Randy Harvey, on the Chronicle, says that when the Astros play the Rangers on FSSW the games will NOT be blacked out. Anyone else hear this? Any possibility that MLB is different, and if I buy the MLB Extra Innings package I could watch the Astros on the opponents broadcast??? I know i'm just wishing but . . . .
Yep, I would guess Les is taking the same exact stance as Jim and the bum from comcast on the commercials . . .at least Les is smart enough to STFU though
going to post this again, jim crane has a projected revenue stream. he is running this franchise very business like, he doesn't have drayton's personal wealth to lean on after taking losses from the team.
If he thinks a good business plan is to alienate his customers, then by his own standards he is doing a fine job.
I think it's part of the "game" being played by both sides. Keeping FSN gives good PR to the providers by letting them say "we didn't take away the games, we still have the old channel". Perhaps more importantly, it gives them leverage in CSN negotiations by letting them point to a RSN in the same market at a somewhat lower price. Even though the quality isn't nearly as good, it's still a RSN and a precedent they can use. The "credit" they're giving to a few customers on their bills is pennies in the grand scheme, relative to the importance of the ultimately agreed-upon figure. I certainly could be wrong. But I find it hard to believe, and would like to see hard evidence, that the multi-million dollar corporations striking these deals are so dumb that they'd sign an agreement without a single out clause for at least three years, even if the RSN loses all local professional teams (and thus, 99% of its value). It's possible, but they'd have to be really ****ing stupid. Given how profitable those businesses are, I have my doubts. To me, it's blind loyalty to assume they have an iron-clad contract just because. I mean, whenever the CSN Houston side says anything, you guys are immediately skeptical and questioning all motives. You take almost nothing at face value (and that's good). I just think you should apply that same mindset to both sides.
The Braves had an iron clad contract with TBS that has cost them money for over a decade that they've never been able to get out of. Jim Crane said on the radio, Jim Crane, that the deal he wants would lock them in with the providers for 20 years with no outs. Edit: Also, like I've already demonstrated, most other RSNs in the country are formed on pre-existing stations. SportschannelX goes under or gets sold by MediaGroupX and the new one comes on with deals already in place or the carriers have no deals in the market still in existence. What is happening here is VERY rare. The two pro sports teams banded together to form their own RSN and left an existing network that is still on the air. Fox Sports has no desire to take the channel off the air or let DTV out of a deal.
Your stance can't really be that the providers would rather pay FSN $2.50 per month per subscriber for their 2 million customers that aren't watching it and wouldn't complain about losing it rather than just dropping it and pocketing $5million a month. I just don't find that remotely plausible. I'm pretty sure FSN is actually part of a package that the providers have to buy. A few years ago FOX removed their channels from Dish Network because of a disagreement on fees. It wasn't just FSN, it was FX and National Geographic as well.
Show me, then. Don't just assume or tell me "pretty sure". That's my biggest problem in this -- people light into CSN over not being honest, all the while blindly believing the providers over an argument they haven't even made themselves! If the providers want to say they have this contract they can't get out of (which would make them ****ing idiots, but I'll go with your hypothetical on this), that's one thing. But they haven't, to my knowledge. If you're correct and the contract is the real issue, then their campaign on this is using made-for-PR soundbytes and ignoring the reality. And no one is calling them out on it. Furthermore, not only are they not getting called on it, but people are actually making excuses for them! Demand the same honesty and transparency of your provider (that many pay $100/month or more to) as you do CSN, the Rockets and Astros. That's my only point. It's not a one-way street here.
Who is arguing that CSN is dishonest? They are just mispricing their services - nothing more. They want more than it's worth, and the providers are saying no.
