dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
90436
share rss forum feed


nascar

join:2000-02-28
Verona, NJ
kudos:3
reply to brownk

Re: [HD] FCC Rules on Verizon Access to MSG HD

They better have room. MSG's HD means plenty of happy current and future FiOS customers.


icemannyr1

join:2001-04-11
Township Of Washington, NJ
reply to brownk
I remember someone saying that on each VHO FiOS does reserve QAM space for the Regional Sports Networks.
It should be noted that there is actually 4 feeds.
MSG, MSG2, MSG+ and MSG +2.
When we eventually get MSG HD and MSG + HD will MSG 2 HD and MSG + 2 HD be included?


bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ
said by icemannyr1:

I remember someone saying that on each VHO FiOS does reserve QAM space for the Regional Sports Networks.
It should be noted that there is actually 4 feeds.
MSG, MSG2, MSG+ and MSG +2.
When we eventually get MSG HD and MSG + HD will MSG 2 HD and MSG + 2 HD be included?

I'd bet my left nut that Verizon has room for the 4 MSG HD feeds. They are not that stupid.
Expand your moderator at work

tnsprin

join:2003-07-23
Bradenton, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to skohly

Re: [HD] FCC Rules on Verizon Access to MSG HD

said by skohly:

said by FIOSHD:

said by tnsprin:

Unfortunately a stay is almost automatic if CV files. Hopefully the courts then reject the cases. But that is not as likely, and so the delays will continue while the courts schedules and hears arguments.

I'm not so sure about a stay being automatic. For a stay to be automatic CV would have to demonstrate that handing over MSG HD would cause them some sort of irreperable harm...the problem with that is making that argument would fly in the face of their primary argument that they are not gaining a competitive advantage. Of course, I'm no lawyer and rooting very hard for VZ in this fight so take what I say with a grain of salt.

I'm feeling about 60/40 we get it in the 30 days.....although who wants to bet that the signal is crap and we encounter all sorts of mysterious issues with the feed? CV will do ANYTHING.

Makes sense on all points

Temporary stays are almost always automatically granted if they don't immediately reject the case. The courts often need a little time to decide if thetr are any grounds to hear an appeal based on the filing. Of course the stays end if they later reject hearing the appeal.

robjlevin

join:2002-10-30
Millington, NJ
reply to icemannyr1
The overflow HD games are only on Cablevision. They are not made available to anyone else and I wouldn't count on them being made available. They are not full time channels.


matcarl
Premium
join:2007-03-09
Franklin Square, NY
said by robjlevin:

The overflow HD games are only on Cablevision. They are not made available to anyone else and I wouldn't count on them being made available. They are not full time channels.

Verizon already carries the SD overflow channels. When nothing extra is on they just simulcast the regular channels. Don't know what they would do with HD

nyranger74

join:2011-09-25
Plainview, NY
There is no MSG2 HD or MSG+2 HD

nysports4evr
Premium
join:2010-01-23
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
said by nyranger74:

There is no MSG2 HD or MSG+2 HD

Pretty sure there is... »www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=197174#14


icemannyr1

join:2001-04-11
Township Of Washington, NJ

1 edit
reply to brownk
You are correct that there is no full time MSG2 and MSG+2 in HD but Cablevision does have two channels called iO Sports and iO Sports2 that do show the games from MSG2 and MSG+ 2 in HD.

nyranger74

join:2011-09-25
Plainview, NY
I had cablevision for years, and MSG2 and 2+ were never in HD!!


matcarl
Premium
join:2007-03-09
Franklin Square, NY
said by nyranger74:

I had cablevision for years, and MSG2 and 2+ were never in HD!!

I believe they have one HD overflow sports channel now.

UofMiamiGrad
Premium
join:2001-02-03
Great Neck, NY
said by matcarl:

said by nyranger74:

I had cablevision for years, and MSG2 and 2+ were never in HD!!

I believe they have one HD overflow sports channel now.

»www.cablevision.com/thegame

That link has always had the overflow schedule with pdf.

»www.optimum.net/pv_obj_cache/pv_···11_1.pdf


Greg2600

join:2008-05-20
Belleville, NJ
reply to brownk
Comcast NJ only had MSG and MSG+ HD.

robjlevin

join:2002-10-30
Millington, NJ
reply to nyranger74
said by nyranger74:

I had cablevision for years, and MSG2 and 2+ were never in HD!!

They were added last season.

JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4
reply to tnsprin
said by tnsprin:

Temporary stays are almost always automatically granted if they don't immediately reject the case. The courts often need a little time to decide if thetr are any grounds to hear an appeal based on the filing. Of course the stays end if they later reject hearing the appeal.

