said by mahermusic :

Oh please. He's an idiot that doesn't understand the simplicities regarding noone wanting to watch ESPN. No need to watch anything here!

said by Cheese :

He will state he is not in the majority, just watch

said by mahermusic :

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"...

said by jmallory :

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.

said by jmallory :

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.

said by Dogfather :

ESPNs horrible ratings show this to be total conjecture. Looking at their ratings the average consumer couldn't care less about ESPN.

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.

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.

said by jmallory :

... the average consumer is expecting it to be part of the basic tier (along with their RSN)

said by jmallory :

Your not getting what I am saying at all.

Here are my points ...

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.

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.

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.

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!

said by Dogfather :

Sports should be on its own tier.