I think this is misguided. AM/FM radio locks you into a very limited set of stations and no choice in playlists. "Kids" these days do not want AM/FM, they want Spotify/Pandora, which they are already curating when outside the car to manage their music. If you look at Ford, they already include "Drive" in most Ford and Lincoln vehicles that allows for many in-dash apps. Add a bluetooth smartphone to the mix, and you've got streaming online radio (which the carmakers are not getting any revenue from). The situation is similar to satellite radio - you have to have a subscription to use satellite in your car, yet the carmakers included that as well (mostly as an add-on option). However, satellite radio never really took off, and so we don't see it as overtaking AM radio. But if online radio can take over where satellite could not, then AM/FM can go away. If you're adament about getting free over-the-air radio in your car, you'll just have to get your own receiver and plug it in the dashboard. (ie a walkman plugs into the mini-stereo port on your car radio).
You seem to ignore the cost of mobile bandwidth. If mobile Internet providers are charging $20 a month for 2 GB of data streaming audio would cost people who want it more then they normally pay for XM radio and as you said, that never took off. (Let alone most people pay for the Internet on their phones already) The cost of an Radio in a car is 1/4 of what it would cost a car maker to install an Internet radio receiver. Not going to happen.
At this point, I would assume the actual radio hardware to be negligible. But like cassette decks, just because it's cheap doesn't mean drivers want AM and FM buttons on your dashboard that they will never use. Ford has opened an office in San Fransisco to get app developers to make apps for their cars. GM will start installing LTE connections as options across most of their brands as early as the coming model year. At this point, you are basically looking at the equivalent of an iPad as your in-dash entertainment system going forward. The only things holding back this future are (1) safety concerns with manipulating a touch-screen interface for apps, and (2) the loss of the emergency alert system. And to get back to the main point - currently, the Astros have no good solution for streaming radio broadcasts over the internet while in Houston.
Sure they do...they participate in MLB revenue sharing, which includes internet revenues, including the sale of the AtBat app where you can listen to any game in the league for $15/season.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Astros">#Astros</a> owner Crane said there were talks today in attempt to reach @<a href="https://twitter.com/csnhouston">csnhouston</a> deal in time for Tuesday's game vs. Rangers.</p>— Brian T. Smith (@ChronAstros) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChronAstros/status/318851599105683457">April 1, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Astros">#Astros</a> owner Crane said there were talks today in attempt to reach @<a href="https://twitter.com/csnhouston">csnhouston</a> deal in time for Tuesday's game vs. Rangers.</p>— Brian T. Smith (@ChronAstros) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChronAstros/status/318851599105683457">April 1, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Astros">#Astros</a>' Crane said there were conference calls between sides for @<a href="https://twitter.com/csnhouston">csnhouston</a> negotiations.</p>— Brian T. Smith (@ChronAstros) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChronAstros/status/318852499308154881">April 1, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Astros">#Astros</a>' Crane on @<a href="https://twitter.com/csnhouston">csnhouston</a>: "I know there was a couple conference calls late this afternoon so maybe something will work out by ...</p>— Brian T. Smith (@ChronAstros) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChronAstros/status/318853504670240768">April 1, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>...(Tuesday). I know they can switch (the station) on fast. So we've got to get 'em to cut a deal that will work for us."</p>— Brian T. Smith (@ChronAstros) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChronAstros/status/318853656457920512">April 1, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
So, if you only had two choices and had to bet on one of them, which would it be 1) CNS Houston will be available by Friday (which is the first day we really need it as the next two games are on FSSW and we are off Thursday) 2) Next year, on opening day, CSN Houston will still not be available on any major carriers other than it's own I will cast the first vote for 2 Hope I am wrong, but I don't think this is settled in the next year unless Crane passes
I'll go with option 1, but not necessarily because I'm all that confident that something will get done by Friday. I just can't see it dragging out another year.
And why not? They simply have no choice - they agreed to the deal. As someone has posted in the Chronic, the Trailblazers haven't been n Directv for going on six years now so there's really no reason to believe that the Rockets are exempt somehow from this happening. I can see why Directv is taking the "tier" position. If you look at their current sports channel lineup, you can't get the other Comcast Regional Sports Networks without buying the Sports Pack for $12.99 per month. It makes no sense for them to place CSN on the basic tier AND charge customers $3.40 to get it especially when the demand simply isn't there for these teams outside their home market.
