CSN Updates Part 2

DTV doesn't want U-Verse or Dish to know what terms they are offering. CSN-H doesn't want U-Verse to know what DTV is offering. Etc.

 

I know it's a bit of cliche, but the phrase that I think best describes this situation is "unstoppable force meets an immovable object."

From reading through the filings in this case it appears that the network could never be profitable under its original business plan without obtaining its called-for carriage rates.

Once it became apparent that the carriers were unwilling to pay the rates necessitated by the plan, the wrangling began. Crane wasn't willing to accept rates that couldn't properly support the business plan and Comcast wasn't willing to adopt a modified business plan that could survive on lower rates. With neither party willing to budge, we're looking at a good old fashioned Mexican standoff, if you will.

 

Are you ever going to participate in the discussion?

 

What's funny is that despite all the recent trials/rulings/hearings/judge opinions/crane bashing/"he kicked his ass" bravado... the last few posts basically say where we are right now, and its no different than it was over a year ago.

Over a year ago.

All we know now is that this company is bankrupt, may or may not stay in bankruptcy protection, does not have a business plan that's viable (judge proven), and would need a viable business plan to turn a profit and keep the network afloat (which likely can't be done).

That and Comcast is trying to obtain what amounts to basically a monopoly in the traditional cable/broadband market.

 

Nope. I'm just waiting for your next temper tantrum against Crane so I can make fun of it.

 

Sorry man, habit.

Tell those people holding a gun to your head forcing you to read em, to cut it out.

 

Crane was hellbent on getting his team on MLB TV to appease his fanbase.... He was hell bent on getting out of the agreement now not later. In both senses, he got knocked out.

Crane is not worried about the Rockets being on TV at this point and despite what some posters are saying there is no guarantee that there is a deal out there that will suit Crane. Crane thinks he can recoup his losses via the dumb lawsuit he has against McLane and Comcast.

 

I'm sorry, should he have accepted the deals that the judge already said were bad?

And by prolonging the process with bankruptcy, it simply prolongs how long it will take to get the teams on TV... and all the while, the Astros still may be allowed to take their media rights elsewhere as they can't figure out how to fix the network.

Lawsuit only filed in reaction to being forced to stay in the crappy deal that McLane and Comcast formed on their own. This was never some elaborate plan to "recoup losses". If you believe that, it shows how far into the forrest you truly are.

If he gets out of the deal, the Rockets are free to accept whatever bargain basement carriage deal thats out there without the threat of an Astro veto. The problem is, without the Astros, the network is essentially worthless. Also, the Rockets were unable to strike any deals on their own as it is.

Quit the bias... it ruins the thread.

 

Crane rejected it. It was a bad offer per the judge. Based on that, the offer was most likely lower than anything McLane, Les, and Comcast agreed was an acceptable rate. Comcast most likely knew that Crane would reject offer before Crane saw it. It doesn't make it a lowball offer by DTV. Houston sports fans have basically said they would rather not watch the Rockets and Astros than switch to Comcast. CSNH just doesn't appear to have the leverage Fox does at getting providers to accept their offers.

 

First of all, Comcast is still the largest pay TV entity in Houston, and has the largest subscriber base for any single pay TV company.

Secondly, the people who don't switch either can't (due to comcast not being available), or they won't due to a previous bad experience with Comcast... regardless of sports teams or no sports teams.

If the roles had been reversed, and DTV had exclusive rights, you'd see even less of a migration from cable to satellite vs. satellite to cable... so if you had to chose one medium to try to get the channel going, you'd still have to go with cable/comcast in this market.

Finally, you have the FSN issue as even though providers are getting a rebate on the channel without Houston sports, unless the subscriber asks them for that money back they aren't obligated to pass on those savings to the subscriber.

Channel disputes certainly aren't unique to this market or even comcast by itself... hell, several more "enticing" channels have been taken away in larger markets due to disputes, without the type of uproar that would be needed to make the providers take notice.