I don't think you really understand leverage in business. You also seem to think contracts are wishy washy things. The providers don't need to go arou d giving interviews and airing lying commercials. It's not their brands that are going to get crushed here. People aren't going to stop watching TV because of this situation and there's likely no going to be a mass migration because of Comcast's terrible reputation. If it costs you more money than those customers are worth then it's better to lose customers. You're all caught up in what's fair to you as a fan of this team but these providers have no obligation to lose money so you can watch your team. If they thought they would make money off CSN then there'd be a deal. This whole loyalty idea is just lame. Fox and Dish Network resolve fee dispute; restore channels http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ent...ork-resolve-fee-dispute-restore-channels.html Fox's dispute with satellite broadcaster Dish Network, which led to a monthlong blackout of Fox's regional sports networks, FX and the National Geographic Channel, was resolved Friday when the two companies agreed on a new multi-year contract. Fox immediately restored its 19 regional sports networks, including Prime Ticket and Fox Sports West, and the two entertainment channels. The Friday armistice lifted the threat that Fox also would pull the signals of its local TV stations, including KTTV Channel 11 and KCOP Channel 13 in Los Angeles, which would have prevented Dish customers from watching such popular network programming as "House," "Glee" and potentially the final games of the World Series. Viewers in 14.3 million homes -- including more than 600,000 in the Los Angeles area -- with Dish service have been infuriated by the feud. On Oct. 1, Fox pulled its signals for the cable channels off the satellite broadcaster when the two companies could not agree on payments. The hang-up during the monthlong stalemate was payment for the expensive sports channels and whether Dish would make them available to all of its subscribers. The Fox cable sports channels run as much as $4 per month per subscriber, about four times the cost of an entertainment channel like TNT. The resolution means that local sports fans can watch the UCLA football game this weekend on the Fox sports channels as well as Anaheim Ducks and Los Angeles Kings hockey games. The new deal with Dish does not affect Fox's ongoing tangle with New York-based Cablevision Systems Corp. 'Viewers in more than 3 million homes in New York, Connecticut and New Jersey have been missing the World Series, Fox's broadcasts of NFL football games, "Family Guy" and "Glee."
Yeah, apparently they leverage all their channels if you don't want to pay for one. Hardball at work.
He is a supporter of comcast and is not happy that we are bashing comcast so much on here. Crane has been clear that they are not going to negotiate, they are going to wait for "thousands" to switch to comcast and the "others will fall in line" Crane makes me sick, but at least he did clear a lot up for us the other day
Go read the thread in the GARM. Any time Hutchings, Crane, or anyone from CSN opens their mouth, you immediately have dozens of rabid fans screaming them down about what liars and horrible people they are. It's happened hundreds of times these past few weeks. Hell, people in the last week have suggested legal action against CSN for supposedly false advertising.
How do you know it is not a ploy? He says he is waiting on an offer. Non-negotiation means here is our demand, and wait for acceptance. Crane does want the public support, obviously. Even the radio/TV guys for the Astros ask you to call your providers during every ST game. Comcast being an owner really complicates things. They win if people leave the other companies for them, and they win if the other providers cave in.
Two things: 1.) As I said, I want to see DirecTV and others be that honest here, and I want fans to hold them to that standard just as they do the CSN Houston side. I don't think I've heard the contract argument made a single time from their side. Instead, it's this "sports tier" garbage, which is a load of bull**** because there's not a single RSN in the entire country that isn't on the extended basic tier in the home market. Major is right: it comes down to the fact that the two parties have differing ideas on what a fair price is. And maybe the existing contract with Fox has something to do with it. If those are the real factors, SAY IT. 2.) Even if those contracts are standard across the board, the providers themselves have responsibility. That's why they're ****ing idiots, if that's the case. No one forced them to agree to such silly terms, just like no one forced them to accept the first 15 or so RSNs under the new pricing structure. They're trying to put toothpaste back in the tube and using CSN Houston as a guinea pig to see what they can get away with. It's not about what's fair to me as a fan. It's about honesty and transparency. People freak out the second CSN says anything that is disingenuous, all the while looking the other way when DirecTV does the same. In fact, not only do people not call out DTV on their blatant PR speak, but they actually make an argument for them that they've yet to make themselves! It's incredible. I think both sides are to blame because, as Major said, they each have differing ideas as to the value of the product. I think each has an exaggerated position and needs to be pushed to the middle to reach a compromise. The best way to do that is to pressure both sides, and for the most part, that's not happening. The providers are allowed to avoid the root issue and talk in PR speak, and no one seems to care enough to call them out on it.
Supposedly, ESPN is planning to do the same with Longhorn Network when the next negotiations come up for ESPN, ESPN2, etc. I find it hard to believe that they'd risk ESPN by tying it to LHN, but they may have so much leverage there that they can pull it off. This is really the heart of the problem. Comcast has every incentive to overprice the station - it's a win/win for them. Either providers pay the inflated price, or they get to steal some customers from them.
