<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20897653</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:15:16 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:15:16 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20909919</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/891765"><b>Cheese</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  mahermusic <A HREF="/useremail/u/424720"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Cheese <A HREF="/useremail/u/891765"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>He will state he is not in the majority, just watch  ;)<br> </div>Oh please. He's an idiot that doesn't understand the simplicities regarding noone wanting to watch ESPN. No need to watch anything here!<br> </div>:D]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20909919</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:43:47 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20909891</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/424720"><b>mahermusic</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Cheese <A HREF="/useremail/u/891765"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>He will state he is not in the majority, just watch  ;)<br> </div>Oh please. He's an idiot that doesn't understand the simplicities regarding noone wanting to watch ESPN. No need to watch anything here!<br><small>--<br>1/20/09 = The final day of our Retarded Cowboy President!</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20909891</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:39:47 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20908862</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/891765"><b>Cheese</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  mahermusic <A HREF="/useremail/u/424720"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  wentlanc <A HREF="/useremail/u/850183"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills.<br><br>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?<br><br>cw<br> </div>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.  <br> </div>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"... <br> </div>He will state he is not in the majority, just watch  ;)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20908862</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:49:16 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20908541</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/424720"><b>mahermusic</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  wentlanc <A HREF="/useremail/u/850183"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills.<br><br>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?<br><br>cw<br> </div>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.  <br> </div>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"... <br><small>--<br>1/20/09 = The final day of our Retarded Cowboy President!</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20908541</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:52:33 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20903081</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/635340"><b>rahvin112</b></A> : 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.<br><br>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.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20903081</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:06:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20902854</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : See, I have to pay for Anime Channel.  That's it.  I'm moving to Mars.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20902854</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:18:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20901718</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>Easy tiger.  Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare.<br><br>Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them.<br> </div>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.<br> </div> <br><br>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. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20901718</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:16:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20901710</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : Already chip in for Anime (its available here On Demand for free).  HowardTV is a premium On-Demand channel so sorry there. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20901710</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:13:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20901211</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1571362"><b>garyjpete</b></A> : 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.  <br><br>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.  <br><br>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.  <br><br>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.  <br><br>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.  <br><br>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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20901211</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 03:36:36 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900550</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : Don't need to.  FCC proposals being worked out now include kicking off expanded basic into a la carte, channels that cost $0.75 or more.  I'll just bide my time.  Come next year we'll likely have an FCC that doesn't lick the ass of industry and will actually act in the interest of consumers.<br><br>Meanwhile, you want to chip in to pay my Anime Network or HowardTV fee?  Would only be fair considering how much I've contributed to your channels.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900550</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:56:34 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900441</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>... the average consumer is expecting it to be part of the basic tier (along with their RSN) <br> </div>ESPNs horrible ratings show this to be total conjecture.  Looking at their ratings the average consumer couldn't care less about ESPN.<br><br>If these crap sports channels cost providers like average channels do fine.  But when they're so disproportionately high, like the $20 million a month NFL Network wanted ($0.70-$0.90/subscriber) from Comcast, they and their 3 fans can go F themselves.<br><br>Hopefully when Kevin Martin is tossed out on his ass we can get an FCC that will give the power back to subscribers with a la carte.  Then we can stop paying for the ESPN leeches without having to cancel all together.<br> </div>Well if you believe that based on ratings that no one other than me is watching ESPN, go call Brian Roberts at Comcast and tell him he is free to kick ESPN off of his systems because Mr. Mallory in Clawson, Michigan is the only one who watches it and the rest of us can save the $7 a month.  