I'm sorry but this simply makes no sense. A stay based on what? Courts grant stays pending a trial/hearing. There has already been a hearing on this... two of them. CV sued the FCC saying they didn't have the authority to close the loophole. The court disagreed with CV. So they appealed. The appeals court upheld the lower court ruling. Unless CV petitions the supreme court to step in, there simply is no basis for a stay - temporary or otherwise. A stay would only be granted as a condition for future court hearings. That's not going to happen here. Yes, CV could drag its feet (although I doubt it), but from a legal perspective, this is over. CV sued, and they lost. There simply is no basis for a stay.

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
CV can sue based on the ownership interpretation which hasn't been addressed, since CV and MSG are now separate company's, CV can take this legal path to knock off another few years.

At the longest, we will find out CV's legal strategy in a few weeks. CV has literally Billions to spend making this to never happen, never, ever underestimate a determined company with pockets this deep.

UofMiamiGrad
Premium
join:2001-02-03
Great Neck, NY
Attribution rules upheld in court that the FCC uses & used in this case to say MSG and Cablevision are owned by the same entity. I think the game is over, but you can hold your stance that more lawsuits are upcoming.

»transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable···016.html


nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:17
reply to guppy_fish
said by guppy_fish:

CV can sue based on the ownership interpretation which hasn't been addressed, since CV and MSG are now separate company's, CV can take this legal path to knock off another few years.

At the longest, we will find out CV's legal strategy in a few weeks. CV has literally Billions to spend making this to never happen, never, ever underestimate a determined company with pockets this deep.

The FCC doesn't care who owns the programming - it doesn't matter if MSG has nothing to do with CV. The bottom line is the FCC ruled that MSG HD has to be made available to AT&T and Verizon based on the harmful competition ruling. You are so stuck on this ownership argument.....And since you are stuck on this ownership argument, why is the only MSG "company" responding to the FCC's decision Cablevision? MSG Networks is eerily quiet...If they were the only company who owns MSG, shouldn't they be commenting on a negative ruling?....hmmmm...Doesn't past the smell test.

robjlevin

join:2002-10-30
Millington, NJ
reply to guppy_fish
said by guppy_fish:

CV can sue based on the ownership interpretation which hasn't been addressed, since CV and MSG are now separate company's, CV can take this legal path to knock off another few years.

If, as you say, CVC doesn't own MSG then why are they even involved in all of this? The fact is, this charade is going to come to an end sooner or later, but I do agree the Dolans will go down fighting.

But to say they have billions to spend on legal costs is a bit of stretch.

JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4
The thing is, the FCC already made note of the fact that MSG is a 'separate company' in their ruling. They essentially called MSG a shell company, and rejected the obvious move by CV to spin it off. UofMiamiGrad is correct - the cable companies have tried, in the past, to use this little maneuver (spinning off a company into a 'shell') to avoid other rules set forward by the FCC (e.g. the 30% ownership rule). Even if CV does go with a lawsuit on that aspect (again, guppy, you were wrong to say that the FCC would be forced to do a lawsuit here... incorrect - the onus is on CV, if they wanted to go down that road), in reality, based on precedent, it would take the courts about 9 seconds to throw their case out. The idea of creating a shell company to avoid all sorts of legislation isn't new - not by a long-shot.

This was an obvious move by CV, which the FCC specifically called out in their demand that they hand over MSG HD to Verizon and AT&T. Yes, guppy is technically correct, in that the court didn't rule on this one specific aspect of the case (it wasn't brought forward in the lawsuits to date), but does anyone really believe it'll wash? What court, in their right mind, would grant a stay based on that? This fight is over. Note that CV has made no moves in going forward with any other lawsuits since the appeals court found in favor of the FCC. Why is that? I mean, if that was a winning strategy for CV... why hasn't it been persued to date? And I've seen no indication from CV that they're going to do so. Has there even been a peep out of them since the FCC came down with this demand? I haven't seen it.

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to brownk
If ones tactic is to prevent implementation, then its best to serialize all avenues to prevent enforcement. I understand what JPL, NYDave and others are writing and see your point of view. But, I still believe the trump card CV has is the ownership rule, which without everything done until now wouldn't apply.

If one is strictly looking at this strategically, CV should only do one thing at a time and when all paths for that fail to produce the result they want, you go to the next plan, this maximizes the time by doing this serially.

To be clear, MSG doesn't have to sell to everyone, just like the NFL doesn't. Its the CV ownership that give the FCC leverage and that specific issues hasn't even be challenged yet in court.

