
how-to block ads
|
jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by Dogfather :After a long history of fighting the channel extortionists Charlie seems to give in often as of late, passing on increases to customers. The result is higher prices and fewer customers. That's because as much as you may hate ESPN, FSN, etc ... you simply cannot offer a Pay-TV service without them. Plus, I don't how much of Charley "fighting" them was actually "fighting" ... when you have good growth you can absorb a lot of the increases...but new sub growth has been slowing for awhile now and those increases now have to be passed on to customers. | |
|   Dogfather Premium join:2007-12-26 Laguna Hills, CA | Re: They didn't keep prices down Sports should be on its own tier. | |
|  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by Dogfather :Sports should be on its own tier. Yes and we can have that argument for the next week as well, but the current market reality is that that the overwhelming majority of your prospective customers expect ESPN, ESPN2, and their local RSNs in the basic package. Until something changes in the market such as regulatory requirements..you have to offer it or your service isn't competitive. | |
|  |  |   Dogfather Premium join:2007-12-26 Laguna Hills, CA | Re: They didn't keep prices down Given ESPNs low ratings I would disagree. | |
|  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
2 edits | Re: They didn't keep prices down said by Dogfather :Given ESPNs low ratings I would disagree. Tell you what, you go setup your own service with all the sports on another Tier, and you report back with how successful you are.
Ratings are irrelevant in this particular discussion, people may not watch ESPN all the time, but they want access to it. During the peak of football season I may watch 12 hours of ESPN weekly...1/2 to 1/3 that any other time...but I would still want it. | |
|  |  |  |  |   Dogfather Premium join:2007-12-26 Laguna Hills, CA | Re: They didn't keep prices down Easy tiger. Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare.
Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by Dogfather :Easy tiger. Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare. Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them. Yep, and as soon as you show me some numbers were 51% of the subscribers don't want at least ESPN, ESPN2, and their RSN...we can talk about the rest. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI | Re: They didn't keep prices down It isn't the number of eyeballs that matter, it is the type of consumer those eyeballs are attached to and it is a very lucrative consumer. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |   uid1307457 Premium join:2005-12-30 Tempe, AZ
·Qwest.net
·Convergent Interne..
·DIRECTV
| said by jmallory :said by Dogfather :Easy tiger. Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare. Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them. Yep, and as soon as you show me some numbers were 51% of the subscribers don't want at least ESPN, ESPN2, and their RSN...we can talk about the rest. espn can go bankrupt for all i care | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |   Hi Desert
@qwest.net
| said by jmallory :said by Dogfather :Easy tiger. Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare. Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them. Yep, and as soon as you show me some numbers were 51% of the subscribers don't want at least ESPN, ESPN2, and their RSN...we can talk about the rest.
You got it all wrong. Its not the market that is demanding ESPN to stay on all channel tiers. Its Disney's practice to bundle less popular channels with popular ones and even with some of their local networks they own. For example, if Dish wanted to create a tier without the expensive sports crap then Disney would drop Lifetime, possibly ABC, cartoon channels etc.. Its common knowledge that Disney extorts extra money through bundling extortion.. just do a google to confirm that. Disney owns so many channels as a content provider and they can basically charge more through bundling. Its totally wrong and is the major reason this industry needs regulation. These channels should exist on their own merit not on subsidies. And ESPN probably has the highest carriage fee of any channel and is one of the least watched channel. I'm sick of the increases myself and every time Dish has a hike I cut back services. I dropped one of my tuners last time. Next increase they will see me say goodbye. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Dogfather Premium join:2007-12-26 Laguna Hills, CA | Re: They didn't keep prices down Absolutely...bring on a la carte. | |
|  |  |  john1290
join:2003-12-06 Reynoldsburg, OH
