dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1444
share rss forum feed


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

1 recommendation

Tennis Channel really?

can't really blame the carriers this time. The tennis channel should be lucky it's gets carried AT ALL. They have hte nerve to ask for ANY money.


n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

1 recommendation

said by 88615298:

can't really blame the carriers this time. The tennis channel should be lucky it's gets carried AT ALL. They have hte nerve to ask for ANY money.

I agree. Watched it once or twice and was bored to tears. the Tennis Channel should have to PAY to be carried. Either that or it should be an ala carte channel that only interested parties subscribe too.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.


fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to 88615298
said by 88615298:

can't really blame the carriers this time. The tennis channel should be lucky it's gets carried AT ALL. They have hte nerve to ask for ANY money.

Obviously they must have some content that people want to watch otherwise there would be no contact dispute.

moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD

1 recommendation

said by fifty nine:

said by 88615298:

can't really blame the carriers this time. The tennis channel should be lucky it's gets carried AT ALL. They have hte nerve to ask for ANY money.

Obviously they must have some content that people want to watch otherwise there would be no contact dispute.

And this brings in the discussion about ala carte channels. If the people of Tennis Channel think they have a product, they can make it a pay by the month channel like HBO, Showtime, etc. My guess is that they simply want more money and know that not many people want to watch it to make it profitable unless they are part of the "expanded basic" service.

Madtown
Premium
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA

1 recommendation

reply to 88615298
Who cares, I don't watch tennis anyways, and no one I know watch tennis anyways, so it not anyone in the world cares anyways.


fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy:

And this brings in the discussion about ala carte channels. If the people of Tennis Channel think they have a product, they can make it a pay by the month channel like HBO, Showtime, etc. My guess is that they simply want more money and know that not many people want to watch it to make it profitable unless they are part of the "expanded basic" service.

Then in that case the problem is self correcting. If many people don't watch, they can simply tell them to go away and they will either agree to a smaller rate increase or none at all, or simply be dropped.

Or, it could very well be that there are significant numbers of people watching the channel and the cable company will have to come to an agreement with the channel that may include a significant rate increase.


trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2
reply to 88615298
I think all the people in this thread will agree with me in saying that there's no loss in losing this channel.


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to fifty nine
The problem is that the Tennis Channel is demanding to be placed on a basic subscription tier. This leaves no room for the TV provider to recover the increased cost through more expensive tiers or even a sports package. The only way to get more money is to charge everyone higher rates, and not just those 6-10% of their customer base that actually wants this channel.

They really need to restructure and package channel types within more distinct genres. Cartoons and children's programming should be on a separate tier. Sports belongs on another. Science and nature stuff can go into their own group. This would still allow for smaller, niche channels to survive, but it could keep the cost reasonable and allow customers to have a bit of control in the market, other than the all or nothing use it or lose it "choice" that is currently forced upon us.

The current business model is not going to last at the rate it is going. Something better be done soon.


fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2

1 recommendation

They can demand all the want. If there isn't significant viewership they don't have the upper hand and the cableco can tell them to pound sand.


Quiglag
God is Love
Premium
join:2004-09-19
Ontario, CA
reply to trparky
Even as a tennis fan, I have no problem loosing the tennis channel. All of the majors are shown on basic cable channels anyways. Watching the game now on ESPN2.
--
Tool Reviews


Tennis Fan

@ed.gov
reply to trparky
A lot of people care, including me. I am dropping FIOS and going to Directv because of this fiasco.


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

said by Tennis Fan :

A lot of people care, including me. I am dropping FIOS and going to Directv because of this fiasco.

Sadly, it is the Tennis Channel that is just as much to blame for this mess, if not more so than the TV provider. Unfortunately, your actions only strengthen and embolden the content provider's position. Next year it will be DirecTV in negotiations and asking you to pay an additional $5 on your bill. It will never end until somebody finally stands up to these media giants.

It is too bad that FiOS does not have enough viewers to make a significant dent in the Tennis Channel's viewer base. Comcast and DirecTV could seriously influence these constant rate increases if they stood firm and refused to play along. We will hit that point soon, as the customers that pay the TV providers are not going to be able to keep up with the rate hikes.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

1 recommendation

reply to n2jtx
In my opinion all of them should be ala carte. In fact, they should be "on demand" ala carte. Why pay for a whole month of any channel if once a month there happens to be something of interest?

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

1 recommendation

reply to jmn1207
Yeah but if lumped into a sports package, how many football fans watch tennis? I know that we all pay for ESPN and there's quite a cross section of folks that don't care much for ANY sports programming and this probably doesn't seem fair to those folks and they would support having a "sports free" package.

I don't have anything in particular against tennis. There are courts in my subdivision and for pure recreation I play every now and then with my kids. However, I don't follow it and lumping it in with a sports channel package seems unfair.

