 |
 | 
trparky
Bite My Shiny Metal Ass
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
clubs:
1 edit | Re: I switched to DirecTV (partly due to this) Not the hijack the thread, but you'll probably find that the picture quality is better with DirecTV.
--
Tom | |
|
| | |
| | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| Re: I switched to DirecTV (partly due to this) I've use TimeWarner in the past, an it was decent.
Comcast here, in Santa Clarita was very expensive, and didn't offer what others did (at the time, Newsworld International was standard on TW and DTV, 'premium' on Comcast, and not offered on Dish.
I'm on DirecTV, and it works well.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | 
Racerbob
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY | We have the game on now...pq is excellent on DirecTV ! Glad that we broke the Time Warner habit. | |
|
| | | 
Splitpair
Premium
join:2000-07-29
Cow Towne
 ·T-Mobile US
1 edit | said by gigahurtz  :Not the hijack the thread, but you'll probably find that the picture quality is better with DirecTV. I don't know about that as Comcast Direct and Dish all post-process HDTV raw feeds before placing them onto their systems.
If one wants the highest quality signal then a minimum of a 3 meter dish and a matching receiver/decoder (4DTV) is the way to go as that allows a direct receive of the raw feed from the GB bird channel 410.
Wayne
--
If you cannot fix it with a buttset and some beanies you ain't a technician. | |
|
| | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by trparky :Not the hijack the thread, but you'll probably find that the picture quality is better with DirecTV. Pullllllllllllease. well maybe standard def stuff might be but not HD
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
| | | 
rivsys
@bellsouth.net | Re: I switched to DirecTV (partly due to this) I assure you the HD material I receive over my DTV dish is every bit as HD as the HD served up by Comcast.
Get REAL. | |
|
| | | | 
DreamWraith
Premium
join:2004-04-07
Mount Vernon, WA
| Re: I switched to DirecTV (partly due to this) said by rivsys :
I assure you the HD material I receive over my DTV dish is every bit as HD as the HD served up by Comcast.
Get REAL.
Do you actually beleive that crap coming out of your mouth? Seriously. Google "HD Lite". See the light. | |
|
| | | | |
rivsys
@bellsouth.net | Re: I switched to DirecTV (partly due to this) Must be nice to be a technoshill -- then any position is defensible. You just re-spew whatever you last sucked up.
Enjoy whatever drivel they give you next Thursday. I'll be watching Dallas and Green Bay! | |
|
| | | | | itguy05
join:2005-06-17
Camp Hill, PA | Not on the new MPEG4 channels. Which would be all but about 5 of them (HBO, HDNET, HDNET Movies, ESPN, and TNTHD). I can assure you that my DTV HD channels are as good as, if not better than the Combast I came from 3 weeks ago. | |
|
|
megladon111
@hoola.com
| Comcast’s cease-and-desist letter requests a statement in writing by the end of tomorrow which states that the network has stopped attempting to influence customers.
they want them to stop trying to influence customers... Well i want those stupid ads on tv where the show stops, and before it starts again to stop trying to influence customers. what the network is doing isnt maybe the best tactic, but i bet if it was a FCC NFL regional tax they were trying to get away with the cable companys would be going, "yea that would be acceptable" | |
|
|
xblk
@cox.net
| cox here in san diego doesnt have nfl network on their standard service only on digital cable and only if u buy their sports tier package..... i refuse to pay for digital cable just for nfl network...
i rather goto dish as u get the nfl network w/o buying into their sports package | |
|
| | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: I switched to DirecTV (partly due to this) ... dish... the company that felt the Outdoor Network was part of the "sports tier"... and your giving them a free pass why again?
Don't sit there in your chair and give any dish provider a free pass when it comes to sports.. they were the ones that originally pulled this whole sports tier crap to begin with.
.. oh how the mind of the American public is on such a short loop tape.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
|
| Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| I'm sorry to point this out, but you are doing exactly what the network wants you to do to help support their high prices and future hikes in price. In other words I would call you a sucker.  | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| .. yet oddly enough, DirecTV and the NFL has priced the service so far out of reach and then did an "exclusive agreement" with each other so the ONLY place you can get the Sunday Ticket is through one sole provider.