Go ahead, write him an email and copy that email and his response here.  Tell him that based on your research, no more than three of his subscribers will leave his service and that none of his competitors will invite people looking for ESPN to join up with them (just like they didn't with Big Ten Network) instead of his service because they know no one watches it either.  Go ahead, hearing this will make his day because, I guarantee that the only person who probably wants to tell ESPN to go "F" themselves more than you, is him.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900441</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:39:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900375</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>... the average consumer is expecting it to be part of the basic tier (along with their RSN) <br> </div>ESPNs horrible ratings show this to be total conjecture.  Looking at their ratings the average consumer couldn't care less about ESPN.  And when we do see sports channels put on their own tier, few subscribe.<br><br>If these crap sports channels cost providers like average channels do fine.  But when they're so disproportionately high, like the $20 million a month NFL Network wanted ($0.70-$0.90/subscriber) from Comcast, they and their 3 fans can go F themselves.<br><br>Hopefully when Kevin Martin is tossed out on his ass we can get an FCC that will give the power back to subscribers with a la carte.  Then we can stop paying for the ESPN leeches without having to cancel all together.<br><small>--<br>"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders...All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,<br>and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." -Hermann Goering 4/18/46</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900375</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:29:14 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900285</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : All you have proven is that USA is the most watched cable network.  I never said ESPN was.  In fact, if you actually go back and read my posts I have never claimed that anyone other than myself has watched it.  My entire point has been is that the reason it is in the basic tier is that the average consumer is expecting it to be part of the basic tier (along with their RSN) and to be a competitive service in THE CURRENT REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT you have to offer the channel as well.<br><br>That is all I said.  <br><br>Never said anyone watched the channel<br>Never said it was the first place channel in ratings or in the middle of the pack, or even in last place.<br><br>I have said, that we all pay for channels we don't want.  Now if you have no interest in sports, you probably are getting the short end of the stick but if you feel that strongly about it I can only suggest two things.<br><br>1.)  Vote for people who will work to change the regulatory environment to enable ala carte programming. <br><br>2.)  Vote with your wallet and don't subscribe to cable / satellite service.  There are other ways of supporting the programming you like.<br><br>If you are unwilling to do either or both.  Then you are just whining.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900285</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:13:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900019</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : Of course you are.  Everyone is paying for your ESPN subscription whether they watch the zero rating channel or not.  In order to get any service, we have to pay for your ESPN subscription.  You actually think the 3 viewers of ESPN actually cover the cost of those crap channels?  Hardly.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20900019</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 21:28:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899923</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : I'm not leeching off anybody...I am paying for my ESPN subscription (right there in my programming package).  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899923</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 21:12:10 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899739</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : Well than Dish Network and look forward to more subscriber losses due to their high prices thanks in no small part to the channel welfare program that keeps a minority of subs happy.<br><br>I just think it would be nice if the few ESPN fans weren't leeching off other subs and would support their own habits for a change.  But like all welfare recipients they'll attack anyone who dare question their freebees.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899739</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:32:36 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899477</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : Well I'm sorry but some things in life are "take it or leave it."  I'm sorry your parents didn't explain that to you while you were growing up (assuming your an adult and not some 15-year old kid).<br><br>On your second point, P. J. O'Rourke said that nothing is worth more than someone else is willing to pay for it.  Hunter S. Thompson said "You pay for your ticket, and you take your ride."  <br><br>On your third point, you can be critical all you want, but the reality is 1.)  This is an industry wide pricing scheme not just Dish's and 2.)  I think there is more going on here than people don't want to pay for ESPN.  If you want to make an impact on this...vote for people who will represent you, vote with your wallet.<br><br>If Basic cable subscribers don't want to subsidize "my" (sic) sports habit, they are always free not to subscribe.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899477</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:33:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899458</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/891765"><b>Cheese</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>I would go with your logic if ESPN regularly had a lot of events that got big ratings but they don't.  Some weeks they have zero shows or events in the top 20.  The Deuce, ESPN News and Classic are a complete joke.  They should gather of all the sports channels, Fox, ESPN, YES, and put it all on it's own tier because they represent a significant amount of the cable bill (according to providers).<br><br>But I do agree, we need a la carte.  Then let ESPN compete for business rather than relying on ABC-Disney channel extortion and channel welfare.<br> </div>Your not getting what I am saying at all.  <br><br>Here are my points ...<br><br>1.)  The "AVERAGE" consumer expects ESPN, ESPN2, and their local RSN(s) in the basic subscription package.  