Comcast SportsNet Houston -- Current Providers

Right on.

I've already been through this game. I chose a cable provider based on the fact that my provider provided all Houston Rockets games to me, a Houstonian.

Les makes a change so he can make some dollars and now I'm the one that supposed to petition my provider? Let Les do that or I'll just quit watching the team. I'd rather b**** in this forum than change providers or petition my present provider -- on principle.

Barring the success of the fools that do participate in such a crusade, I'm supposed to deal with two hours of phone calls and spend half a day waiting for a new install? No.

Sorry. I know I don't make 0.0001% as much for my time as Les Alexander does but time is still money to me and I'm not giving up a bunch of it (again) to help Les out.

I don't owe him. He owes me.

 

I do. Television networks change all the time. New ones come, old ones change or go away entirely. It's the responsibility of a cable provider to remain in touch with subscriber demands and adjust accordingly. That's what they're paid for.

You don't support the providers through monthly payments? The ONLY reason Fox Sports Southwest (formerly Fox Sports Houston) is on the basic cable tier for most providers is because it WAS the home of the Astros and Rockets and related programming. Now? It's nonstop poker, reruns of Big 12 games and the occasional live third-tier CUSA game. Psst, providers: cut the cord with FSN. That'll sure help with costs. And I don't want to hear about contracts or anything else. The providers have known this change was coming for over a year. They did nothing about it because of laziness and/or greed. And they're getting off scot-free, it seems.

How, by just staying with Fox Sports forever? I don't see that as realistic. Networks come and go. That's business. Twenty years ago, no one had even heard of Fox Sports Whatever. Its operators fought an uphill battle to gain broadcasting rights and acceptance on basic cable packages. Before that, it was HSE. Now in 2012, it's a new group.

I suspect the sides will soon come to an agreement, just as they have in previous similar situations as well as in other cities. But it's the fault of BOTH sides trying to maximize every last dollar, not one. Unless we have precise figures of what each side is looking for (financially), I think it's irresponsible and unproductive to not pressure both sides.

 

I've been a hardcore fan since Rudy and Calvin were players. I remember my dad taking me to games the first year they opened the Summit and I was hooked.

For a number of reasons that go much deeper than win/loss record, I've really lost interest in this team over the last 2 or 3 years. This year was the first year I was really looking forward to getting back into them again. I want to see how these young guys look.

But yeah, that obviously ain't happening right now.

Just when I thought I was in, they push me back out.

 

If you're paying decent money on a monthly basis to your provider, you should hold them accountable to some degree if they won't give you the option of watching professional games of the local team.

 

The_Cat:

I don't consider it my responsibility to push either side.

I suppose because this is a new, digital age with regard to TV, channels "changing all the time" actually affects me and other Houstonians.

Before when channels changed, they flipped from 20 to 39, both channels that every single Houstonian with a TV could watch.

After that most of the games moved to FSH, at a time when everyone had to have cable to watch TV at all and a time at which FSH was included in every basic cable package but one.

This is not something that happens "all the time." This is something that has never happened.

I know Les made ducket with this change that has made Rockets games unavailable to me so I blame him.

It's not my job to become informed on the situation, to be correct in my assignation of blame, or to become involved in a petitioning situation or to waste time getting through the electronic directory so I can get a live person to whom to complain.

I twice lived outside of Houston for four years and each time I moved back I considered it a real perk that I'd get to see all Rockets games on TV or in person.

I didn't realize it would be more of a hassle to watch the Rockets in Houston than it is outside of Houston.

Also to The Cat, do you have Comcast or do you live out of town? I fully expect that you are lecturing from a place of already getting the games in which case I'm sorry but I don't care what you think. Doesn't mean I don't like your posts; I do. But if you're already getting the games I really don't care what you think about this situation.

 

I could have written this post myself. Repped.

 

Because providers acted preemptively. It was known at least a year in advance, maybe two, that the Rockets and Astros were moving to FSN. Both teams were near their heyday in terms of audience demand, so providers got their acts together and deals were completed. They didn't this time. I don't think the suits at Comcast (and with the Rockets/Astros) are any more greedy than the folks at FSH. The providers simply see lower demand and are trying to drive a hard bargain.

It's not your responsibility to push either side, of course. I'm just saying that in my opinion (and yes, I have Phonoscope, so you can tune me out), the best way for eager fans to help get a deal done is to pressure BOTH sides. Les is partly to blame, but the providers are as well, and it helps when they hear it. Both sides need to feel public pressure in order to come to the middle.