NOW, NFL wants to play ESPN, place the channel in a tier where all digital subscribers will have it, jack the rate, and they pull this crap?
This is what ESPN did. They wanted ESPN on basic so when they jack their rate to $2.50 per sub, they get a larger chunk of revenue. Comcast wants to put the programming in tiers where people will watch. NOT everyone is a sports fan - I'm not. I see sports as a niece tier where those that want it will go get it.
This is a money grab, but not by Comcast or any cable company.
Believe what you want and buy the propaganda, but anytime I see these battles being fought I know exactly where the culprit is.. and it's NOT the provider.. it's the network. Lifetime tried this as have others.. all along it's the delivery providers who get the neg press.
Every wonder what is the main factor in price increases in your bills no matter who be it? - it's the networks that cause the price increases.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
|
| |
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Boo hoo, poor mistreated Comcast. How is that any different than Comcast adds that end up on satellite? | |
|
| JohnA
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Pittsburgh, PA | Re: Boo hoo, poor mistreated Comcast.
It's actually better from NFL Network's position. The user had to intentionally go to their site.
I've had it free on Dish Networks since it came out. | |
|
| | 
TraumaJunkie
Premium
join:2004-03-05
Knoxville, TN
| Re: Boo hoo, poor mistreated Comcast. said by JohnA :It's actually better from NFL Network's position. The user had to intentionally go to their site. I've had it free on Dish Networks since it came out. Free? You think the NFL is guving it to sat. providers free? No, you are paying for it, even if you don't want it or watch it...you are paying. I'd rather have the option to pay for it if I want it instead of being forced to pay for NFL when I do not watch it.
BTW....many of you that post in threads advocating ala-carte channel selection are here advocating the NFL network not being on the basic tiers. What do you really want? For once come out and say it instead of riding the fence and falling off on the popular side of the day. | |
|
| | |
afsdsda
@comcast.net | Re: Boo hoo, poor mistreated Comcast. I pay less for satellite then you would pay for cable, and on top of that the NFL network comes with the basic low end package. I'm amazed anyone actually uses cable as satellite is such a better deal. | |
|
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Boo hoo, poor mistreated Comcast. For the first two years of NFL Network's existence on Comcast, it was part of the basic digital package which is the comparable level of service tier. And for the record, as I stated above, it was the dish that invented the sports tier back in the late 90s'... no one is innocent here.
People are buying into these petty arguments as victims when the public is nothing more than the sheep being herded by each side.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
|
|
| 
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH | Re: Link to Cease & Desist story I love it. They want cable customers to go tattle on their provider to the government. Just what we need next, the government dictating what channels our television providers carry. | |
|
| 
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| So they are encouraging cable customers to express their disatisfaction with their wallets. Isn't that exactly what everyone on this site does anyway? How else do you get companies to change policy, other than threatening to blow them up or destroying computers with a hammer? (neither of which work it would seem)
I see nothing wrong with it. I hope they keep the site up.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
|
| | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Link to Cease & Desist story I hope they keep the site up too.. but I'd also hope they'd tell the WHOLE story and not this mirage of an attack campaign.
If they want to say their message, be honest to the people and tell them WHY they want to be on the lower tiers. They won't..
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
|
| 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by TKJunkMail :It sure LOOKS LIKE they are encouraging people to drop cable - no matter what Palansky says. So? Show me where that is against the law. If cable was the only outlet for HBO I'm 100% certian HBO would be encouraging DirectTV subscribers to switch to cable. I see nothing wrong with encouraging a channel to get as many viewers as possible. The networks do it all the time. | |
|
| moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by TKJunkMail :It sure LOOKS LIKE they are encouraging people to drop cable - no matter what Palansky says. And how is this ANY different than Comcast telling people to drop DSL or Dish type companies?  | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| "... including LIVE NFL GAMES..." Bull sh*t.. The NFL network is a joke of a network anyway. Their "games" are few and far between.. the NFL network was invented because NFL capped themselves out with DirecTV and the Sunday ticket.. they realized they WANTED cable customer money so they invented this joke of a channel to sell to cable companies and Dish Network. It's a slap in the face that they'd nego such a stupid deal with DirecTV in the first place.. now it's even funnier that they are feeling all butt hurt that their lame attempt to swoon the cable customer is backfiring in their face.