I might buy a sports package for basketball, football, baseball and hockey but IMO, tennis is fringe. I suppose it depends on how much the Tennis Channel wants per month, per subscriber. My guess is that's part of the problem. It could be significant unless it's lumped into the millions of basic service subscribers.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to Madtown
I have similar feelings but if they succeed in demanding to be part of the basic package, that puts more pressure on the rate everyone pays for the channels most of us do enjoy.


n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

1 recommendation

reply to rradina
said by rradina:

In my opinion all of them should be ala carte. In fact, they should be "on demand" ala carte. Why pay for a whole month of any channel if once a month there happens to be something of interest?

I am all for ala carte. There are perhaps 15 channels total I would subscribe to, excluding broadcast basic.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.


Tennis Fan

@ed.gov
reply to jmn1207
I don't care who is to blame. I don't like having the channel I watch the most cut off in the middle of the most important tennis tournament in North America. It has opened my eyes to what Directv is offering now, which are some good offers such as free NFL Sunday ticket also.


trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

1 recommendation

Yeah... but you're doing exactly what the media giants want. More money!

We need to start putting the screws to the media giants and tell them no more rate hikes.


djrobx
Premium
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VOIPO

1 recommendation

reply to rradina
We need the gubbermint to step in and prohibit content providers from bundling channels. ESPN gets ransom deals because its parent (ABC) can threaten to pull the main network feed if demands aren't met.

Until that happens there is no chance for us to have ala carte or tiers that make rational sense.


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to Tennis Fan
Yes, the reason this happened is precisely because customers like you run to the next TV provider, or the TV provider caves during negotiations and we all see higher bills.

This scenario will play out in the near future with DirecTV. Eventually it will impact one of your favorite channels again. Maybe next time it will be a channel you don't care at all about, but DirecTV will raise your rates to keep the channel around for the vocal minority that do watch it?

The practice of having the customer switch providers to get the channels they want to see is driving the prices artificially high, and this is only a short-term solution that will eventually come crashing to a halt. It is not a sustainable business and it is destined to fail in the end.

Look around, it is already begun.

»gigaom.com/video/cord-cutters-q2-2011/


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to djrobx
said by djrobx:

We need the gubbermint to step in and prohibit content providers from bundling channels. ESPN gets ransom deals because its parent (ABC) can threaten to pull the main network feed if demands aren't met.

Until that happens there is no chance for us to have ala carte or tiers that make rational sense.

The saddest part of this whole mess is that the prices will continue to soar year after year as the greedy parties keep making ludicrous demands. Eventually, the customer base will dwindle as we simply can't afford it anymore, and our corrupt government will most likely use my tax money to pay for a bailout that only adds fuel to the fire, as this money will surely go to the elite top as an award, while the working stiffs will take the brunt of the punishment in layoffs and reduced benefits.


StudioTech
Off The Air

join:2001-10-10
Edison, NJ
reply to Tennis Fan
said by Tennis Fan :

I don't care who is to blame. I don't like having the channel I watch the most cut off in the middle of the most important tennis tournament in North America. It has opened my eyes to what Directv is offering now, which are some good offers such as free NFL Sunday ticket also.

You do realize that at this point of the tournament, almost all of the matches are going to be either on ESPN2 or CBS anyway and all of the matches can we watched live on the US Open's website, right?

Joe12345678

join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL
reply to jmn1207
canada is like that.


Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
kudos:2
reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:

They can demand all the want. If there isn't significant viewership they don't have the upper hand and the cableco can tell them to pound sand.

And that's what Mediacom did. This channel disappeared on Sep 3. Permanently. As in 'we won't carry it anymore' and not 'we are trying to work out some things'

Every person so far reacted like this

'Huh? There was a tennis channel?'

I hope golf channels are next.
--
I speak for myself, not my employer.


dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4
reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:

They can demand all the want. If there isn't significant viewership they don't have the upper hand and the cableco can tell them to pound sand.

this channel would just die out if we had true ala carte.
--
Oh YES! let me drop everything i'm doing regardless of who it affects to deal with your petty little problem!

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to 88615298
I fail to see how picking the US Open as a time to do this adds anything to their argument when the open is carried on mass carried channels already.

Its not quite like if Fox where to be pulling the plug on Superbowl Sunday(though id imagine they would get sued by the NFL for loss of ad revenue if they did that in a carriage fight with a big CATV provider)
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

1 recommendation

reply to jmn1207
Don't put it past the government to let them fail and then pump more money into PBS. All part of their plan to create state-run media and control information.

OK -- I know that sounds like a 9/11 conspiracy theorist but I think we need to get rid of PBS and not ever rescue failed businesses. There's a reason species survive on this planet. Billions of predecessor species died. Interfering with this natural selection process is dangerous...

I also think we need to reinstate the regulation that stops content creators from being owned or owning content delivery. It troubles me that Comcast bought NBC/Universal and the "gubbermint" rubber stamped it.