| said by jmallory :said by Dogfather :Sports should be on its own tier. Yes and we can have that argument for the next week as well, but the current market reality is that that the overwhelming majority of your prospective customers expect ESPN, ESPN2, and their local RSNs in the basic package. Says you. I hate any and all sports channels. I can't wait for the day of REASONABLE a la carte pricing. Once that happens, so long espn, mtv and many other worthless channels. Go on and cry that this will also kill off History channel, Discovery and other good channels. To that I say hardly. Because I believe that the majority of people here in the US actually watch/like those channels. Every time my friends and I discuss the dream of a la carte pricing, we're ALL in agreement that sports and music channels need to go buh-bye. Let you sports type pay the premiums to keep those types of shows on the air. I'm confident that most people will be happy to pay for/watch Discovery, History, TLC type stuff. | |
|  |  |  |   hobgoblin Sortof Agoblin Premium join:2001-11-25 Orchard Park, NY clubs:
| Re: They didn't keep prices down Top 20 Cable shows
Rank Shows NET DAY(S) Live+SD HH Rating Viewers Live+SD (000) 1 CLOSER, THE TNT MONDAY 4.7 7,058 2 NASCAR SPRINT CUP L (BRICKYARD 400) ESPN SUNDAY 4.3 6,668 3 HANNAH & MILEY:BEST OF DSNY SATURDAY 3.0 5,864 4 MONK USA FRIDAY 3.1 5,062 5 WWE ENTERTAINMENT (WWE RAW) USA MONDAY 3.0 4,961 6 BURN NOTICE USA THURSDAY 3.0 4,760 7 SAVING GRACE TNT MONDAY 3.1 4,571 8 FOOD NETWORK STAR FOOD SUNDAY 2.8 4,508 9 WWE ENTERTAINMENT (WWE RAW) USA MONDAY 2.7 4,494 10 PSYCH USA FRIDAY 2.8 4,484 11 ICARLY NICK FRIDAY 2.7 4,446 12 LAW & ORDER: CI (ORIG) USA SUNDAY 2.9 4,321 13 MLB SUNDAY NIGHT L (YANKEES/RED SOX) ESPN SUNDAY 2.8 4,230 14 IN PLAIN SIGHT USA SUNDAY 2.8 4,174 15 INCREDIBLES, THE DSNY SUNDAY 2.4 3,922 16 CAMP ROCK DSNY THURSDAY 2.4 3,913 17 ICARLY NICK FRIDAY 2.3 3,815 18 TBS PRIME MOVIE (LAST HOLIDAY) TBSC SUNDAY 2.4 3,813 19 S HANNAH MONTANA(S)-07/26/2008 DSNY SATURDAY 2.3 3,768 20 SPONGEBOB NICK SUNDAY 2.4 3,716
Not seeing many of your channels on there -- "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
|  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
1 edit | said by john1290 :said by jmallory :said by Dogfather :Sports should be on its own tier. Yes and we can have that argument for the next week as well, but the current market reality is that that the overwhelming majority of your prospective customers expect ESPN, ESPN2, and their local RSNs in the basic package. Says you. I hate any and all sports channels. I can't wait for the day of REASONABLE a la carte pricing. Once that happens, so long espn, mtv and many other worthless channels. Go on and cry that this will also kill off History channel, Discovery and other good channels. To that I say hardly. Because I believe that the majority of people here in the US actually watch/like those channels. Every time my friends and I discuss the dream of a la carte pricing, we're ALL in agreement that sports and music channels need to go buh-bye. Let you sports type pay the premiums to keep those types of shows on the air. I'm confident that most people will be happy to pay for/watch Discovery, History, TLC type stuff. Just show me the numbers that state even a "simple" majority (51%) are in agreement with you, we will talk. "Me and my friends" isn't going to cut it.
In addition, you know, if you really like the Discovery / TLC programming (and you should because a lot of it is top notch), you can always just buy the DVD/Blu-Rays when they are released. I have the complete Planet Earth Blu-Ray set (actually I have the BBC release) and I have been buying the Discovery Atlas series on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray when they are on sale. I also plan on getting "When We Left The Earth" as well to. You can see all the programming you like without even subscribing to Cable or Satellite.
| |
|  |  |  |  |   mahermusic
join:2001-07-06 Chesterfield, NJ
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by jmallory :Just show me the numbers that state even a "simple" majority (51%) are in agreement with you, we will talk. "Me and my friends" isn't going to cut it. I've even turned off those channels via my TiVo, since noone even watches them. -- 1/20/09 = The final day of our Retarded Cowboy President! | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by mahermusic :said by jmallory :Just show me the numbers that state even a "simple" majority (51%) are in agreement with you, we will talk. "Me and my friends" isn't going to cut it. I've even turned off those channels via my TiVo, since noone even watches them. You don't even make a simple majority of DSLreports subscribers let alone Cable and Satellite subscribers. I have no doubt that there are people who don't watch sports at all on Cable and Satellite, but I believe that they are in the minority. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  wentlanc You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30 Maineville, OH
| Re: They didn't keep prices down I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills.