"locking you out"... haha.. where the cable customer is locked out is that they won't sell the Sunday Ticket to cable companies... THAT is where the irony of all this comes in.
If I wanted to watch football, I'd get it from ABC or FOX on Sunday.. and now, on ESPEN for Monday night football..
It's the NFL who ought to be slapped here. In this case, I don't side with ANY provider of video.. this is the NFL being greedy as f!
"Forcing you to pay more".. yes.. they are.. they are taking the monthly consignment fee and passing it on to only a small group of people that WANT the channel. What this does is limits the amount of consignment viewers that NFL gets to reach into the pockets of. If the network is on all basic subscribers, they raise the rate of carriage, guess who all pays? EVERY customer that has this joke of a channel in their package. What Comcast, Time warner, Cable Vision and others have done is cut the pool of customers in which NFL can charge. There are MANY customers prior that NEVER watched the channel, but paid into the NFL network - just as they have with ESPN. The big 10 did this.. in fact, MOST content providers play this game.. they DON'T want to be specialized tier'd or put on a higher end tier.. they KNOW they will get less money for their network programming. The big 10 just tried this. They wanted to be on lower tiers to get a bigger chunk of the pie and then cried about it to the public blaming cable.
What the ads need to say is "wwaaaaa ... waaaaaa... cable won't let us suck money from people that don't want our programming.. waaaaa..".. get real.
They want money? Offer the ticket to a broader viewing audience. I really get sick of these petty arguments where they play the public as idiots... sadly, it works.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
|
| |
NFL
@verizon.net
| Re: Link to Cease & Desist story quote:
"Forcing you to pay more".. yes.. they are.. they are taking the monthly consignment fee and passing it on to only a small group of people that WANT the channel.
There's a reason the NFL generates a vast amount of revenue. Millions of people spend money to watch football. The group of people who want this channel is much larger than you think.
Wanting the channel and being willing to pay extra for an entire tier just to get one channel are two different things. The NFL is exploiting the fact that people who really want the channel will switch providers and pay about the same price as cable rather than raising their monthly rate by adding a sports tier.
Both parties are guilty of being greedy, but I don't think the ads are illegal in any way and I don't think Comcast should be forced by the court to place the channel in a basic tier. Let the consumer decide. | |
|
Scott_
join:2002-04-01
New Baltimore, MI | Figures Comcast sucks.... they are a bunch of greedy bastards.
First the Big Ten network and now this. When does it end?
I don't want to hear how they are looking out for the consumers best interest. | |
|
|
See 23 replies to this post |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX | Switch to Cable??? As if the cable companies don't run ad campaigns to switch from sat. to cable occasionally. I have seen several billboards from TWC concerning switching to cable. | |
|
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | What's the issue? Why isn't NFL network entitled to stump for anyone they want? | |
|
| 
Ebolla
join:2005-09-28
Dracut, MA
| Re: What's the issue? said by vpoko :Why isn't NFL network entitled to stump for anyone they want? They are, but I would think the issue is more along the lines of the fact that comcast has to pay a set amount of money for a minimum amount of subscribers, if NFL pushes people to other companies comcast is still under a contract to pay X amount of money and if they have literally 10k subscribers but are paying for a min. of 100k then comcast loses money while NFL still collects their cut. | |
|
| |
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | Re: What's the issue? So? Why is that NFL Network's problem? | |
|
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
2 edits | Dont need either one Im quite happy with the 6-8 games a week I can watch on free over the air hdtv, why would I pay extra for nfl network?
NFL has already sold its soul to the major media networks.
Ive saved around $4620.00 over the past 5 years by not getting cable tv I cant see getting cable for the 3 channels I want.
And the best thing, I dont have to pay those money grubbers to shove commercials at me. | |
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Dont need either one said by gaforces :Im quite happy with the 6-8 games a week I can watch on free over the air hdtv, with the except of week-ends like this the most you normally get is 5.
Either Fox or CBS has both an early and late game. They swicth off. One channel only has ONE game. Very rarely do they BOTH have early and late games so that's 3. Sunday night game that's 4, Monday Night game that's 5. At least get the math right. | |
|
| |
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
1 edit | Re: Dont need either one There were 3 games on this last sunday ...
