SuperWISP
join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY
| ESPN360: Boycott and possible class action lawsuit
An interesting thing happened the other day: A user told me that a Web site was refusing to allow him access to programming he wanted to see (and could not find on any other site) unless he switched ISPs. I checked, and the site -- Disney's ESPN360.com, was indeed doing this. When I or any of my users try to access the site, a big, red box pops up in the middle of the screen. It says:
ESPN360.com is available at no charge to fans who receive their high-speed internet connection from an ESPN360.com affiliated internet service provider. ESPN360.com is also available to fans that access the internet from U.S. college campuses and U.S. military bases.
Your current computer network falls outside of these categories. Here’s how you can get access to ESPN360.com.
1. Switch to an ESPN360.com affiliated internet service provider or to contact your internet service provider and request ESPN360.com. Click here to enter your ZIP code and find out which providers in your area carry offer ESPN360.com
2. For Verizon Customers Only: Sign-in using remote access if you already get ESPN360.com
I eventually found a number for the service, deep within the bowels of the Disney Corporation, and called to find out what the score is, since I obviously could not view the sporting events to see for myself.  As it turns out, ESPN360 won't sell their content directly to a customer. ESPN wants bill us, the ISPs, per customer to permit access to the programming. And it's "all or nothing;" you can't do a separate tier of service to recover the cost.
What's more, the fee per customer for a small ISP like myself would be $0.79 per user, but would be substantially less for a larger one. (And universities -- which are themselves ISPs -- inexplicably get the service for free.) So, our large competitors would have to raise their rates less per customer than smaller ISPs, giving them a big advantage. (ESPN also seems not to realize that ISPs' margins are tiny as it is. I make about $2.50 per month on a basic residential customer now, and so their fee would take an outrageous 1/3 of my profit.)
Worse still, anyone can see what would happen if this nasty business model caught on. Every ISP would have to pay individually for dozens of Web sites, and the big ones would get lower prices for every one. What's more, we'd have to keep raising our prices -- something which consumers hate when cable companies do it due to similar pricing strategies on the part of ESPN and other content vendors. It's bad enough that content providers are trying to transfer their costs to ISPs in other ways (e.g. by doing P2P, so that we pay for their upstream bandwidth costs).... This one could break the camel's back.
ISPs must band together and boycott ESPN360 and any other content providers. What's more, because ESPN360 is actively trying to get our customers, with whom we have business relationships and contracts, to switch away from us, we should seriously consider a class action lawsuit for tortious interference with business relationships and contracts. |
|
mrbueno
join:2002-08-03
US | Why should I tell someone else how to do business? Let the market decide. Does it suck? YES! Will it work? It might.
The market will tell us what they want. We must always be playing with the big boys. |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK | Funny - these same people are the ones begging for net neutrality. I could just block all Disney pages on my ISP - LOL, but I would face problems.
--
»magicwisp.com |
|
mrbueno
join:2002-08-03
US
2 edits | reply to SuperWISP
Well, you wouldn't be blocking their customers so I don't see why you would have a problem.
Redirect to ESPN.com
Also, if you can't beat them, join them. Counter offer 35 cents per user. |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK | Oh if I do a redirect - it would be to a page that described their total prejudice towards small business.
--
»magicwisp.com |
|
SuperWISP
join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY
| reply to mrbueno
said by mrbueno  :Why should I tell someone else how to do business? That's exactly what ESPN360 is trying to do: tell us how to do business. We've got to say, "no." |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK | reply to jdmarti1
This really ticks me off - content providers complain that they have to have equality on my network. Yet they want to be able to exclude me? I am not allowed to block content - but they block my network? |
|
mrbueno
join:2002-08-03
US
1 edit | reply to SuperWISP
So don't sign with them. I'm not going to force them to court over it. I might block their site, but no court.
By the way, you CAN create two tiers of service if you want. Block the lower paying customers and allow the higher paying ones. I don't see where you are stopped from doing that.
Hmm... $3/month for ESPN360.com I like the sound of that. |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK
| said by mrbueno :So don't sign with them. I'm not going to force them to court over it. I might block their site, but no court. By the way, you CAN create two tiers of service if you want. Block the lower paying customers and allow the higher paying ones. I don't see where you are stopped from doing that. Hmm... $3/month for ESPN360.com I like the sound of that. No - us having to sign to carry content is wrong, and anyone that does it is opening a big can of worms. |
|
mrbueno
join:2002-08-03
US
1 edit | Sure, it's an awful idea. My statement was tongue-in-cheek.