Not offering it would put your system at a distinct disadvantage over your competitors.  Back in Dish was getting started Charlie swore he would never offer porn (playboy, etc) on his system.  Well, turns out, people who subscribe to Playboy also subscribe to premium channels, sports packages, and pay-per-view and if Charley wanted anything more than a lot of low-margin basic channel only subscribers he needed to add porn to his system.  Charlie, also tried to apply pressure on the RSNs to keep increases small and booted them off the systems for awhile.  All that accomplished was lighting up the Echostar switchboard with people looking to complain and/or cancel their service.  In each case, Charlie had to step off his high horse and do what was right for his business.  Lesson Learned.<br><br>2.)  It is not the ratings per se, it is the demographics that make the sports channels lucrative.  If I was an advertiser I would rather have 100,000 viewers that actually purchase things than 1 million who don't.<br><br>3.)  We all pay for channels we don't want.  That is how this business works for better or worse.  Unfortunately, nothing short of regulation or mass consumer revolt is going to change this model so unless you are going to vote in a liberal government I don't think regulation will be coming nor does it  look like consumers will revolt either.  Most people may not be happy with this arrangement but accept it.<br><br>4.)  If this arrangement is not agreeable to you then simply cancel the service and tell them and any provider that tries to set you up that you will not be subscribing until your conditions are met.  Cable / Satellite isn't a necessity.   In fact, you mentioned that you are a big Discovery Networks fan, so why not just cancel the cable / sat service and take that $600 bucks a year or so and purchase Discovery DVD / Blu-rays with it.  Much better picture and sound quality than you will get from Cable or Satellite and hey all your money goes directly to them and none of it goes to ESPN, FSN, or any other network you don't like.  A much more effective way of showing the people you like their programming and as a side benefit every business related article on DLSreports doesn't turn into an ala carte argument....hey everybody wins!<br> </div>You are under the assumption that a majority of people want ESPN, you have no idea what people want...]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899458</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:28:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899437</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/891765"><b>Cheese</b></A> : No sports channels here either...I don't really care for them TBH]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899437</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:23:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899375</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/377729"><b>dvd536</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Sports should be on its own tier.<br> </div>AMEN!<br><small>--<br>When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899375</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:12:52 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899331</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : There are some rare events like Home Run Derby that can get a decent rating M 18-24, M 25-54 but that programming is so rare as to not justify the extortion pricing ABC charges MSOs and DBS for the channels.  Perhaps if ESPN didn't get the huge channel welfare checks, they would have to improve their programming lineup.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899331</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:05:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899306</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : The ratings don't indicate that the "average" consumer gives two squirts of piss about ESPN or RSNs.  Their ratings are horrible.<br><br>And the difference is these sports channels are very expensive compared to other channels that suck.  <br><br>Again we see the take it or leave it attitude as if I'm not allowed to be critical of Dish Network's policies that are obviously resulting in lost subscribers and I would guess it's over price.<br><br>ESPN sucks ass and that sucking is clearly reflected by their horrible ratings.  These crap sports channels, being as expensive as they are should be treated like other overpriced programing (eg HBO).  Basic cable subs shouldn't be subsidizing your sports habit to the tune of a big chunk of their cable bill.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899306</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:58:28 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899221</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  wentlanc <A HREF="/useremail/u/850183"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills.<br><br>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?<br><br>cw<br> </div>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.  <br> </div>Enabling ala-carte would go a long way to disprove the notion that "a majority" want ESPN.<br><br>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.<br>Most of my peers do likewise - Netflix, Blockbuster, RedBox, the library, rabbit ears, radio and YouTube fill void.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899221</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:41:21 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899214</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>I would go with your logic if ESPN regularly had a lot of events that got big ratings but they don't.  Some weeks they have zero shows or events in the top 20.  The Deuce, ESPN News and Classic are a complete joke.  They should gather of all the sports channels, Fox, ESPN, YES, and put it all on it's own tier because they represent a significant amount of the cable bill (according to providers).<br><br>But I do agree, we need a la carte.  Then let ESPN compete for business rather than relying on ABC-Disney channel extortion and channel welfare.<br> </div>Your not getting what I am saying at all.  <br><br>Here are my points ...<br><br>1.)  The "AVERAGE" consumer expects ESPN, ESPN2, and their local RSN(s) in the basic subscription package.  Not offering it would put your system at a distinct disadvantage over your competitors.  Back in Dish was getting started Charlie swore he would never offer porn (playboy, etc) on his system.  Well, turns out, people who subscribe to Playboy also subscribe to premium channels, sports packages, and pay-per-view and if Charley wanted anything more than a lot of low-margin basic channel only subscribers he needed to add porn to his system.  Charlie, also tried to apply pressure on the RSNs to keep increases small and booted them off the systems for awhile.  