I only watched green bay, not really interested in other teams. | |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Dont need either one said by gaforces :There were 3 games on this last sunday ... I only watched green bay, not really interested in other teams. Point is you say you watch 6-8 games a week there are only 5 at most and one is on ESPN and if you don't get cable then at the most you'll only get 4 games a week most of the time. So make your point but at least be accurate. | |
|
| | | |
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | Re: Dont need either one Yes, I admit, I exaggerated, thanks for the correction! | |
|
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
1 edit | multiple comments to above posts I have DirecTV and Cable. Digital picture quality is very similar. Get a better TV.
Not sure how you see Comcast addressing the increase cost for NFL is a Comcast greed issue. If NFL or any content increases charges or cost substantially more than the average content, the cost needs to be addressed somehow.
Jerry Jones is a moron | |
|
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
·Comcast
| Who's taking who hostage? I'm happy CC is keeping this a pay channel (pay extra).
I see all the football I need via regular TV and the web.
I don't understand the basis of the NFL's claim/effort to force the cost on ALL cable customers. I'm sure CC would offer it with basic if the NFL provided it to them free (and left a few ad spots open for CC's use.
Professional sports already earn a great deal of money, and receive huge subsidies from the public trough (Stadiums, police protection, road and infrastructure upgrades) and in some cases tax breaks, far above any other business unrelated to producing goods and services for the government.
Adding an across the board fee/tax to all users of cable (which is a defacto private utility) would be outrageous | |
|
| JohnA
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Pittsburgh, PA
| Re: Who's taking who hostage? said by tshirt : Adding an across the board fee/tax to all users of cable (which is a defacto private utility) would be outrageous You mean like they do with all those other channels in your package that you never watch. | |
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by tshirt : I'm happy CC is keeping this a pay channel (pay extra). I see all the football I need via regular TV and the web. There isn't any LEGAL way you can watch the NFL over the web unless you are subscribing to NFL Sunday Ticket and also getting the $100 Super Fan package.
I don't understand the basis of the NFL's claim/effort to force the cost on ALL cable customers.
I could say the same with just about ANY channel on cable I do not watch.
I'm sure CC would offer it with basic if the NFL provided it to them free (and left a few ad spots open for CC's use. See here's where it helps to be informed. The NFL has ALWAYS offered ad spots open to the cable companies. In fact the latest offer is I believe 18 in day. If Comcast can not make enough revenue from those 18 spots to pay most if not all the 70 cents fee then perhaps they need to get into another line of work.
As far as giving it out for free. Comcast gladly pays $3 per sub for ESPN and $2.50 for ESPN2. I don't hear anyone griping about that. Personally I don't think reruns of World Series of Poker are worth that much. | |
|
| |
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
·Comcast
| Re: Who's taking who hostage? said by BF69 :said by tshirt : I'm happy CC is keeping this a pay channel (pay extra). I see all the football I need via regular TV and the web. There isn't any LEGAL way you can watch the NFL over the web unless you are subscribing to NFL Sunday Ticket and also getting the $100 Super Fan package. As far as giving it out for free. Comcast gladly pays $3 per sub for ESPN and $2.50 for ESPN2. I don't hear anyone griping about that. Personally I don't think reruns of World Series of Poker are worth that much. I don't think Espn is worth it either.
all the football /sports, I care about are local teams and golf. the few other highlights I see are on numerous web sites, LEGALLY (the NFL does understand how press coverage feeds their business)
This is the best aurgument for ala cart cable over and above a free/very cheap starter/basic package.
If these channels are so valued by subs, CC should be able to demand a much higher price per specailty channel. let the users pay the full price. | |
|
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
·Mediacom
| LMAO So Comcast is greedy because they think only people who want NFL network should pay for it?
Comcast is greedy because NFL Network wants to get a fee from millions of Comcast TV customers regardless if they are NFL fans?
All sports channels should be in a premium tier. You want it? Then pay for it. | |
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: LMAO said by Anonymous :So Comcast is greedy because they think only people who want NFL network should pay for it? Comcast is greedy because NFL Network wants to get a fee from millions of Comcast TV customers regardless if they are NFL fans? All sports channels should be in a premium tier. You want it? Then pay for it. Comcast is greedy because the fee is 70 cents and they want to charge $5.
