dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
1 edit | reply to Matt
Re: $700M doesn't sound much like crippled to me
said by Matt  :And the NFL has nothing to do with why cable TV rates are high. So, when the NFL and sports networks are asking for more money, the cable company eats that cost and doesn't raise our rates?
Monday Night Football is on ESPN.
ESPN is notorious for charging higher and higher rates to cablecos(and Sat) for the "right" to carry the network.
Since ESPN is carrying MNF, doesn't that trickle down to *us* as higher rates?
MNF is NFL.
MNF is on ESPN.
ESPN is on Cable.
NFL wants big bucks to carry MNF.
ESPN likes to raise rates on a whim.
Cable passes that cost to *ME*/us.
Conclusion: NFL does cause cable rates to be high and increase.
Right?
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| said by dadkins :said by Matt :And the NFL has nothing to do with why cable TV rates are high. So, when the NFL and sports networks are asking for more money, the cable company eats that cost and doesn't raise our rates? Monday Night Football is on ESPN. ESPN is notorious for charging higher and higher rates to cablecos(and Sat) for the "right" to carry the network. Since ESPN is carrying MNF, doesn't that trickle down to *us* as higher rates? MNF is NFL. MNF is on ESPN. ESPN is on Cable. NFL wants big bucks to carry MNF. ESPN likes to raise rates on a whim. Cable passes that cost to *ME*/us. Conclusion: NFL does cause cable rates to be high and increase. Right? All NFL broadcasts are up for bid when the contract expires. ESPN outbid ABC for Monday Night football.
So your conclusion is a logical fallacy. Just because two things are indirectly related doesn't mean one is the result of the other or directly responsible for a specific result. In this case, the NFL isn't responsible for cable rate hikes because ESPN outbid all the other networks for the rights to carry Monday Night Football.
ABC/CBS/NBC would be the more appropriate entities (but equally incorrect) to blame. Because they didn't bid a higher amount you now have to purchase cable to watch MNF rather than simply attaching rabbit ears to your TV. |
|
rifleman69
join:2006-04-12
Beaverton, OR
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by Matt :said by dadkins :said by Matt :And the NFL has nothing to do with why cable TV rates are high. So, when the NFL and sports networks are asking for more money, the cable company eats that cost and doesn't raise our rates? Monday Night Football is on ESPN. ESPN is notorious for charging higher and higher rates to cablecos(and Sat) for the "right" to carry the network. Since ESPN is carrying MNF, doesn't that trickle down to *us* as higher rates? MNF is NFL. MNF is on ESPN. ESPN is on Cable. NFL wants big bucks to carry MNF. ESPN likes to raise rates on a whim. Cable passes that cost to *ME*/us. Conclusion: NFL does cause cable rates to be high and increase. Right? All NFL broadcasts are up for bid when the contract expires. ESPN outbid ABC for Monday Night football. So your conclusion is a logical fallacy. Just because two things are indirectly related doesn't mean one is the result of the other or directly responsible for a specific result. In this case, the NFL isn't responsible for cable rate hikes because ESPN outbid all the other networks for the rights to carry Monday Night Football. ABC/CBS/NBC would be the more appropriate entities (but equally incorrect) to blame. Because they didn't bid a higher amount you now have to purchase cable to watch MNF rather than simply attaching rabbit ears to your TV. ESPN and ABC are the same company nitwit. |
|
OSUGoose
join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
clubs:
·AT&T Midwest
 ·Cingular Wireless
·Verizon BroadbandA..
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Matt
Which would be fine, cept abc owns ESPN, or something like that. And perhaps ABC wanted that time slot open to have their own prime time shows run, and now they enshure both stations are making money, non sports watchers can go to abc, and they can charge ad people based on viewership, sports watchers to espn, for same reason. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to rifleman69
said by rifleman69 :ESPN and ABC are the same company nitwit. Actually, Disney owns them both. ESPN and ABC are operated as subsidiaries. So ABC does not own or control ESPN whatsoever. Really, before calling someone a nitwit you should at least do a cursory Google search. |
|
robbob340
K.U. Sweet 16
Premium
join:2001-02-15
Wichita, KS
| reply to Matt
said by Matt :All NFL broadcasts are up for bid when the contract expires. ESPN outbid ABC for Monday Night football. So your conclusion is a logical fallacy. Just because two things are indirectly related doesn't mean one is the result of the other or directly responsible for a specific result. In this case, the NFL isn't responsible for cable rate hikes because ESPN outbid all the other networks for the rights to carry Monday Night Football. ABC/CBS/NBC would be the more appropriate entities (but equally incorrect) to blame. Because they didn't bid a higher amount you now have to purchase cable to watch MNF rather than simply attaching rabbit ears to your TV. But with Disney owning both ABC and ESPN one has to draw the logical conclusion that they (both Disney and the NFL) realized they could make higher profits going the route of cable/satellite (maybe less viewers from an advertisements standpoint, but hey, they can make up for it by increasing the costs of ESPN) over ABC (who had meandering ratings for a number of years prior to the switch). In turn cable/satellite subscribers are now paying for the "privilege" of MNF instead of being available on a free basis. In a few years I fully expect the Fox NFL games to go to their cable channels also. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC | An assumption does not make a conclusion logical. I would argue that assumptions are more often wrong rather than right. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
 ·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP
| reply to Matt
He didn't say ABC owned ESPN. He said they're the same company (eg The Walt Disney Company) in response you claiming that ABC was bidding against ESPN for programming rights which is why you got called a nitwit. It was Disney that made the call moving their MNF broadcast to ESPN in order to prop up ratings and free up Monday nights on their regular network.
Disney bids against the likes of News Corp., NBC-Universal-Vendi, Turner and CBS. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to Matt
Your assumption that assumptions are more often wrong rather than right is conjecture. |
|
DannyZ
Gentoo Fanboy
Premium
join:2003-01-29
Erie, PA | reply to Matt
It is functionally the exact same company since ABC Sports merged with ESPN and _all_ sports broadcast on ABC is by ESPN |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by DannyZ :It is functionally the exact same company since ABC Sports merged with ESPN and _all_ sports broadcast on ABC is by ESPN You are correct. ABC was losing money on Monday Night Football, so Disney requested they move it to ESPN. I read the specifics somewhere once, but I can't remember where. |
|
DannyZ
Gentoo Fanboy
Premium
join:2003-01-29
Erie, PA | That was after the merge I believe. |
|
