"We want to be treated like everyone else" * *except that we want to charge the carriers triple what everyone else charges.
I could really care less about all the other junk, pre/post game shows, blah, blah, blah or how great the channel is. Just show the damn games!!!!!!
Only a company as poorly run as comcast, would make a commercial lying about and ripping the exact businesses that they are trying to get to buy their channel.
Are there RSNs out there charging $1.13/subscriber? (And that's assuming the $3.40 figure is accurate, which I'm not sold on, but we've already beat that horse to death.)
Already posted but not to my put my own efforts to waste Spoiler Right now, so much of the city doesn't have access to CSN. What is the current status of negotiations between CSN and other regional carriers? Status is....we literally are in day to day conversations with them. I cannot report at this time that we have a deal done with obviously the big ones that impact Houston - Direct, Dish, AT&T and maybe a couple other smaller ones - but I will tell you that we are literally talking to 'em on a day to day basis. I was in LA on Tuesday, flew to NY on Tuesday night and was there a couple of days with our group(s). We had several meetings with a lot of the carriers. The status is, in short, we're negotiating. We're trying to get a deal done. I can say that when we meet with all these folks, they love the channel, they'd like to do a deal with us, they obviously want it at a certain rate and we value it at a certain rate, so we're trying to find the common denominator if you will and find the agreement where it works well for them and works well for us for the long term and we can get carriage on for everyone to see their teams. When negotiating with several different carriers, I would assume that is a challenge but when you talk major obstacles, in terms of price. How difficult is that and is there a way to bridge that gap so that you can get this done quickly? We are talking to...obviously Houston is our home and Houston is important but folks need to remember we are in a five state region. We hit all of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Arkansas and parts of New Mexico so we're talking with carriers that are not only in Houston, but also the five state region. Obviously Houston is very important to us and this channel and fans of these teams. It is a major priority for us. There are a lot of dynamics that go into that and we hear a lot with people that don't understand all the dynamics and we try to explain as many as we can but the bottom line is, there is economics involved obviously, other components where we talk about the carriage requirements - where we want to be carried. You'll hear and read we'd like to be on basic or expanded basic cable, where all other RSNs are on throughout the country. That's where we want to be. Some providers want to put us on a different tier or an a la carte and make fans/subscribers pay extra for the channel. We don't think that's right. We'd like to be on basic or expanded basic where everyone can see it. Bottom line, there are a lot of dynamics involved. We're having good conversations. People & these companies like the channel but they want to do what they think is right for their business and for their customers and we want to do what's right for our business and for the long term of this channel that we can continue to provide the best coverage of the teams for all the fans. When you talk about being able to carry that particular, the RSN, are there any other networks in the country that charge a premium fee for a RSN? From what I'm hearing, there are no models like that. To my knowledge and I believe I'm correct, there is no other RSN in the country that is required to be on a different tier in terms of a RSN that is equal to what we're doing. What we're doing and the model we have and the channel we have, there is no other like network in the country that is put on a different tier and isn't on the basic or expanded basic system for their subscribers and viewers. That's part of our point. All we're asking is to be carried like all other RSNs in the country. These providers are putting them on, they have them on their packages across the U.S. and we're just asking to be treated the same way. The economics involved, we feel are right on par with other RNs across the country. It's a fair market value. We already got the largest cable system in the city and the Houston DMA is carrying us as well as some of the smallest. They've all stepped up. They're paying us, paying the economics for this channel and they're feeling they're getting a great value in return for their customers. We're just asking that everyone else do what we've already been doing here in Houston with other systems and what these providers are doing around the country and including I might add, up in Dallas. The length of time this has gone on, almost 6 months into the Rockets season, is unprecedented. This idea these other carriers are going to want to make CSN a premium channel, if YES isn't premium, what RN is a premium channel? Do you feel you're being used as the guinea pig by these other carriers to see if they can test out this theory of pushing RNs into premium channels. That's a great point. We look at it at...there are a lot of things happening across board with sports and rights and regional TV, we understand that and are sensitive to that. I go back to the point, we are trying to be civil. All these folks we are talking to, we want to be partners with. Ultimately we feel we will be and feel they will carry our channel. We're gonna work with them and want to be good partners with them. We want to keep this civil and in good business negotiations. But yeah, that's what we keep looking at and saying "Why are we holding out" because what we're offering, we have a great channel, obviously I'm biased, our coverage of the Rockets been the best it's ever been, we go in depth with the team and will have carried 10 ST games for the Astros. That's never been done before. We got the Dynamo. We covered the Texans last season. We don't have an official partnership with them but have a great relationship with them. We're covering the teams here in Houston. We have a good channel. It's a good proposition for these carriers in our view. It's a great channel and value proposition for the viewers