You know BET charges a fee and I sure as hell don't watch that. Why should I have to subsidize that? That should be on it's own tier where only the people that want to watch that kind of programming can pay for it. | |
|
| |
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
·Mediacom
1 edit | Re: LMAO said by BF69 :said by Anonymous :So Comcast is greedy because they think only people who want NFL network should pay for it? Comcast is greedy because NFL Network wants to get a fee from millions of Comcast TV customers regardless if they are NFL fans? All sports channels should be in a premium tier. You want it? Then pay for it. Comcast is greedy because the fee is 70 cents and they want to charge $5. You know BET charges a fee and I sure as hell don't watch that. Why should I have to subsidize that? That should be on it's own tier where only the people that want to watch that kind of programming can pay for it. Well of course Comcast wants to make profit. I never said anything otherwise. Comcast wants to charge sport fans. Fine with me. You see I am positive NFL would be making a lot more money if they were on basic tier and get a fee from 21.4 million Comcast cable customers. So in other words if it's valid to state Comcast is holding you hostage, same goes for NFL too.
For all I care only sport fans should be financing this monster (sports industry in general). Of course that would mean you would be GOUGED but hey anything for the team, right?
good news is you would probably get some ass-lube for free with your subscription.
It's funny though, companies take free stuff of the air and charge for it and sport fans are OK with that. | |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: LMAO said by Anonymous :said by BF69 :said by Anonymous :So Comcast is greedy because they think only people who want NFL network should pay for it? Comcast is greedy because NFL Network wants to get a fee from millions of Comcast TV customers regardless if they are NFL fans? All sports channels should be in a premium tier. You want it? Then pay for it. Comcast is greedy because the fee is 70 cents and they want to charge $5. You know BET charges a fee and I sure as hell don't watch that. Why should I have to subsidize that? That should be on it's own tier where only the people that want to watch that kind of programming can pay for it. Well of course Comcast wants to make profit. I never said anything otherwise. Comcast wants to charge sport fans. Fine with me. You see I am positive NFL would be making a lot more money if they were on basic tier and get a fee from 21.4 million Comcast cable customers. So in other words if it's valid to state Comcast is holding you hostage, same goes for NFL too. For all I care only sport fans should be financing this monster (sports industry in general). Of course that would mean you would be GOUGED but hey anything for the team team, right? good news is you would probably get some ass-lube for free with your subscription. It's funny though, companies take free stuff of the air and charge for it and sport fans are OK with that. Then you support Comcast stop charing white people for BET then? You support Comcast stop charging Jews, Muslims and atheists for Christian channels? You support Comcast stop charging men for Oxygen, We, Lifetime and SopaNet? If not then you're just a hypocrite. | |
|
| | | |
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
1 edit | Re: LMAO I guess so. But you just can't compare the prices of those channels to the prices for sports channels.
I just don't like sports. Nobody deserves millions for kicking/throwing a ball. | |
|
missb_2000
join:2003-02-17
Mckinney, TX
| TW lost me as a customer I switched because of this too. The fact that TW doesn't offer it is crazy. I've had the platinium cable tier for the at least 8 yrs. I've been through so many changes of providers its hard to remember them all, but when my NFL network went away so did the 150+ a month to them. | |
|
DoubleT
Premium
join:2002-04-09
Dallas, TX
| Cost for channels Saw this from Peter King at SI.com and thought it was interesting. quote:
I thought the fair thing might be to show how much money the cable companies are charged to carry some channels, just to put the stance of the NFL into some perspective. The firm SNL Financial, based in Charlottesville, Va., gathers financial data for the cable industry and provided me with these figures:
COST PER SUBSCRIBER HOUSEHOLD (per month)