All that accomplished was lighting up the Echostar switchboard with people looking to complain and/or cancel their service.  In each case, Charlie had to step off his high horse and do what was right for his business.  Lesson Learned.<br><br>2.)  It is not the ratings per se, it is the demographics that make the sports channels lucrative.  If I was an advertiser I would rather have 100,000 viewers that actually purchase things than 1 million who don't.<br><br>3.)  We all pay for channels we don't want.  That is how this business works for better or worse.  Unfortunately, nothing short of regulation or mass consumer revolt is going to change this model so unless you are going to vote in a liberal government I don't think regulation will be coming nor does it  look like consumers will revolt either.  Most people may not be happy with this arrangement but accept it.<br><br>4.)  If this arrangement is not agreeable to you then simply cancel the service and tell them and any provider that tries to set you up that you will not be subscribing until your conditions are met.  Cable / Satellite isn't a necessity.   In fact, you mentioned that you are a big Discovery Networks fan, so why not just cancel the cable / sat service and take that $600 bucks a year or so and purchase Discovery DVD / Blu-rays with it.  Much better picture and sound quality than you will get from Cable or Satellite and hey all your money goes directly to them and none of it goes to ESPN, FSN, or any other network you don't like.  A much more effective way of showing the people you like their programming and as a side benefit every business related article on DLSreports doesn't turn into an ala carte argument....hey everybody wins!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899214</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:39:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899076</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : 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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899076</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:10:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899036</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1307457"><b>uid1307457</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  mahermusic <A HREF="/useremail/u/424720"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>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.<br> </div>I've even turned off those channels via my TiVo, since noone even watches them.<br> </div>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.  <br> </div> :uhh:<br><br> <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>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.<br><br>According to Nielsen Media Research data, USA also beat all comers in the<br>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).<br><br>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.<br><br>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) <br><hr></blockquote><br><br>i dont see espn here:<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/26/entertainment/et-usa26" >articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/26&middot;&middot;&middot;et-usa26</A><br> <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>USA&#146;s view from the top<br><br>The reinvented cable network is No. 1 thanks to its president and a few quirky characters.<br><br>By Matea Gold<br>March 26, 2008 in print edition E-1<br><br>NEW YORK &#150; When USA Network holds its annual upfront presentation here this evening to pitch advertisers on upcoming programming, the cable channel won&#146;t just be spotlighting its new development slate.<br><br>Also on display: the triumphant four-year tenure of its president, Bonnie Hammer, who helped USA regain basic cable&#146;s top perch.<br><br>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. USA&#146;s success has helped lift Hammer&#146;s 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 &#147;emerging&#148; cable channels such as Chiller and Sleuth.<br><br>The only thing surprising about Hammer&#146;s new responsibilities is that she didn&#146;t 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.<br><br>By wooing World Wrestling Entertainment back to the channel and promoting the likes of Tony Shalhoub&#146;s obsessive-compulsive detective Adrian Monk as part of its &#147;Characters Welcome&#148; 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.<br><br>So far this quarter, USA&#146;s 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.<br><hr></blockquote><br><br><b>it is you that should be proving to us that more people watch ESPN because we have plenty of proof that is not true</b>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899036</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:02:35 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899027</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1307457"><b>uid1307457</b></A> : ...]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20899027</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:01:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898937</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1307457"><b>uid1307457</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>Easy tiger.  Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare.<br><br>Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them.<br> </div>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.<br> </div>espn can go bankrupt for all i care]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898937</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 17:43:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898893</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/455278"><b>Austinloop</b></A> : I don't watch ESPN and their ilk/spawn and I am on DSLreports and have Dish, so there!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898893</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 17:33:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898714</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : I would go with your logic if ESPN regularly had a lot of events that got big ratings but they don't.  Some weeks they have zero shows or events in the top 20.  The Deuce, ESPN News and Classic are a complete joke.  They should gather of all the sports channels, Fox, ESPN, YES, and put it all on it's own tier because they represent a significant amount of the cable bill (according to providers).<br><br>But I do agree, we need a la carte.  Then let ESPN compete for business rather than relying on ABC-Disney channel extortion and channel welfare.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898714</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:57:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898701</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>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.