Turning your logic against you, you don't make up a simple majority of anything either, so who are you to talk so poorly of the rest of us?
cw | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by wentlanc :I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills. Turning your logic against you, you don't make up a simple majority of anything either, so who are you to talk so poorly of the rest of us? cw Wasn't putting anyone down...all I am saying is that if the majority of people expect things to be a certain way (like having ESPN, ESPN2, and FSN as part of basic service) then that is the way it is going to be. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   DishItOut
@rr.com
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by jmallory :said by wentlanc :I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills. Turning your logic against you, you don't make up a simple majority of anything either, so who are you to talk so poorly of the rest of us? cw Wasn't putting anyone down...all I am saying is that if the majority of people expect things to be a certain way (like having ESPN, ESPN2, and FSN as part of basic service) then that is the way it is going to be. Enabling ala-carte would go a long way to disprove the notion that "a majority" want ESPN.
Instead, we are cleverly forced to buy 2nd or 3rd tiers to access ONE channel. Whether that's LifeTimeMovies or Travel or Golf or FNC is immaterial, it is a form of extortion. I refuse to pay $60 a month for one channel, so we do without. Most of my peers do likewise - Netflix, Blockbuster, RedBox, the library, rabbit ears, radio and YouTube fill void. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  rahvin112
join:2002-05-24 Sandy, UT
| Disney has convinced you of that fallacy. Remember when you pay that $6 for ESPN every month the vast majority of it goes to support all the other BS channels Disney offers. If the providers of the channels (not the delivery companies like the cable and satellite) were forced to unbundle their channels and sell them to the providers individually your bill would go DOWN. ESPN would drop significantly in price without 90% of the charge for it being used to subsidize a dozen channels you don't watch.
By forcing unbundled the Sat. and Cable companies could offer REAL packages that people want a drop all the BS channels that have less than a 1000 people watching them. Half your TV bill supports mostly channels you don't watch and likely never will because Disney and the other content providers force the delivery companies to buy them and sell them to subscribers. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   mahermusic
join:2001-07-06 Chesterfield, NJ
·Vonage
·Comcast
| said by jmallory :said by wentlanc :I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills. Turning your logic against you, you don't make up a simple majority of anything either, so who are you to talk so poorly of the rest of us? cw Wasn't putting anyone down...all I am saying is that if the majority of people expect things to be a certain way (like having ESPN, ESPN2, and FSN as part of basic service) then that is the way it is going to be. I agree... and since it seems that YOU'RE in the minority here. You must be wrong. "That's the way it's going to be"... -- 1/20/09 = The final day of our Retarded Cowboy President! | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Cheese Premium join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL clubs:
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by mahermusic :said by jmallory :said by wentlanc :I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills. Turning your logic against you, you don't make up a simple majority of anything either, so who are you to talk so poorly of the rest of us? cw Wasn't putting anyone down...all I am saying is that if the majority of people expect things to be a certain way (like having ESPN, ESPN2, and FSN as part of basic service) then that is the way it is going to be. I agree... and since it seems that YOU'RE in the minority here. You must be wrong. "That's the way it's going to be"... He will state he is not in the majority, just watch  | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Cheese Premium join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL clubs:
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by mahermusic :said by Cheese :He will state he is not in the majority, just watch Oh please. He's an idiot that doesn't understand the simplicities regarding noone wanting to watch ESPN. No need to watch anything here! :D | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  Corydon Cultivant son jardin Premium join:2008-02-18 Denver, CO clubs:
·Comcast
| Without solid numbers, you're both just blowing smoke.
Incidentally, the question isn't whether a majority watch sports on television, but whether they watch ESPN...a completely different question altogether.
