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

Sports Channels/Networks not offered by DirecTV

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by joshadam84, Feb 9, 2013.

  1. Mar 5, 2013 #101 of 170
    Sandra

    Sandra Legend

    325
    25
    Apr 16, 2012
    Satelliteracer I will defer to your industry knowledge, but isn't this the crux of the situation....and situations past? I mean, with my Total Choice package I get many many channels that I'll never watch...but I subsidize anyway because they're part of the package. I realize individually they may not be as expensive as the Pac 12 Networks, but collectively they do add up....and I pay for them anyway because I have a package.


    Sandra
     
  2. Mar 5, 2013 #102 of 170
    Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
    I feel the difference is in the amounts. Its one thing to have a channel in Total Choice that costs 3 cents, quite another when it costs $1 or $3 or $5. Just my two cents.
     
  3. Mar 5, 2013 #103 of 170
    Sandra

    Sandra Legend

    325
    25
    Apr 16, 2012
    I dunno...I'm sure there are channels were the carriage rate is three cents, but accoring to reports Nickelodean, MTV, TNT, CNN, Disney (and others I'm not thinking of at the moment) are all a LOT more than 3 cents per month per subscriber.

    In fact, closer to $1 or more in some cases...


    Sandra
     
  4. Mar 5, 2013 #104 of 170
    KyL416

    KyL416 Hall Of Fame

    4,407
    602
    Nov 10, 2005
    Tobyhanna, PA
    Even though Disney Channel shifted from premium to basic cable back in the late 90s/early 00s (depending on when they struck new contracts with the individual provider), they still are not ad supported. The move to basic cable actually helped them take Nickelodeon down a peg, they wouldn't be a major player in the kids TV scene and beating Nickelodeon in ratings on a regular basis if they were still relegated to just the TVs that have a cable box. (Which at the time in most cases is not the TV in the bedroom of their target audience)

    TNT charges higher since they have NBA rights

    Nickelodeon and MTV have some of the highest rated programs on cable giving them the clout to charge higher and demand wider penetration. (Keep in mind highest rated doesn't mean the best when it comes to quality, just take a look at what's in the top 25 for the past few weeks)

    CNN, I'd have to get back to you on that one since I don't have time to compare it to the other news networks right now, but my guess is keeping those news bureaus around the world and flying Anderson Cooper and a video crew to every natural disaster isn't cheap.
     
  5. Mar 5, 2013 #105 of 170
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Yeah, the Big Ten has positioned themselves rather well for media with the BTN.
     
  6. Mar 5, 2013 #106 of 170
    TheRatPatrol

    TheRatPatrol Hall Of Fame

    7,278
    209
    Oct 1, 2003
    Phoenix, AZ
  7. Mar 6, 2013 #107 of 170
    Devo1237

    Devo1237 Legend

    418
    15
    Apr 22, 2008
    Unfortunately, the PAC-12 network is looking like it might be what finally makes me ditch the satellite for the first time in 16 years. As a huge proponent of niche sports like tennis and water polo, I just can't help but feel DTV has jumped the shark when it comes to their role as the ultimate sports provider for more than just the big boys. I know the P12 is demanding wide carriage, but something tells me if DTV offered them enough money/subscriber, they'd make a compromise there. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I'd happily pay an extra $20 to get things like p12 nets, FSC and the tennis channel in the sports pack. Alas, I'm forced to subscribe to Choice Ultimate for Tennis, the sports pack for soccer, and time warner for the p12. Talk about an expensive pain in the butt.

    Satelliteracer said some people want cheap bills and some people just want every channel at any price, and yet somehow I'm not getting either. I will admit that some of my bitterness toward the p12 deal is due to the fact DTV bent over backwards for the Lakers channel that shouldn't even exist in my mind. If the dodgers pull the same junk and DTV caves to them before figuring out a p12 deal I am definitely out.
     
  8. Mar 6, 2013 #108 of 170
    larryharry59

    larryharry59 Mentor

    58
    3
    Feb 5, 2012
    Tennis Channel and Fox Soccer is on Choice Xtra now
     
  9. Mar 6, 2013 #109 of 170
    Devo1237

    Devo1237 Legend

    418
    15
    Apr 22, 2008
    I was talking more about FSP and BeIn, but I didn't realize Tennis was moved back down to Extra. Regardless, it's stupid I have to subscribe to a premium package for one sports channel, and the sports pack for the others.
     
  10. Mar 6, 2013 #110 of 170
    donalddickerson2005

    donalddickerson2005 Legend

    230
    1
    Feb 13, 2012
    Devo1237. I agree with you. Another thing I would like is an all sports package for like $100 a month but you get every sports channel NFL NBA NCAA NHL MLB not to mention ppv boxing-mma plus all other sports not named here.
     
