. With all of the rhetoric neither company wants to be seen as 'caving'. There is a number that would be beneficial for both sides (there always is), but neither side wants to go there. Somewhere down the road the animosity will begin to wear off and they will negotiate again, but no idea when that will be.

    Probably about the time Pete Carroll and Chip Kelly are back in the Pac-12 somewhere...I think Harbaugh is in the NFL for good.


    Sandra
     
  6. Aug 21, 2013 #786 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Let us keep New York out of this.

    But, again, Dish is successful. He may make more money with other decisions but you cannot say they are not making money.

    Same can be said for DirecTV. You can challenge individual decisions but they make ones that make money for them.
     
  7. Aug 21, 2013 #787 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Nobody cares about "caving." The only time we heard anything about victory was the Viacom dispute because that was dirty.

    Fox Sports just caved as hard as you can cave. Anybody jumping on their grave?

    "Caving" is for internet forums.
     
  8. Aug 21, 2013 #788 of 3040
    James Long

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

    46,116
    1,067
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    If that is the deal DirecTV offered then it wouldn't be all 20 million customers paying. :)

    (Unless you're following the big pot of money theory where all of the fees paid by customers goes into a big pot and it is given out to the programmers per their contracts and customers are not making a direct payment for content. That isn't a bad theory. Do the exact channels in Ultimate cost $7? Do the exact channels in Xtra cost $6? Do the exact channels in Choice cost $10? Probably not. Those are price points not exact dollars for content.)

    I suppose if you follow the big pot of money theory everybody pays for NFL Sunday Ticket ... and everybody would pay for PAC-12 even if they would not get the channel.
     
  9. Aug 21, 2013 #789 of 3040
    damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    233
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    Yea I do! I haven't ever seen anything to prove other wise . Directv gets their money from one place , Subscribers. Without them they would not have ST, Choice Extra, or even Directv 14.
     
  10. Aug 21, 2013 #790 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Hmm. From an actual accounting view, it is a big pot of money. From a business planning view, it is not. Every channel on any system has a value assigned to it on what they are willing to pay and what it means to them. (Some may be a mini-bundle and some may be considered absolute basic must haves but essential it is every channel.) To not break down your business in that way would be suicide long term. I am sure that Dish and DirecTV and Fios and Comcast all know (or at least think they know) how much everything from ESPN to the local RSN to AMC to HBO are worth to them.
     
  11. Aug 21, 2013 #791 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Not really. The money gets thrown into a pot but so does the money in a restaurant. I do not pay for your order of lobster any more than you pay for my steak. The base costs are shared but not the actual items. Every business throws the money into a pot and pays out of the pot. At least on the profit center level.
     
  12. Aug 21, 2013 #792 of 3040
    damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    233
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    Where do they get their money? Thin air?
    Restaurant also wouldn't have lobster or steak if a customer wasn't paying. Right?
     
  13. Aug 21, 2013 #793 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Doesn't mean I am paying for yours or you are paying for mine. If you don't come in and buy something, my price does not change. The customer pays for what they buy. If you work two jobs, you put your money in the same bank. But company A is not paying for your services for Company B.
     
  14. Aug 21, 2013 #794 of 3040
    Joe Tylman

    Joe Tylman Legend

    368
    55
    Dec 13, 2012
    The .80 is determined as the “in market” price per subscriber. Markets are dictated by zip codes. After a certain range then a sub price kicks in. The farther out you go from the primary market the cheaper the sub price gets. This is generally how RSN fees are setup with everyone.

    With that said the main difference is that DIRECTV is national so there for every subscriber would be covered by some rate. Even if it was a penny or partial penny it adds up. Cable companies will pay the same thing but their foot prints are significantly smaller. So even if a cable company adds it in Alabama to 60k customer’s they’re going to pay a small fee per sub. This is where the major difference is and why it cannot be compared to why a cable company would do something. It’s not the same scale.

    Business decisions are based on value, or perceived value, and not emotion. DIRECTV has clearly determined that the PAC 12 does not add enough value at the price point suggested based on what they offer. It’s the same thing as you ordering something from Amazon instead of going to Best Buy. Does it mean that you hate Best Buy? Not because of that it just means you don’t see the value in buying it there for a higher price.