Just browsing through what's on ESPN for the next days, I see:
- Lots of Sports Center - World Series of Poker (this is what qualifies as sports these days?) - "X-Games" (ditto) - A handful of talk shows about baseball, football or a few other things - Two out-of-market baseball games. - One out-of-market pre-season NFL game (Saints and Cardinals).
Granted, that's taken in the doldrums of summer, but still...I'd find it hard to believe that anyone who's not a pretty hardcore sports fan would get all that worked up about what they have on. Certainly nothing that a combination of local news and sports coverage plus talk radio doesn't cover at least as well and for free. -- "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too." | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
1 edit | Re: They didn't keep prices down said by Corydon :Without solid numbers, you're both just blowing smoke. Incidentally, the question isn't whether a majority watch sports on television, but whether they watch ESPN...a completely different question altogether. Just browsing through what's on ESPN for the next days, I see: - Lots of Sports Center - World Series of Poker (this is what qualifies as sports these days?) - "X-Games" (ditto) - A handful of talk shows about baseball, football or a few other things - Two out-of-market baseball games. - One out-of-market pre-season NFL game (Saints and Cardinals). Granted, that's taken in the doldrums of summer, but still...I'd find it hard to believe that anyone who's not a pretty hardcore sports fan would get all that worked up about what they have on. Certainly nothing that a combination of local news and sports coverage plus talk radio doesn't cover at least as well and for free. I have never argued that people watch a lot of ESPN, that isn't the point. The point is that if you started a Satellite TV package today and you did market research and you asked people what channels that people wanted to be part of your "basic" package (let's say 40 channels), I would think most knowledgeable people would say that the majority of them would have ESPN, ESPN2, and their RSN in that list somewhere.
I'm not saying a lot of people regularly watch it, I am not saying it is worth what ESPN is charging for it, I am just saying that most people expect it to be part of the basic programming package. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  jmallory
join:2005-11-02 Clawson, MI
| Re: They didn't keep prices down said by Dogfather :Horsecrap...if ESPN was backed out and the price of the package dropped as a result, of course people would like it. People pay $14/mo for HBO, and sports fans who want to watch Australian Dick Wrestling, World's Strongest Man and endless Poker reruns can fork over $10 for ESPN. Like I said, I would like to see you market that unless you are going to force every provider to do it and to divide up their tiers in the exact same manner. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  See 7 replies to this post | |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  garyjpete
join:2008-08-05 Idaho Falls, ID
| It seems to me that one point everyone agrees on is that in a free market, the demand of the consumers should dictate the supply of the producers. It is obvious to me, an everything pack subscriber with Dish, that there is enough of a demand for ESPN and every channel package to justify the corporate decision to keep the structure the way it is.
If Dish was to take the risk on it's own to offer a-la-carte programming, who can guarantee that Direct TV will do the same? Who's to say that an a-la-carte programming scheme will not adversely affect the current channel pricing structure? I would love to create my own package and cut my bill in half, but as long as the market demands stay relatively the same, the programming options will not change.
The price per channel with any pay tv service is seriously discounted when it's in a bundle. It's more cost effective and profitable for the networks and service providers that way, and believe it or not, cheaper for the consumer. Breaking these packages up would simply create an increase in the cost per channel to the point where you could easily pay more for less channels and still not be able to reasonably afford the channels you want.
Yes, supply and demand ideally control the market, but the market can break down, and then what do we do? Dish's loss of 25,000 customers is hardly a drop in the bucket, considering the 13+ million that still pay for extra channels they don't watch, be they ESPN or TNT.
Do the math on that. 39.99 a month x 13,000,000 is $519,870,000 a month, x 12 months = $6,238,440,000 per year if every subscriber is only paying for the DVR Advantage top 100 with locals. Do you have any idea how much money 6 billion dollars is? Warren Buffet was at one point the richest man in the world with a net worth of 8 billion dollars, a net worth, not annual gross proceeds! The last quarter's loss of 25,000 customers equates to $999,750 which is nothing considering the slowed growth was still over 150,000 new customers.