<br> </div>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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898701</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:54:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898612</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : 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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898612</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:41:07 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898603</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>            :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>             :</small><br><br>Easy tiger.  Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare.<br><br>Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them.<br> </div>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.<br> </div>Look at their ratings, they suck horribly.  Even huge games like Yankees Red Sox can't even muster a 3.  They only had 2 events in the top twenty with only Nascar pulling better than a 4.  1 decently rated event a week certainly isn't worth the dough they're charging.  The week before, only Home Run Derby and pregame cracked the top 20 for ESPN.  The week before that, the ONLY ESPN show to make the top 20 was another Yankees Red Sox game and it didn't even pull a 3.  More people watched WWE than that game.  The July 1st Nielsens; not a SINGLE event or show of ANY ESPN network broke into the top 20.  <br><br>ESPN aside from an occasional NASCAR event or big baseball game (which would get decent ratings no matter what channel it's on) can't muster any decent ratings.  NONE.<br><br>Hell, look at the ratings for the so-called popular SportsCenter.  They can't even pull a single point.  They get a 0.7-0.9.  That's the kind of numbers infomercials pull.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898603</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:39:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898542</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : Absolutely...bring on a la carte.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898542</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:27:21 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898437</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/679831"><b>fancydancer</b></A> : <div class="bquote">said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A><br>Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them.<br> </div>By the same token, News (or insert channel type) channels should be on their own tier since I don't watch them and therefore should not have to subsidize them for everyone else. Gimme a break!  :uhh:<br><small>--<br>Thank you for keeping this a work-free environment!</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898437</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:09:11 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898381</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Corydon <A HREF="/useremail/u/1530301"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>Without solid numbers, you're both just blowing smoke.<br><br>Incidentally, the question isn't whether a majority watch sports on television, but whether they watch ESPN...a completely different question altogether.<br><br>Just browsing through what's on ESPN for the next days, I see:<br><br>- Lots of Sports Center<br>- World Series of Poker (this is what qualifies as sports these days?)<br>- "X-Games" (ditto)<br>- A handful of talk shows about baseball, football or a few other things<br>- Two out-of-market baseball games.<br>- One out-of-market pre-season NFL game (Saints and Cardinals).<br><br>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.<br> </div>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.  <br><br>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.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898381</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:58:57 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898314</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  wentlanc <A HREF="/useremail/u/850183"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills.<br><br>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?<br><br>cw<br> </div>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.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898314</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:45:25 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898243</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1530301"><b>Corydon</b></A> : Without solid numbers, you're both just blowing smoke.<br><br>Incidentally, the question isn't whether a majority watch sports on television, but whether they watch ESPN...a completely different question altogether.<br><br>Just browsing through what's on ESPN for the next days, I see:<br><br>- Lots of Sports Center<br>- World Series of Poker (this is what qualifies as sports these days?)<br>- "X-Games" (ditto)<br>- A handful of talk shows about baseball, football or a few other things<br>- Two out-of-market baseball games.<br>- One out-of-market pre-season NFL game (Saints and Cardinals).<br><br>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.<br><small>--<br>"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too."</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898243</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:33:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898191</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/850183"><b>wentlanc</b></A> : I don't watch them either. And if 51% do, let the other 49% of us cut that $5 - $6 from our bills.<br><br>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?<br><br>cw]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898191</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:25:57 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898119</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  mahermusic <A HREF="/useremail/u/424720"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>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.<br> </div>I've even turned off those channels via my TiVo, since noone even watches them.<br> </div>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.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898119</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:11:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898097</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/424720"><b>mahermusic</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>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.<br> </div>I've even turned off those channels via my TiVo, since noone even watches them.<br><small>--<br>1/20/09 = The final day of our Retarded Cowboy President!