 

I don't think the Rockets (or the providers) think it is the job of the fans to push the other side. They simply put together a webpage to make it easy for people to write the providers if they choose to do so-- and of course they encourage folks to do it since it's in the team's interest but fans have the option to blame the Rockets or sit on their hands.

Hell, people can get mad at both sides and stop spending money on both TV and the Rockets forever. It is your perogative. I am just pointing out what the situation is objectively: a fairly typical network vs carrier contract negotiation. Happened with other sports networks and non sports ones (AMC, for example).

REALLY sucks when it happens, but this kind of stuff happens with some regularity.

 

We, the taxpayers, paid for the damn stadium and now he is holding us hostage.

Screw Les.

Eventually the taxpayers need to start buying our teams from the billionaire business guys who do this to us.

Just like the green Bay Packers.

 

If that means you're getting the games already without lifting a finger, thank you, I will.

 

Clutch: I think there are several other "Comcast SportsNet" regional networks that have worked out deals with non-Comcast providers. I wonder what the process is like for these regional sports networks.

I think all these "CSNs" are relatively new as NBC/Comcast have only recently gotten more into this line of business.

 

Posits the guy completely unaffected by the situation.

Les made money in this deal and I and a ton of other Houstonians are locked out on account of him taking the deal that was best for him and his wallet.

I'm not going to start caring about his team again until he demonstrates that he cares about the local fans that built his arena... An arena by the way that, if I could, I would now go back in time to protest rather than support.

If I were to get in a petitioning mood, I'd be fighting for no more corporate welfare for zillionaire team owners that don't give a **** about the fans.

 

I think it would be more effective to send angry emails to the Rockets than to hassle directv and the others.

Why should we care which conglomerate gets over the other?

 

I think that's a small element of it. But the Rockets/Astros do own the majority of the network. As such, I think their interest of having games available to the Houston public outweighs the Comcast angle, particularly given the struggles each of these two franchises is having in terms of generating buzz.

Absolutely. We disagree with the reason(s) Dwight isn't here, but if he were, it changes the dynamics completely. Right now, providers have the Rockets/Astros over a barrel. I just don't think there's enough local demand (i.e., customers potentially switching to Comcast) to spur much movement from whatever the provider's initial financial target was. On the other hand, I think the Rockets/Astros are reluctant to move beyond a certain point because their ratings projections in future years (when each is presumably competitive) are much higher than the baseline figures being used from the past couple years.

I do agree that the deal gets done eventually. As you said, too much at stake for both sides. But to make a deal happen quickly, the ownership end needed a big carrot to make providers budge off their initial asking price. That should have been Dwight. Sigh.

 

I understand being frustrated not being able to watch the team, but I don't really understand the refusal to sign a petition telling your provider you want to watch the games. Sure it improves Comcast Sportsnet's bargaining position, but it also shows your provider that you care and that investing in the channel is worth their time and money regardless of what price they end up paying.

The Rocket's are a business set up to make profit for their owner and always have been. Of course they are out to make money and always have been. Just like your cable provider is, who ever you choose. If your provider doesn't pick up the channel, then threatening to not watch any more is a bit of a meaningless threat.

It's really no different than when the Rockets went from all home games being on local TV to all being on cable. You can stop being a fan of the team if you want I suppose, but remember this isn't JUST the Rocket's TV channel. I'm sure the Rockets have alot of influence, but they aren't just negotiating to show Rocket's games, but also everything else that is broadcast on the channel (college sports, Astros, ect).

The channel has to make x amount of dollars to be worth switching from their previous deal. Whether that makes Comcast and the Rocket's greedy for what they are asking, or your provider greedy for trying to get it for cheap is a matter of perspective. Without knowing the details of the negotiations we can only speculate.

 

I wish I could rep Batman like 100 times in this thread.

 

Understood. Though I'll point out that I personally emailed and called Phonoscope about the situation back in July, far before a deal was agreed to.

 

I think it would be more effective to send angry emails to the Rockets than to hassle directv and the others.

Why should we care which conglomerate gets over the other?

Anyone up for some protests in front of the stadium when the games start?

 

There are several other "Comcast SportsNet" networks with non-Comcast providers. DirecTV has Comcast SportsNet Bay Area, Comcast SportsNet Mid Atlantic, Comcast SportsNet California, Comcast SportsNet Chicago and Comcast SportsNet New England as of right now that I know of.

This gives me a little hope that they will work something out with Comcast to get the Houston SportsNet channel. At least I hope they do. I am not switching if they don't. I will find alternative ways to watch it.