It's the only reasonable option anymore. I've got comcast so I get to see all the games but none of my friends do so they find streaming live tv to watch. What's funny is how they've been battling this problem since the Napster days in 1997 and it's only gotten easier to find what you want.
To be honest, does anyone see this playing out differently if a new network buys the station? I think they're going to run into the same option which is that people just don't want to watch the Astros and they are a long way off from being competitive. And the Rockets are now competitive enough that many of their games will be nationally televised.
By new network I meant another cable/satellite company. According to Barron, nobody is clear on who the buyer is at this point.
The issue is the pricing model that Comcast and the Astros/Rockets used in putting the entire thing together in the first place. They had to reach lofty per-subscriber fees to recoup the costs associated with the network and ultimately profit. If another media conglomerate proposes a new, lower-cost structure, they won't have to seek the same high fees, and other providers will be much more likely to add. It's not as if no one wanted the programming. In 2012 and 2013, before bankruptcy, before Dwight and with the Astros in much worse shape than they are today, other carriers still entered negotiations and were interested in carrying the network. They just couldn't go to a high enough number for Comcast to make its model work, and now we're in a stalemate. Of course, the new buyer would undoubtedly have to make staffing cuts to make the lower carriage deals work, so it wouldn't be the same as the CSNH we have today, most likely.
Yeah, it'll get better. Apparently, one or more of the original partners went in with some bad assumptions on the financials. If a new buyer is coming in, he's coming with the benefit of seeing why the last deal failed and will have more realistic assumptions of what they can extract from other carriers. If they still want to buy in knowing what they should now know, then they're willing to agree to prices that the previous partnership was not.
Or other media conglomerate keeps prices the same, but is still able to make money as Comcast Time Warner conglomerate pays same price with more subscribers.
I can see yalls points but I have to assume this also means a hefty cut to the Rockets & Astros rights fees.
No way. The Kings just got $700 mil for thier CSN. The Mariners got $2 billion. My guess is the buyer will pay a lot and Rockets and Stros like the number
He was on 610 this evening and stated that one rumor is that the buyer is either AT&T or DirecTv or both (aren't they merging?)
So, can I get a run up on this story now? Will Comcast finally be gone before next season? Or another year of this crap?
@dfbarron: Bloomberg News quoting proverbial unnamed source identifying AT&T as mystery bidder for CSN Houston, which would fit conventional wisdom.
Doubtful It would mean that the new buyer would be buying knowing they can make money by demanding less from the other carriers since the current model is not working. Otherwise why bother buying the channel. besides, isnt ATT merging with another sat company?(Direct?)
As much as it sucks to not be able to watch the Rockets on my TV in clear HD, it is kind of fun to watch on that h-town sports site and talk about the game with all of the clutchfans members on there..
I'd tune in every night, but I can't with Sudden Link the only option in my area. I used to watch each Astros and Rockets game when they were on FSSW. Heck, I even watched the Astros games on HSE back in the days of the dome.