When i stop and look at these figures, the Nielsen ratings and my personal preferences don't really make a difference since Dish Network is not a consumer based democracy, but rather a corporation that, like any entity, has to find ways to survive amongst its competition for vital resources, namely you and I. The one we feed is the one that survives, and choose to feed Dish, for the time being, to get what i want out of it. When Dish becomes unreasonable, I can leave it behind for something else. For now, it's the most reasonable option I have for what I want. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  Austinloop
join:2001-08-19 Austin, TX | I don't watch ESPN and their ilk/spawn and I am on DSLreports and have Dish, so there! | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Cheese Premium join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL clubs: | No sports channels here either...I don't really care for them TBH | |
|  |  |  |  |   uid1307457 Premium join:2005-12-30 Tempe, AZ
·Qwest.net
·Convergent Interne..
·DIRECTV
| said by jmallory :said by mahermusic :said by jmallory :Just show me the numbers that state even a "simple" majority (51%) are in agreement with you, we will talk. "Me and my friends" isn't going to cut it. I've even turned off those channels via my TiVo, since noone even watches them. You don't even make a simple majority of DSLreports subscribers let alone Cable and Satellite subscribers. I have no doubt that there are people who don't watch sports at all on Cable and Satellite, but I believe that they are in the minority. 
quote: USA Network wrapped up 2006 as the most-watched ad-supported cable channel, averaging 2.63 million total viewers in prime time over the course of the year, an increase of 13 percent versus 2005.
According to Nielsen Media Research data, USA also beat all comers in the core demos, averaging 1.18 million adults 18-49 (an 11 percent increase over 2005) and 1.19 million adults 25-54 (a 9 percent year-to-year hike), breaking TNT's four-year winning streak among the two categories. USA also notched the best number with adults 18-34 (537,000, up 15 percent versus last year).
In the total cable universe, non-ad-supported Disney closed out the year at number two, averaging 2.54 million viewers in prime, a 20 percent jump from its 2005 performance. Disney claimed 12 of the year's top 100 programs of 2006, reaching its apogee on Aug. 25 with its original movie The Cheetah Girls 2, which debuted to 8.12 million viewers between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m.
Among ad-supported nets, TNT finished on the heels of rival USA, averaging 2.38 million viewers in prime, a dip of 7 percent from the number it posted in 2005. The Turner net also took second among adults 18-49 (1.07 million, down 8 percent) and adults 25-54 (1.14 million, down 8 percent)
i dont see espn here:
»articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/26···et-usa26 quote: USAs view from the top
The reinvented cable network is No. 1 thanks to its president and a few quirky characters.
By Matea Gold March 26, 2008 in print edition E-1
NEW YORK When USA Network holds its annual upfront presentation here this evening to pitch advertisers on upcoming programming, the cable channel wont just be spotlighting its new development slate.
Also on display: the triumphant four-year tenure of its president, Bonnie Hammer, who helped USA regain basic cables top perch.
The channel brought in nearly $700 million in profit last year, an impressive amount even compared with the broadcast networks, including NBC, its corporate sibling, which made about $300 million. USAs success has helped lift Hammers fortunes as well. On Monday, NBC Universal announced it was expanding her domain by giving her oversight of a new cable studio split off from Universal Media Studios and putting her in charge of emerging cable channels such as Chiller and Sleuth.
The only thing surprising about Hammers new responsibilities is that she didnt get them sooner. Since the television veteran took over USA in 2004, it has shaken off its reputation for stale programming and reinvigorated a graying audience with younger viewers.
By wooing World Wrestling Entertainment back to the channel and promoting the likes of Tony Shalhoubs obsessive-compulsive detective Adrian Monk as part of its Characters Welcome brand, USA reclaimed the top spot in prime time on ad-supported cable in 2006 for the first time in six years. Last year, the channel beat its competitors again with a record average of 2.7 million viewers.
So far this quarter, USAs audience is up 7% over the same period last year to nearly 3 million viewers, putting it ahead of the broadcast network the CW for the first time.
it is you that should be proving to us that more people watch ESPN because we have plenty of proof that is not true | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  See 7 replies to this post | |
 |   dvd536 as Mr. Pink as they come Premium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ
| said by Dogfather :Sports should be on its own tier. AMEN! -- When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|  | |  |
|