and the customers of these carriers. Everybody wins. Fans get the best coverage. More teams, more sports on the air. More HS, more college coverage is put on that people want to see. We think it's a good deal. We deserve to be on the carriage that is equal with our peers across the country. That's all we're asking. We have fair value for our channel and it's a good value proposition for everyone. We're asking to be treated in the same as everyone else is. We're getting a lot of texts. We have upset listeners right now. Are you aware of the anger of the fans and viewers who want to see these games? Yup. Absolutely we are. We are sensitive to the fact that people are angry. I hear it. You gotta remember, I grew up here. I moved back to launch this channel. I've been around these teams my whole life. These are my teams I grew up with so I'm a fan first. I talk to people all the time, friends and family included who don't have the service, and they ask when is it getting done? I'll take them through everything and at the end, they say "That's great but get the deal done." I look at them and say "I promise you, we're trying." I'd like for folks to understand is we're here. We're here in Houston. We made a commitment to be here in Houston, cover these teams the best they've ever been covered, bring more sports & insight to their teams. We're trying to bring the best RSN ever in Houston. That's first. To do that, that's a big commitment and there's a lot that goes around to getting that channel on the air. We've got that channel going. We've got a great channel. Now we're working and trying to get these deals done. We're here. We're working with folks throughout the rest of the U.S. corporately who are not based in Houston. We're trying to convey to them that the over 85,000, after this weekend, 95,000 petitions, people who have contacted us and said "I want this channel." We had a couple of carriers go out, I believe AT&T on the record, that said "There is not a lot of interest in this channel." We said, "We're not sure where that's coming from because number one, you can look right on our website, we got all the information & FAQs. We have over 85,000 people who have contacted us and want this channel." Then we've had other folks at other carriers who have said "There isn't anything different that people are getting." How can they say that? You have another service that doesn't carry this. Last year, you were able to watch the Astros, Rockets, & Dynamo and you can't watch them right now, I'm pretty certain you're paying the same for your service, if not a little more. So that's not right. We look at the providers, say "We are giving more content, we're giving everyone what they had last year, and providing some of the best coverage of these teams. You got great coverage, a great channel, a great value in this channel and your customers are demanding it and I can tell you now they are hearing it. They are trying to find the best deal for them and we're offering up what we think is a great value and fair and all we're asking is to be treated like all other RSNs in the country, 35 total I think. We want to be like everyone else. Yes, we know people are very, very unhappy. They want to watch their teams. They want to watch the Rockets make the run to the playoffs. They want to watch opening day with the Astros. They want to watch the Dynamo tonight. We pay attention. We listen to our fans and customers. We take the good with the bad. We want people to understand that we're with you. We're here, trying to get the deal done. That's why we're asking them to let their carriers know you want this channel. Let them know you want this channel. That's what works. That's what they need to hear. You mentioned that some carriers, AT&T in particular, was saying that you aren't offering anything different. You took programming from a channel they had and moved it to a new channel. Here is what I don't understand about that argument: what is the difference between you moving the programming to another channel and having to negotiate a contract there, or if the channel they already had, the contract was up and they had to do a contract there. To me, either way, you have to do a contract. Yeah, right. Essentially you're right(laughing). They have to do a contract, they have an ongoing contract or agreement with FOX, who carried FSSW and carried these teams as well as others in the five state regions. This is not unique to Houston or these teams. RNs have come up across the country. Teams have gotten into the business because they wanted to promote or do a better job in their feeling, do a better job of their teams being covered. More insight and expand the opportunity to carry more games. We'll carry every Astros game that isn't on a national network. Yeah, they gotta do a deal. What we're doing, we created a channel. We're sensitive to the economics, we're sensitive to some of the technology constraints that some of them have in terms of being able to put the channel on. That's why when we talk to them, look, we want to be a good partner, We're giving you great value and a good channel in a market that loves their teams. All these fans want to watch the games. We've done it. We got the channel. We're covering them. We got a great value. We're asking them to step up and make a deal with us and let's get our partnership going and let these fans see the teams/games and let's move forward. There have been a lot of reports in the media that have stated there is one particular faction of CSN ownership that has been very reluctant to negotiate. There have been reports that there have been times when agreements have been close but one particular faction of ownership at CSN has not wanted to sign off on them. It's not true. I'll tell you that right now. Not true. The ownership is unified in the fact that what we're trying to do and ownership is 100% supportive of this, is to get the best agreement for the long term success of this channel. People look and say, "Is it just about the economics, trying to make a profit?" Listen, we are a business but what ownership is saying, we have a channel, there has been a significant investment, and there will be an ongoing investment of covering these teams and covering all the sports within the region and we have to ensure that we make the best deal for the long term success to continue and go