Leading non-sports channels
TNT: 91 cents
Disney Channel: 83 cents
USA Network: 51 cents
CNN: 46 cents
TBS: 44 cents
Nickelodeon: 43 cents
FX: 36 cents
Leading sports channels
ESPN: $3.26
Fox Sports Net: $1.92
NFL Network: 80 cents
Fox College Sports: 63 cents
NHL Network: 51 cents
ESPN2: 46 cents
NBA TV: 36 cents
--
And don't forget! The world is a PVP server. If you see a member of the Alliance, you're free to kill them on sight. | |
|
| cableguy619
join:2003-06-24
Chula Vista, CA
| Re: Cost for channels said by DoubleT :Saw this from Peter King at SI.com and thought it was interesting. quote:
I thought the fair thing might be to show how much money the cable companies are charged to carry some channels, just to put the stance of the NFL into some perspective. The firm SNL Financial, based in Charlottesville, Va., gathers financial data for the cable industry and provided me with these figures:
COST PER SUBSCRIBER HOUSEHOLD (per month)
Leading non-sports channels
TNT: 91 cents
Disney Channel: 83 cents
USA Network: 51 cents
CNN: 46 cents
TBS: 44 cents
Nickelodeon: 43 cents
FX: 36 cents
Leading sports channels
ESPN: $3.26
Fox Sports Net: $1.92
NFL Network: 80 cents
Fox College Sports: 63 cents
NHL Network: 51 cents
ESPN2: 46 cents
NBA TV: 36 cents
For all those who have read this is the cost for everyone no matter if you watch it or not. So if you have 600,000 wh owatch it and 6 milliong that doesn't you are paying per subscriber. | |
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by DoubleT :NHL Network: 51 cents The NFL fee is actually 70 cents but let's not quibble. Even at 80 cents it's only 60% more than NHL nNetwork and I can tell you the NFL gets WAY more than 60% better ratings.
A regular season game between the worst 2 teams in the NFL would get at least double the ratings of a game 7 Stanley Cup final even if one of the teams was the Red Wings. | |
|
| | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | Re: Cost for channels Post some links supporting these "facts" will you? | |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Cost for channels said by Skippy25 :Post some links supporting these "facts" will you? The amounts the NFL and NHL wants are known fatcs which are out there. Go looka tthe ratings for the Stanley Cup finals and compare that to the lowest rated NFL regular season games. Once again these facts are out there. I wouldn't post something that wasn't true since all the info could easily be found by haters.
USE LOGIC! | |
|
| | 
amarryat
Verizon FiOS
join:2005-05-02
Marshfield, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by BF69 :said by DoubleT :NHL Network: 51 cents The NFL fee is actually 70 cents but let's not quibble. Even at 80 cents it's only 60% more than NHL nNetwork and I can tell you the NFL gets WAY more than 60% better ratings. A regular season game between the worst 2 teams in the NFL would get at least double the ratings of a game 7 Stanley Cup final even if one of the teams was the Red Wings. I'm really surprised that my bill didn't drop by 70 cents when they moved it to the sports package. | |
|
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon FIOS
| With as much as they charge for these sports packages... Wouldn't it simply be more cost effective to just get the damned season tickets for the team(s) you want to see and watch them LIVE instead of from your TV?
Seriously, it just screams flawed logic.
--
Front Line Force Fortress Forever | |
|
| smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| Re: With as much as they charge for these sports packages... Yeah, because everyone lives close to their favorite team and doesn't have to drive 200+ miles or even fly to see their favorite team.
Season passes, gas money, hotel rooms, and airline tickets are so much cheaper than a sports tier on cable.
It just totally screams flawed logic! | |
|
| |
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: With as much as they charge for these sports packages... Whose fault is it that their favorite team isn't local?
Or hell, even the tickets to one local game where their team is playing has to cost less than what some of these packages cost. | |
|
| | | 
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Re: With as much as they charge for these sports packages... I don't know about the sports teams in your area but I understand that in order to get a season ticket to the Denver Broncos you sign up on a waiting list and it might take ten years to get one.