The Dolans have and agenda and more free money than the FCC is budgeted annually ( I posted the links previously ). They might just decide to do nothing and see where that leads as to my knowledge there is no defined penalty for ignoring an FCC ruling.

So the Dolans ignore the ruling, the FCC makes an arbitrary fine, CV Sues and its back to where we are today, No MSG-HD for FIOS

We shall see in three weeks!

xer0derm

join:2007-07-27
said by guppy_fish:

To be clear, MSG doesn't have to sell to everyone, just like the NFL doesn't.

I'm not sure that is correct. The NFL has a signed contract with Direct TV to be the sole provider of NFL ticket. It's not that they didn't offer to everyone, they just chose one company to sell it to. In terms of the NFL Network, I was under the impression that they did offer it to everyone, it was just that not all of the cable companies picked it up, CV being one of them.

FIOSHD

join:2007-10-22
united state
said by xer0derm:

said by guppy_fish:

To be clear, MSG doesn't have to sell to everyone, just like the NFL doesn't.

I'm not sure that is correct. The NFL has a signed contract with Direct TV to be the sole provider of NFL ticket. It's not that they didn't offer to everyone, they just chose one company to sell it to. In terms of the NFL Network, I was under the impression that they did offer it to everyone, it was just that not all of the cable companies picked it up, CV being one of them.

for the 100th time Sunday ticket does not apply. There was an open competitive bidding session and DIRECTV payed through the nose for an exclusive contract. when the contract ends there will be another period where there will be negotiations for carriage rights.

CV is not in an axclusive deal for carriage rights to MSG HD. They offer it to everyone who is not a direct competitor for them in their markets.


joeyj

@verizon.net
said by FIOSHD:

said by xer0derm:

said by guppy_fish:

To be clear, MSG doesn't have to sell to everyone, just like the NFL doesn't.

I'm not sure that is correct. The NFL has a signed contract with Direct TV to be the sole provider of NFL ticket. It's not that they didn't offer to everyone, they just chose one company to sell it to. In terms of the NFL Network, I was under the impression that they did offer it to everyone, it was just that not all of the cable companies picked it up, CV being one of them.

for the 100th time Sunday ticket does not apply. There was an open competitive bidding session and DIRECTV payed through the nose for an exclusive contract. when the contract ends there will be another period where there will be negotiations for carriage rights.

CV is not in an axclusive deal for carriage rights to MSG HD. They offer it to everyone who is not a direct competitor for them in their markets.

Dont think its fair to say directv payed thru the nose for ST.
That kinda implies they got ripped off.

Between all the bars, clubs, restaurants & households it impossible to figure how much $$ ST brings in for them.
+ they then collect the monthly bills from all those bars etc & households that have directv all year as well due to keeping it for ST.

FIOSHD

join:2007-10-22
united state
said by joeyj :

Dont think its fair to say directv payed thru the nose for ST.
That kinda implies they got ripped off.

Between all the bars, clubs, restaurants & households it impossible to figure how much $$ ST brings in for them.
+ they then collect the monthly bills from all those bars etc & households that have directv all year as well due to keeping it for ST.

I guess "pays thrugh the nose" is opinion and relative to your perspective. they definitely paid a premium for it, and paid enough that the NFL could make more money on a solo contract than they could have with a non-exclusive contract to the entire market....they must have or else why would the NFL leave money on the table?

As a former D customer I can tell you that the prices to the subscriber escalated greatly year over year...especially after they signed their last deal.

The point is that the NFL made a business decision after a fair and open negotiation was held. It is apples and oranges when compared to CV and MSGHD and has no baring on this issue.


joeyj

@verizon.net
Yea the ST $$ did go up alot but basically everyone that calls (as long as your bills are in good standing) can get discounts of $120, $200 or even ST free.

NFL likes having only 1 provider for ST as it keeps the # of people at a limit so its like a cap essentially. They actually dont want alot of providers to have it cause the local ads would take a viewership hit then with more games available & the networks wouldnt like that at all.


bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ
What is the official date by the FCC in which the order goes into effect before cablevision faces fines/etc?

Fingers crossed I get my Rangers in HD this season...


ROCKnROLD

@verizon.net
The ruling by the FCC was on September 22 so that would make October 22 the day. I'm guessing any appeal by CV would be an 11th hour thing. None of us know for sure how long (if at all) CV can delay this with that strategy. I'm a Ranger fan also hoping it's much sooner rather than later. BTW, with no NBA it would be less painful for CV to concede now. There'd be less of a rush by Knick fans to switch over.

chitchatjf

join:2008-07-13
Lawrence, MA
reply to brownk
If CV wants to pull that
BS I would pull thje SD feeds off of fios (and not make payments)