</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898097</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:06:21 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898091</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/897844"><b>N3OGH</b></A> : I can't remember the last time I watched ESPN.<br><br>I watch more Weather Channel and News channels than anything else.<br><br>Maybe History, Discovery, and AMC.<br><br>But I agree, at this point ESPN and other sports channels should be on a separate tier, given their cost.<br><small>--<br>Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power&#133;</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898091</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:05:09 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898033</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  john1290 <A HREF="/useremail/u/909612"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>   :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>    :</small><br><br>Sports should be on its own tier.<br> </div>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.<br></div>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.<br> </div>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.<br><br>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.<br><br> ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898033</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:55:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898032</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/522329"><b>hobgoblin</b></A> : Top 20 Cable shows <br><br>Rank Shows NET DAY(S) Live+SD HH Rating Viewers Live+SD (000) <br>1 CLOSER, THE TNT MONDAY 4.7 7,058 <br>2 NASCAR SPRINT CUP L (BRICKYARD 400) ESPN SUNDAY 4.3 6,668 <br>3 HANNAH & MILEY:BEST OF DSNY SATURDAY 3.0 5,864 <br>4 MONK USA FRIDAY 3.1 5,062 <br>5 WWE ENTERTAINMENT (WWE RAW) USA MONDAY 3.0 4,961 <br>6 BURN NOTICE USA THURSDAY 3.0 4,760 <br>7 SAVING GRACE TNT MONDAY 3.1 4,571 <br>8 FOOD NETWORK STAR FOOD SUNDAY 2.8 4,508 <br>9 WWE ENTERTAINMENT (WWE RAW) USA MONDAY 2.7 4,494 <br>10 PSYCH USA FRIDAY 2.8 4,484 <br>11 ICARLY NICK FRIDAY 2.7 4,446 <br>12 LAW & ORDER: CI (ORIG) USA SUNDAY 2.9 4,321 <br>13 MLB SUNDAY NIGHT L (YANKEES/RED SOX) ESPN SUNDAY 2.8 4,230 <br>14 IN PLAIN SIGHT USA SUNDAY 2.8 4,174 <br>15 INCREDIBLES, THE DSNY SUNDAY 2.4 3,922 <br>16 CAMP ROCK DSNY THURSDAY 2.4 3,913 <br>17 ICARLY NICK FRIDAY 2.3 3,815 <br>18 TBS PRIME MOVIE (LAST HOLIDAY) TBSC SUNDAY 2.4 3,813 <br>19 S HANNAH MONTANA(S)-07/26/2008 DSNY SATURDAY 2.3 3,768 <br>20 SPONGEBOB NICK SUNDAY 2.4 3,716 <br><br>Not seeing many of your channels on there<br><small>--<br>"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." <br>- Ralph Waldo Emerson <br></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898032</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:55:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898012</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Easy tiger.  Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare.<br><br>Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them.<br> </div>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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898012</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:53:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897984</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : Easy tiger.  Good for you and your football but there are quite a few people not interested in channel welfare.<br><br>Sports fans should pay to support their very expensive channels instead of expecting everyone else to pay for them.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897984</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:48:41 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897977</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/909612"><b>john1290</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  jmallory <A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>Sports should be on its own tier.<br> </div>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.<br></div>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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897977</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:47:21 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897924</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>   :</small><br><br>Given ESPNs low ratings I would disagree.<br> </div>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.  <br><br>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.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897924</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:38:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897870</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/375661"><b>Josimars</b></A> : One of the reason why they are going to lose more customers including me is the fact that they no longer carry GOL TV. They need to get their act together before the new European soccer season starts or esle adios at least from me]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897870</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:27:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897869</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : Given ESPNs low ratings I would disagree.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897869</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:27:41 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897748</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Sports should be on its own tier.<br> </div>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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897748</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:03:23 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897660</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : Sports should be on its own tier.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897660</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:42:52 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897653</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1284576"><b>jmallory</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Dogfather <A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>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.<br> </div>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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897653</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:41:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>They didn&#x27;t keep prices down</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897310</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1514516"><b>Dogfather</b></A> : 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.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897310</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:24:20 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