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
| | | |
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: With as much as they charge for these sports packages... said by Transmaster :I don't know about the sports teams in your area but I understand that in order to get a season ticket to the Denver Broncos you sign up on a waiting list and it might take ten years to get one.  Holy sh*t!!! That is absurd. | |
|
| | | | |
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Re: With as much as they charge for these sports packages... I agree but the Broncos are the big thing in Denver
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
LeftOfSanity
join:2005-11-06
Felton, DE | Never Happy If it is added to the basic tier prices go up for everyone. While if it added to digital sports tier, only the fans need pay extra. | |
|
| 
binarycode
join:2003-04-30
USA
| Re: Never Happy Why does it have to be added to the digital sports tier? Why should I, an NFL fan, have to pay for more crappy channels when all I want is the NFL Network channel? A la carte is the best choice for consumers. It just will not be implemented for a long time because then we won't have to pay for 75% of the channels that are being forced down our throats, thereby cutting profits from the providers. This in turn gives them less money to spend on their lobbyists. The lobbyists will have less money to give to the politicians. They certainly don't want that! | |
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by LeftOfSanity :If it is added to the basic tier prices go up for everyone. While if it added to digital sports tier, only the fans need pay extra. OK so why do I have to pay for BET then? How is that any more fair?
By the way your cable company has already been increasing prices constantly. So that's a lame excuse. Anyone that think that by not getting NFL network their cable prices will stay the same is an IDIOT. Asl cable can make that 70c ents back because the NFL gives out ad spots exclusively for them on NFL Network. If you cable company ad dept is so lame they can't sell ads on NFL Network they need to look for other jobs. | |
|
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| Glad I am glad to see that Cablevision is on the list of carriers that won't "play ball". Enough already with the overpriced sports channels being forced down everyone's throat. I am not happy having to get ESPN, ESPN2, Yes!, SNY, etc. and have no interest in them. The fact that they are the most expensive of all the basic channels is really irritating.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| 
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | Re: Glad Add my vote to keeping them as "pay extra". I don't want to pay for NFL garbage and their commercials. | |
|
| | 
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26
·Embarq
| Re: Glad said by SLD :Add my vote to keeping them as "pay extra". I don't want to pay for NFL garbage and their commercials. Thank you for saving me valuable typing time  | |
|
| | | 
Toguro
join:2003-10-23
Ottawa, IL
| Re: Glad said by Titus Pullo :said by SLD :Add my vote to keeping them as "pay extra". I don't want to pay for NFL garbage and their commercials. Thank you for saving me valuable typing time Yep  | |
|
Corona
It's cool, I'm takin it back
Premium
join:2000-03-14
Aubrey, TX | FREE MARKET I don't see where Comcast has a case. NFL is selling a product. They can sell it to whoever they want, and partner with whatever carrier they want. | |
|
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
iraq
·Fairpoint Communic..
| The NFL Network is wrong If they want to CHARGE for people to watch the game, then so be it, but like all greedy megacorps, they are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. The NFL exists today because it became popular, now they are trying to leverage as much money as possible for their own greed. I personally recommend NOT paying to watch the games, and see how much their overpaid teams have to cut their salaries when all their income disappears. We the customers are ENCOURAGING them to rip us off. By offering to pay a premium for something that USED to be free, we are just feeding our own doom. Let's just watch whatever they show OTA, and if that goes away, then so does the NFL. Easy as that.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
|
| 
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: The NFL Network is wrong It's the rare occasion that I agree with karlmarx.
This is one of those occasions.
The NFL is just trying to eliminate the middle man (broadcast networks) so they can make more money off their games. They won't be able to do it unless cable companies carry their network on a standard tier, and the NFL knows it.
Every time content providers (ESPN, etc) raise rates, they cite the rising salaries of athletes as the reason their costs increase.
I enjoy a good game as much as the next person, but the multi million dollar salaries today's sports figures make is pretty f'ed up. Especially considering what people who actually contribute to society take home.
It's a sad commentary on the priorities of our society....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|
| | dualsub2006
join:2007-07-18
Newport, KY
| Re: The NFL Network is wrong said by N3OGH :The NFL is just trying to eliminate the middle man (broadcast networks) so they can make more money off their games. They won't be able to do it unless cable companies carry their network on a standard tier, and the NFL knows it. And why shouldn't they eliminate the middle man? It is their product and it is their right to make as much money from it as they can. It's no different from any other company with a product to sell. If you can sell the product yourself at retail and not have to wholesale it to others you make more money. NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL don't owe the general public anything. If they want to lock a couple of games a year to their own network that is their right.
Comcast can send a C&D letter every day for the next 100 years and the NFL won't stop. They are well within their rights to do what they are doing when they recommend satellite to fans. And no, there are no minimums. If Comcast has 10,000 subscribers and their rate is figured on 10,000 then they pay for 10,000, If they get a discount for 100,000 but their numbers fall to 90,000 they can either continue to pay the higher rate or renegotiate if the lower numbers would save them money, but there wouldn't be a big difference in the numbers.