back out and bring more content and coverage and insight at the quality people are expecting and deserve and we need to be able to make sure the deal is the right deal for this network and this network is backed by this ownership. Ownership is unified. Everyone wants to do the right thing. Ownership has said when the right deal is there, we'll do it, we want to do it. They're 100% committed to when the right deal is there, we'll make it happen and we'll get into this proper partnership. As far as anyone sitting out or not wanting to, no. They're in agreement, they want the best deal and want the best partnership. Here's part of the issue with this, right now, only one team has been affected by CSNH not being on these other carriers. As we get to March 31, and a 2nd team is affected, if suddenly a deal happens, things will look fishy. Rockets fans will be angry that if 10 games into the baseball season, all the sudden there is a deal. Where is the major resistance to negotiate on...it seems like any time you have a six month disagreement, the longest that I can think of for any RSN to not be on a carrier, it seems like there has to be sands in the line drawn and someone has to blink or get the other guy to take 2 steps in with them at the same time. Where is the disconnect? You remember in NY, there was a long term holdout. Not with all the systems but one or two carriers who held out. They did that in San Diego. They've been trying to get their deals done(one is still not on the air). We started off with basketball with the Rockets. We started off in October. People want to watch the Rockets. They were doing their part, letting people know, but these systems sat back and said "We're hearing the noise from Houston but that's been building up and building up. "When you throw in professional baseball with the Astros and professional soccer with the Dynamo, all the sudden the voices start coming back up to these providers multiplies. People may look and say that doesn't seem right but they have to understand the dynamics in play in that the more voices, the more fans, all those fans coming together for a unified voice, that volume gets really really high. Hopefully that when we get closer to next week, and we can get a deal done, it's unfortunate that the Rockets fans have not been able to watch games from this season and we've been working hard for that to not happen but it hasn't happened, we continue to work hard, but the bottom line is, the more we put into the pot so to speak with the Astros and Dynamo coming on board, that all that voice and energy will multiply, and these providers, it will become unbearable for them and they're gonna have to do a deal with us. Ultimately, that's what we're asking. That's what's been done in other markets before, and that's the goal here. These providers need to hear from all of the fans. The channel is there, it's ready to go, and all we need is a deal. When do you think or best guess when a deal might get done? Wish I could give you that answer. That best answer I can give you is that we want it done as fast as possible. People ask, "Why didn't you get this done before? What's taken so long?" It's been over a year because we started working and getting out to these providers over a year ago, sending out our proposals and communications with them. They knew this channel was coming but a lot wanted to wait what the channel would look like, would it launch on time, was it professional looking, and was it what we marketed it to be? Yes, we launched on time, yes, it's professional, and yes, it's gone beyond what I think expectations were. It's there. A lot were waiting to sit back, waiting to see what would develop. We're were waiting for them to come to us. We called them. They said they were going to wait and see what happens. That's been the history. I would love to be on tomorrow. I can tell folks, because I do get asked this question, "If you get an agreement, how fast can things get turned around?" I can tell you things can get turned around quickly, within a matter of days. It's a matter of getting a business deal done and once done, we can get that channel on the air, people can start watching. Thanks for your time. Appreciate it. Listen, I always appreciate the time to talk to people. I know people are upset and looking to point fingers. I don't blame them. I would ask everyone to 1) Go to our website IwantCSNHouston.com. We're trying to be as open and honest with everything we're doing and how this deal has been progressing and the deal on the table. People have asked us questions and we're trying to put up answers on the website. We're trying to be as factual and fair...we want to do deals with everyone. We know people are upset but continue to ask that, let them know, if you don't have the channel, call your carrier and tell them you want the channel. Demand it. We're here. We're here in Houston. We're with you guys. We're part of the Houston family. We want everyone to get this channel. We're asking you to stay with us. We're gonna get this deal. We continue to fight for you. We want this channel launched so you can watch your teams. I'm gonna call my carrier. Please do. Thanks for joining us. Appreciate it.
Again, you watch all the games, probably makes it easier for you to sit here and defend comcrap wouldn't you say. Enjoy the games, f*** comcast and les and drayton and jim and joel blank too
thanks for the effort J.R. this just makes me pissed at everyone and why I am for open negotiations. I believe both sides are hiding under their veil of secrecy and that if this was opened up, the pressure would be on for compromises both ways. A) for the networks to place the package on basic B) for Comcast to reduce asking price to a more reasonable level but since neither are budging and it's all closed door - both sides can continually point the finger and consumers are confused and frustrated with no outlet. Comcast - if you love your fans and teams - why not offer free streaming online with registration until this deal is done? You get a ready made list of people who truly watch the games - great marketing tool and great for negotiations. Your advertising clientele would be ecstatic to actually get their commercials viewed. If you believe in your product so much, the viewership alone would end this crap. Oh - and you might get converts by buying some goodwill.
