why, if the NFL and BIG TEN networks are free, do we have to pay extra for the NBA..

It's all about contracts and the power of different corporations. The Big Ten Network (owned by News Corp.) contract is probably a long term contract that was created when News Corp. still had a controlling stake in Directv. Directv sees the NFL as a valuable partner and probably didn't think twice about putting NFL Network on its most basic package as long as they keep NFL Sunday Ticket exclusivity. The NBA doesn't have any similar leverage.

Also, unless I just read wrong you make it sound like NBA TV and ESPNU are making more money by "charging extra" for their channels. They could both make a lot more money if they were in a more basic package since they get so much money per customer, but for whatever reason their contracts put them in a lesser programming tier. Understand that demanding to be in the most basic package is a huge risk and that is one reason why Big Ten Network and NFL Network still aren't carried by many cable companies.

bjlc said:

I don't think that they are making money. but I do believe that they are losing potential customers. I think that they are shooting themselves in the foot, if you ask me.

I would be pushing for a spot in the basic segment.

Click to expand...

Contracts are tricky. Let's assume that they significantly cut the rate per subscriber and demand to be on the most basic package. Even if one provider agrees, they run the risk of being dropped completely from other providers that don't want to put it in the most basic package (either because of limited analog bandwidth for cable or because that provider wants to make more money by continuing to use NBA TV to push their sports pack. And again look how many cable providers won't carry NFL and Big Ten Networks because they demanded basic cable spots.) Also, in many cases, if the price per customer drops for one provider than contractually the price per customer drops for all providers.

To be quite honest, Directv makes more money this way. I have no idea what NBA TV costs, but lets say it's $0.25 per customer (that's probably not very accurate). For Directv to carry it at that price, it would cost them $4.25 million a month (assuming there are 17 million customers). This is paid by every subscriber even if they aren't interested. Now if you put it in the sports pack, then Directv not only doesn't lose money from it, but actually gains money since the cost of it and other sports pack channels are more than covered by the $12 sports pack fee.

Trust me, NBA TV definitely wants to be in the most basic package, but it is sometimes very difficult to make that happen. Again, like I said in my first post: NFL and Big Ten got their spot because of the power that they have. Also, NHL Network was willing to compromise to get its spot in the next to lowest basic tier.

But if I were the President of the NBA, and my rivals were promoting themselves to all of Directv for free, and a ton of my potential fans weren't seeing my channel, I would be doing something in a hurry to change my status.

Click to expand...

Are sports leagues really in competition with each other? The league owned channels, NBA TV, NFL Network, NHL Network and the new MLB Network seem to be targeted towards hardcore fans, who have been following the sport for years, play Fantasy, love stats, and want to take a trip down memory lane. To attract new fans, the NBA and NHL would need to follow the NFL, a lot of nationally televised games on the networks, and not just playoffs. As a huge hockey fan I watch the NHL Network a lot, I'm not big into basketball, having access to NBA TV wouldn't do anything for me, I'd need to have an NBA team to root for to get interested.

NBA TV (NBA.com TV back then) was the first league created channel and I've never seen it offered anywhere outside of a specialty sports package or a higher end package. On cable here, NBA TV and NHL Network are both included in the Sports Tier for $1.95 along with 6 other channels.