I really like the NBA channel and the NFL channel on D*TV. I think that the NBA channel is part of the sports package but I am really not sure of the lineup. These networks have a lot more programming than live games and I look forward to the MLB channel when it hits in 2009. I listen to the NBA, NFL and MLB specific channels on Sirius and XM and the programming is great if you are a fan of the sport.
All of that said, these networks really do belong on a sports only tier. Aside from the live games or the game replays you really have to be a fan of the sport to want to watch the filler shows when games aren't on and the channels just don't appeal to everyone. | |
|
NateCohen
join:2005-10-10
Schenectady, NY
| I'm on NFL's side I really believe this is on the cable companies. I'm not too sure how they run or anything, but how can DirecTV carry NFL Network on their basic package and still offer it for only $45.00/month? I think the cable companies are trying too hard to be greedy. I really think charging $10.00/month for a sports tier to get NFL network is greedy when companies like Fios, Dish Network, and DirecTV are offering it for free. The cable companies need to stop being so damn greedy and offer ONE CHANNEL people actually want. | |
|
| RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: I'm on NFL's side Cable has often blamed the sports people for rate increases. I would love to see how the rates and special kickbacks play out in the hidden and proprietary financial statements between cable and satellite in regards to the sports costs.
I doubt if any of the three groups will be clean.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
|
| 
Jwobot
join:2002-08-14
Sterling Heights, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| Millions of people won't get to watch the game tonight on the NFL Network and its not because they don't get the NFL Network. It's because the NFL are being too greedy and whenever a game is on that channel the NFL want to charge the cable companies a fee just to show the game. | |
|
MOTO6809
join:2007-11-05
Springfield, MA
1 edit | NFL network will cause my bill to go up around .80 cents per month.
They should just let cable companies put it on the sports tier . Why should everyone's bill go up because the NFL network demands that it goes the expanded basic tier.
Pretty soon you will have to pay $39.99 to watch the Super Bowl.. I agree with Comcast and other MSO's on this issue. | |
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: NFL network will cause my bill to go up around .80 cents per said by MOTO6809 :month. They should just let cable companies put it on the sports tier . Why should everyone's bill go up because the NFL network demands that it goes the expanded basic tier. Pretty soon you will have to pay $39.99 to watch the Super Bowl.. I agree with Comcast and other MSO's on this issue. WOW 80 whole cents? Yeah yeah Charter claimed this too. Guess what they raised rates anyways and still no NFL Network. What's the next excuse? Have you complain to your cable company that your bill is $3.50 hire because they pay that much for ESPN? How may other channels don't you watch that you so for glad pay for? Because you do. | |
|
| | 
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
3 edits | Re: NFL network will cause my bill to go up around .80 cents per
said by BF69 :How may other channels don't you watch that you so for glad pay for? Because you do.
Way too many. And I DO NOT gladly pay for them. I hate paying for them. That is why I want a stop put to this practice of using worthless products to generate revenue by forcing customers to purchase them when the customers would not otherwise do so if they had a choice.
Cable companies need to move a bunch of other channels to premier pay tiers as well. In this era of technical capabilities we should not be forced to purchase a bunch of products (channels) we do not want, and this should be considered illegal product tying. Let us buy just the individual products (channels) we are interested in. They could give incentives such as discounts for n number of channels or for packages of channels, etc.
| |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: NFL network will cause my bill to go up around .80 cents per said by N O Y B : Way too many. And I DO NOT gladly pay for them. Sure you do. Otherwise you put your money where you mouth is and not have service with that company.
Get an antenna and guess what, you're no longer paying for channels you don't want. | |
|
| | | |
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
| Re: NFL network will cause my bill to go up around .80 cents per said by BF69 :said by N O Y B : Way too many. And I DO NOT gladly pay for them. Sure you do. Otherwise you put your money where you mouth is and not have service with that company. Get an antenna and guess what, you're no longer paying for channels you don't want.
I think you do not know where my money is. Who I am paying for what and how much.
| |
|
|
|
|
·
Link to Cease & Desist story