    PAC-12 said it can survive without DIRECTV and they get an average of $.24 per subscriber. This number will drop as more markets are added at a cheaper price point but they will still get more money. Do you believe if DIRECTV signed up and they received more money they would drop their price to bring in the same revenue they were making before DIRECTV signed? DIRECTV states that the value is not there and it’s because the total amount they would be required to pay is just not a good payoff. It could be that more profitable stations are coming and transponder space is limited, it could be purely based on subscriber price, or more than likely it’s a mixture of both.
     
  15. Aug 21, 2013 #795 of 3040
    damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    233
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    Sure it does.
    The reason you pay what you pay is because everyone as a whole is putting into the pot.
    You honestly think if Directv had 1 million customers, they could afford everything they have now and provide it to you for the same price. NO way because their wouldn't be enough in the pot.

    By this theory of yours then Directv should have no problem striking a deal with Pac 12, Cause we only pay for what we use right?
     
  16. Aug 21, 2013 #796 of 3040
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    You are confusing a la carte with bundle pricing. You are also mucking around with overheads. There is some volume discount but most of the contacts are written per subscriber. So, 1 million or 10 million, the price reminds at a subscriber rate, not a total rate.

    Within a bundle, we all pay for what we don't watch BUT we pay for what we get. There is some variation fom exact numbers but basically, we pay for what we get.

    Directv has asked to make PAC 12 specific to people "who want it" which means those who elect either that specific channel or a package that is specific to sports or something like that. If the PAC 12 were to agree, a deal would get done.

    But you are trying to say all money pays for everything but it doesn't. Sure, they get a bit fuzzy on some things. Your bill is not exactly what it costs plus overhead. They do adjust some with discounts on bundles, etc. But I am essentially not paying for what I don't get.

    The same money bucket exits at a restaurant or a store. There are deals to entice people that may go at a loss but that's more like advertising than shared cost. The only true shared cost is overhead.
     
  17. Aug 21, 2013 #797 of 3040
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,386
    585
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    You speak with the certainty of someone with inside-PAC12-info. Because you cannot say what DIRECTV® will or will not do. If PAC12 is so dug in, tell us how you know that.
     
  18. Aug 21, 2013 #798 of 3040
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    23,050
    1,165
    Nov 13, 2006
    Directv wants a discount, we guess.

    OR Directv is just so upside down w/NFL they may really not have the cash. Remember, Directv and it's CEO Mike White keeps asking for a merger through the media with Dish. Maybe Directv is teetering


    There's no way you can say Sunday ticket is keeping them from adding channels because they don't have enough money if you have seen their balance sheet. M

    If anything losing st will make it harder for them to afford the pac12

    I don't think it has anything to do with that anyway. Its what they look at in terms of profit and the rates they charge and they just don't want to increase prices as much as others.

    Again, the Dodgers and sec channels will be very interesting.


    Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk mobile app
     
  19. Aug 22, 2013 #799 of 3040
    kick4fun

    kick4fun Godfather

    487
    6
    Aug 9, 2006
    I think there is a lot of truth in this statement. With all of the rhetoric neither company wants to be seen as 'caving'. There is a number that would be beneficial for both sides (there always is), but neither side wants to go there. Somewhere down the road the animosity will begin to wear off and they will negotiate again, but no idea when that will be.

    Probably about the time Pete Carroll and Chip Kelly are back in the Pac-12 somewhere...I think Harbaugh is in the NFL for good.


    Sandra
    hey now.. Seahawks and Pete Carroll are in for the long haul..

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using DBSTalk mobile app
     
  20. Aug 22, 2013 #800 of 3040
    Sandra

    Sandra Legend

    329
    25
    Apr 16, 2012
    I dunno...I always wonder about these coaches who just happen to bail on their school right before sanctions come down. Carroll deserted a sinking ship at USC. I just have a feeling there is a college coaching position with his name on it down the road.

    Just not sure how far down the road.


    Sandra
     

Share This Page