  11. Mar 6, 2013 #111 of 170
    fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,569
    146
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    The PAC 12 in its current form should not exist, either. It should have been like the Big 10 network with a single full time channel and either priced lower or included only in the Sports Pack.

    I also agree that separate Lakers and Dogers channels should not exist. Now, if they were to share one channel that also included the Kings or Ducks and the Galaxy, that might be more reasonable but what will the Lakers channel show between March and September? What will the Dogers channel show between October and March?
     
  12. Mar 6, 2013 #112 of 170
    TJNash

    TJNash AllStar

    198
    11
    Jun 5, 2012
    San Diego
    This is a non-starter for about 50,000 reasons.
     
  13. Mar 6, 2013 #113 of 170
    Devo1237

    Devo1237 Legend

    418
    15
    Apr 22, 2008
    While I agree the 7 networks was a dumb way to go, the P12 Nets have already shown they're willing to make a compromise with the satellite companies by agreeing to let Dish Network only carry the National channel.
     
  14. Apr 6, 2013 #114 of 170
    DawgLink

    DawgLink Woof Woof Woof

    1,543
    3
    Nov 5, 2006
    Washington, DC
    I think it has slowly started, I am the definition of a hardcore sports fan who got as much sports as possible.....but this was the first year that I did not get the sports pack OR MLB Package. Too much.

    Just browsing a few other TV forums that I visit daily, I would say that in the last 3 months, I have seen more people saying that they DID drop packages or services for the first time that they can remember....in all of my years at these places combined.

    I still shake my head at my so-called TV/Internet bill every month as I have VERY slim packages yet prices that should be illegal, IMO

    With these additional sports networks launching...I expect prices to rise quickly the next 2 years
     
  15. Apr 7, 2013 #115 of 170
    djrobx

    djrobx Godfather

    507
    2
    Jan 26, 2009
    The problem is that these expensive sports networks are popping up like weeds, and they all want to be added to everyone's bill unconditionally. I think everyone already pays ESPN well over $3 per month. Then there's the regional sports networks, specialty networks, etc. Others have already brought up the ridiculous additions of Lakers and Dodgers specific networks in LA.

    I don't watch ANY sports. I'm happy to subsidize a certain amount, but at some point, enough is enough and we have to stop feeding these pigs. I'm sorry that the sports you want fell below the line. The obvious solution is a-la-carte pricing for this programming due to its price, but the networks are demanding that DirecTV make a cash grab from people who don't want their product.
     
  16. Apr 7, 2013 #116 of 170
    donalddickerson2005

    donalddickerson2005 Legend

    230
    1
    Feb 13, 2012
    Alacart for every channel us sports nuts also don't like paying for your OWN network or lifetime.
    I'd love pay per network. But that will never happen.
     
  17. Apr 7, 2013 #117 of 170
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    No you wouldn't. Your bill would go up and you'd get less.

    The only real issue right now is the nuts who think they will get tons of money just cause they are sports.
     
  18. Apr 7, 2013 #118 of 170
    DawgLink

    DawgLink Woof Woof Woof

    1,543
    3
    Nov 5, 2006
    Washington, DC
    I think those who are big sports nuts (like me) will be shocked when their bills don't decrease with carte pricing.

    DirecTV and other companies won't set themselves up to suddenly have less-than-usual income

    And to me that means that sports pricing would increase
     
  19. Apr 7, 2013 #119 of 170
    James Long

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

    45,945
    1,024
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I'd look more at the programmers than at DirecTV and other carriers.

    Take the amount a sports network like ESPN charges per subscriber and multiply it by the number of subscribers ... then divide it by the number of subscribers who would "opt in" if subscribing to ESPN was a choice (not included in nearly every package in the tier system). Then adjust the number of subscribers for those who would not accept the new higher price.

    I believe ESPN would do OK under a la carte as they have a mix of programming where something on their channels appeals to each potential subscriber. The real losers in the sports realm would be the RSNs. Their variety of top sports is limited (even more so in the multi-RSN markets). Do the same math for their channels ... watch $1 to $3 per month channels (when sold to nearly every customer in a home market) jump to $10 when they still have to pay the bills after losing subscribers when people are given a choice.

    For DirecTV these channels are carried at a loss ... but it the current marketplace it is better to pay ESPN their $5 and RSNs their $1-$3 and have the channels available than be the carrier without sports. The new $2 RSN fee (in select markets) is just the beginning of expressing the extra cost RSNs are to DirecTV. If a la carte were available perhaps "sports" customers would pay the full cost of having the channels and the rest of their customers bills would be lowered. But such a move would need to be done by all carriers ... otherwise the complaint would be "DirecTV charges extra for ESPN and RSNs while other providers include the channels in their basic package". They would lose customers over the change.
     
  20. Apr 7, 2013 #120 of 170
    JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    4,639
    34
    Jul 21, 2008
    What about stuff that few people want and other channels that sports fans don't want to pay for.
     

Share This Page