I asked a simple question. Not sure how that's defending anyone -- it was a very open-ended query. As far as the streaming idea, my guess is that the NBA wouldn't allow that because it'd be difficult to limit it to the Houston area. In other words, it'd turn into a free for all giving unlimited global access to a product they charge a lot of money for (NBA LP and/or Broadband). Now, there's the ESPN3/Watch ESPN concept, where theoretically CSN could make fans sign in through their cable provider (thereby proving their local address). But it'd open up a big can of worms because it would give the providers even more leverage by saying they already offer the channel to those who want it. And I doubt the NBA would even allow that, given that it would set a tricky precedent.
I disagree. I believe the NBA would be open to the concept because it is limited to a total of two teams at a time with one team being a constant. It's not simply giving away all of their product, but satisfying a short term demand. And with Stern and the gimps desire to sell product overseas, allowing free streaming (although you could limit it to houston area addresses upon registration) that was picked up overseas would seem like a no-brainer. Hell - it's not like sports.eu doesn't already give the baby away. this would just be a controlled burn.
I completely agree with you in theory, especially on the "controlled burn" part. People can already get the product online for free (.eu), if they really want it -- this would allow them to at least have some control. I just don't see it playing out that way in practice. We're not the only city with carriage issues, yet the NBA hasn't shown any interest in allowing an RSN to stream outside of the NBA LP Broadband. Moreover, US professional sports leagues have been stubbornly resistant over the past decade to embrace the openness of the internet. That's why so many campaigns are based around the "pay wall" concept, as opposed to the higher advertising that would theoretically come from opening things up to more eyeballs. I think that's generally a mistake, too, but it is what it is. I suppose CSN could ask the question... I just wouldn't get hopes up that the NBA would have a positive response.
Seems like a no-lose proposition from CSN's perspective to at least ask the question. They get denied by the NBA and they can at least tell the fans that they tried and it's one more thing they are doing to "help the fan" They get approval and they get the direct marketing information they need for full leverage and gain the popular fan support (if that has any measurable value)
The providers have no reason to budge. The RSN model is unsustainable and it looks like Houston is just the right market to make a stand in RSN's. The Rockets havent won much of anything in years and the Astros are historically bad. The ratings don't justify the pricing. When the Astros start there'll be another wave of complaints. If the providers can get through April without caving then it's just not going to happen for a long time.
I was able to burn down my monthly bill from $215 a month on Uverse to $145. I had U300 with the second fastest internet plan that they had. I now have U450 with the fastest internet speed they offer, more channels, no receiver or DVR fees plus free HD. Yeah Com****, you really owned me. I seriously miss my Rockets, but not enough to switch to Com****. Also, I get to keep watching Duck Dynasty and League Pass games I would usually not watch as much. Love watching the Nuggets, OKC and Miami. Thanks!
I was being facetious with the "triple" comment. They want to be treated like everyone else.....except they are charging the providers more than everyone else.
"Bottom line there is economics involved, and other components such as our carriage requirements, we want to be on the basic tier, but the providers want to put it on a higher tier, or even make it a la carte, and we don't want that." Why the F*** not? If you have a product you think people want, and obviously you do since you want a huge premium for it, put it out there and see if people will pay for it. Why in the world would you demand basic tier but want 10% of the entire monthly charge? Do you think CSN would be 10% of what the average family would watch each month. I want it. I'll pay for it. But it is ludicrous to charge for every single cable customer. It should have been pretty easy to see the economics of starting a team channel since it's been done in some fashion for 25 years; and have an idea of what you would/could charge for it. And it was ridiculously stupid not to have the agreements-in-principle in place before the total commitment to the channel unless the entire strategy all along was to hold the fan hostage and require him to switch to Comcrap. "We earn our customers the old fashion way, we kidnap their sports team"
The reality is that if not Comcast - it would have been someone else. IIRC - FSSW was charging right around $2.40. And their product was significantly inferior and that rate was probably negotiated 10-15 years ago. Price appreciation was bound to happen. It's not like this took the other major carriers by storm. Simply assigning blame to comcast (even though they suck) presents a very limited understanding of the dynamics. Both sides are playing this. And as far as the amount of money and it's proportionate percentage of the 'basic' package' - it's really the old 80/20 rule. 80% of the viewing occurs on 20% of the channels - and an RSN is one of the channels that would dominate viewing in a region amongst a very popular demographic.
I think the name itself shows a total lack of business savy or any intention of truly wanting to negotiate. You call the station Comcast Sports Network and you are the cable provider too. Fox wasn't in the business of providing broadband, they are a T.V. station. The name smells of not having any intention about being serious of dealing with other broadband providers. The Rockets are also to blame for not making sure there wasn't a plan ahead of time to include the other broadband providers.
There are roughly 10 other Comcast SportsNet (insert city here) affiliates all over the country that have been picked up by other providers.