Bad news though, AT&T and Verizon are on board. |
|
SuperWISP
join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY
| reply to mrbueno
said by mrbueno :Counter offer 35 cents per user. Great. That's only 12% of my profit. Eight deals like that, and I am unprofitable. Sure, sounds like a sweet deal. NOT.
And where do they get off telling my customers to switch? That deserves a lawsuit right there. |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK
| reply to mrbueno
As big fighters of Net Neutrality - I am wondering if they are on board looking at the future. Let's face it - if this were to happen on a large scale, the only folks that would survive are the big boys. The funny thing is it totally goes against everything that the content providers are fighting for, because it makes it not possible for a large segment of the population to not be able to see their content. Is ESPN being greedy and in the process cutting their own throats? |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK | My other complaint is the fact they would charge me for every subscriber - not the ones that wanted the service. How can I charge my customers for a service that is not requested by them? That would be a very bad service model? |
|
superdog
I Need A Drink
Premium,MVM
join:2001-07-13
Lebanon, PA | They can kiss my lily white a.. My users will not be getting that website, that's for sure!
--
»www.wavecrazy.net
|
|
mrbueno
join:2002-08-03
US
1 edit | reply to jdmarti1
said by jdmarti1 :My other complaint is the fact they would charge me for every subscriber - not the ones that wanted the service. How can I charge my customers for a service that is not requested by them? That would be a very bad service model? *DEVIL'S ADVOCATE*
Do you include email accounts in your costs? Does everyone use those addresses or do they use Yahoo and Gmail addys?
If not you are charging them for a service they don't use and are "unfair".
SuperWISP, 12% of your profit versus 100% lost if the client goes elsewhere. We all have decisions to make.
*/ADVOCATE*
Having said that, a lawsuit isn't the answer to every problem you see. Check out ISPs solution to the Prema Toy Lawsuit against a 12 year old boy. DNS Redirection is a powerful tool and still within our legal rights. Boycotting isn't quite the right word, but yeah I am down for a little civil unrest. |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK
| Lawsuit is definitely wrong at most times, although this particular thing really gets me boiling.
Yes I offer an email address. Not all use it - but I also have some non customers that use the email addresses.
--
»magicwisp.com |
|
SuperWISP
join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY
| reply to jdmarti1
You're right. The content providers are the first to argue for "network neutrality" -- they don't want ISPs to be able to block their sites unless they pay money (not that we're trying to do that). But they want the right to block ISPs unless they pay money. Shows what's really going on in the "network neutrality" debates. It's really content providers going after ISPs in every way possible. |
|
shorthairedp
join:2005-11-21
united state
| reply to SuperWISP
They have a product, they are choosing a product channel. Become a channel Parner.
Panasonic wont allow you to sell or install their business class phone systems unles you pay for certification.
Requiring channel partnerships limits your customer base, but it also increases the quality of the customer experience. A small underfunded (usually sporadic in quality of service) ISP cant affor to offer espn360, which is good in that those customers wont have a bad experience with espn product due to network performance.
Just like panasonic end users will theoretically have less issues with the product since not every yahoo with a punch down can install them.
It sucks to not get the keys to the executive washroom all the time. |
|
jdmarti1
Jack
join:2004-06-15
Oilton, OK
| said by shorthairedp :They have a product, they are choosing a product channel. Become a channel Parner.
Panasonic wont allow you to sell or install their business class phone systems unles you pay for certification.
Requiring channel partnerships limits your customer base, but it also increases the quality of the customer experience. A small underfunded (usually sporadic in quality of service) ISP cant affor to offer espn360, which is good in that those customers wont have a bad experience with espn product due to network performance.
Just like panasonic end users will theoretically have less issues with the product since not every yahoo with a punch down can install them.
It sucks to not get the keys to the executive washroom all the time. I'm sorry the internet is not the same as a PBX or any other product. If the end user has an issue with the connection, then they have the right to move. I just don't see this as an option. I don't understand how anybody can allow this to happen. Just as I don't think it should be allowed for a company to prioritize their voip platform over any other. P2P I have no problems with, until it has it's act cleaned up and starts getting used more for legitimate purposes than illegal file sharing. When the folks running the P2P sites decide to police themselves and become legitimate, then we should have to allow it on our networks too.
--
»magicwisp.com |
|
AnonDog
@verizon.net
| reply to mrbueno
said by mrbueno :Well, you wouldn't be blocking their customers so I don't see why you would have a problem. Redirect to ESPN.com Also, if you can't beat them, join them. Counter offer 35 cents per user. :P I like this idea. Just redirect anything going to Disney to ESPN360, the customer gets the message from Disney and Disney can pay per pair of eyeballs. :P |
|