The providers are doing what they want to do... for a multitude of reasons... but I don't for one second believe they would listen to the "fans" even if there was a larger uprising.

 

Whatever the reason, DTV has little motivation to pay CSNH around a million dollars a month. They aren't losing customers. Customers aren't upset with them. Heck, customers are pretending to be upset just to get a discount from them.

 

I may not have been paying close enough attention to the past, but I did not realize before that Comcast had a favored nations clause, forcing the channel to offer them the lowest rate.

 

I'm not sure it's as much this as it is that people don't necessarily drive their larger life decisions based on sports. ESPN make this mistake with the gigantic failure of the ESPN Phone. They thought sports fans would switch to it because of sports - but while people love sports, they don't make phone decisions based on it. Similarly here, I think people may love the Rockets/Astros, but that doesn't mean they will decide where they get their cable/internet from based on it - there are too many other things that drive that decision.

 

From what was being said over the last year and a half, the primary reason is because the carriers have been shell-shocked by the rise in the number of RSNs and their skyrocketing costs. Houston may just simply be the unlucky area in which the carriers finally decided that 'enough is enough'. And this makes is doubly damning that the Astros and Rockets failed to get the agreements in place BEFORE putting all their eggs in this one basket.

They probably had a pizza and movie night, at Comcast's house, with the Astros and Rockets in their footie PJs, and Comcast showed them Field of Dreams again.

'If you build it, they will come..'

Ummm, nope.

 

So is the Comcast/Time Warner deal the kind of thing that MIGHT sway Crane to think staying with Comcast may not be such a bad thing afterall? Granted, it may take awhile to go through...

http://blog.chron.com/sportsupdate/...for-astros-rockets-fans-in-some-texas-cities/

Comcast-Time Warner merger could be boost for Astros, Rockets fans in some Texas cities[/B]

Posted on February 13, 2014 | By David Barron



While it will take months to reach fruition, the $45 billion acquisition of Time Warner Cable by Comcast could provide a significant statewide viewership boost for Comcast SportsNet Houston across Texas, if not in Houston itself.

Time Warner essentially owns Interstate 35, with systems in Dallas, Waco, Temple, Killeen, Austin, San Marcos, New Braunfels, San Antonio and Laredo, plus Wichita Falls, Beaumont-Port Arthur, Corpus Christi, Harlingen, McAllen, Brownsville, Del Rio, Eagle Pass and El Paso.

A lot of those cities – particularly Corpus Christi and Beaumont-Port Arthur – have been key Astros markets over the years. Ditto Austin and San Antonio, where the Rangers have made major inroads over the last decade because of the team’s minor league affiliate in Round Rock.

So their addition to the Comcast fold could provide a significant subscriber and revenue boost for CSN Houston, which is currently under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Comcast officials had no details Thursday about the potential impact of the Comcast-Time Warner merger on CSN Houston operations. Also still up in the air is the possibility that some Texas systems could be spun off to other owners as part of Comcast’s pledge to shed about three million cable customers to reduce the possibility that regulators could block the merger.

Similarly, the Astros and Rockets had no immediate comment on the merger.

Granted, this doesn’t have any beneficial impact on Houston customers who do not subscribe to Comcast or do not live in a Comcast service area. But in particular for Astros fans and, to a lesser degree for Rockets fans, particularly across South Texas, Comcast’s acquisition of Time Warner could be very good news.

UPDATE: According to the media research and consulting firm SNL Kagan, Time Warner has more than 1.4 million customers in Texas, including 300,000-plus in San Antonio, 250,000-plus in Austin and more than 65,000 each in Beaumont-Port Arthur and Corpus Christi. Even at the lowest potential rate, that could be an extra $13 million a year. At a higher rate, it could produce double that amount. It’s not enough by itself, I don’t think, to solve all of CSN Houston’s revenue problems — for that, it needs to bring DirecTV and AT&T U-verse into the fold — but it certainly could help.

 

It still sounds like another season without the Astros on TV.

Let's not pretend they are making any progress.