The home market is the sticking point. For any other RSN, it's on a special tier elsewhere, but on the extended basic in the home market(s). The providers are asking it to be on a tier everywhere, including Houston. That's the problem. There's a good discussion in the GARM thread on the differences between this situation and Portland, but the biggest is that the Astros can't afford it. Honestly, Portland isn't too threatened. There's no other NBA team (or even professional sport in general) anywhere remotely close that fans can go to, so they're always likely to come back. Paul Allen is flush with cash. They can survive a dispute, especially factoring in that the NBA is largely urban and corporate from a ticket sales standpoint. The Astros, though? That's entirely different. They're already losing market share throughout the state and region to the Rangers simply based on W/L records in the past few years. Suddenly, add in that the Rangers have a quality TV deal and can be seen (even in Houston) when the Astros can't? You're at risk of losing an entire generation of fans if you go years without TV exposure, all in a sport that needs non-local fans to fill 43,000-seat ballparks. The downside for the Astros is much greater than that for the Blazers, which is why I think Crane blinks before too much is lost.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Houston">#Houston</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Astros">#Astros</a>' Crane said there was a "little movement" Monday with CSNH talks but no breakthrough today; no deal imminent. <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Rockets">#Rockets</a></p>— Brian T. Smith (@ChronAstros) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChronAstros/status/319214278504759297">April 2, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Astros">#Astros</a>' Crane says CSNHouston talks in a "standstill."</p>— Brian T. Smith (@ChronAstros) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChronAstros/status/319213586788515841">April 2, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Sounds like Crane was quite disingenuous himself with his comments on Monday, then. All his talk about multiple conference calls and being hopeful a deal would get done... you don't raise expectations like that unless you're A) actually confident in a deal or B) setting up a storyline of "SEE, WE TRIED!!!" for disgruntled fans. Sadly, it seems the second is accurate. I don't think Crane really expected the providers to blink significantly if they hadn't as of yesterday. The comments I appreciated most, from all sides involved in this, were from Tad Brown this morning on 790 -- particularly his closing note about a willingness to negotiate in public. At this point, that's what we need. Obviously I've b****ed about DirecTV's made-for-PR soundbytes, and it appears Crane was doing the exact same thing (on his end) last night. Impossible to know what to even take seriously.
Excerpts from a media interview Tuesday with Astros owner Jim Crane at Minute Maid Park. Crane on the status of CSN Houston talks: Right now, we're kind of in a standstill. Nothing got done today. ... We're in constant talks with them, so hopefully something will break. We need the fans to send in their complaints. It'll never hurt to put a little pressure on them; to switch networks or switch carriers. That's where the pressure is. Frustration with blackout: It's certainly frustrating. We want our fans to see the game, that's the bottom line. The fans pay the bills, so we want them to get out here and we want them to watch the games when they're not out here. Do Astros have an offer to end stalemate: There was a little movement (Monday). But it wasn't anywhere near where we needed it to be. _________________________________________ While the stalemate continues between many of Houston’s television carriers and CSN Houston, area baseball fans have two options for tonight’s Rangers-Astros game at Minute Maid Park. The Astros network broadcast will air on Comcast SportsNet Houston, which is available at Channels 39 and 639 on Comcast’s Xfinity cable service and on Consolidated Communications, enTouch, Phonoscope and Coastal Link cable systems. The Rangers broadcast will be available on Fox Sports Southwest, which airs on Xfinity channels 37 and 637 and also is available, unlike CSN Houston, on DirecTV, Dish Network, AT&T U-Verse, Suddenlink and practically every other cable carrier across a five-state region. Major League Baseball divides its broadcast territories differently than does the NBA, and the Astros and Rangers share the five-state area that includes Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and part of New Mexico. Thus, 127 Rangers games on Fox Sports Southwest will air in Houston this season, including games against the Astros. CSN Houston will air 157 Astros games, beginning Tuesday night, as officials with the NBC Sports Group continue to strike carriage deals that would make the channel available to systems that do not carry it at present. Barring an agreement with one or more carriers, the Astros’ game Friday against the A’s will be the first game this season that will not be available to most TV households in the Houston area. Astros owner Jim Crane described talks as “at a standstill” on Tuesday. “Nothing got done today,” Crane said. “We’re in constant talks with them, so hopefully something will break. … It’s certainly frustrating. We want our fans to see the game, that’s the bottom line. The fans pay the bills, so we want them to get out here and we want them to watch the games when they’re not out here.” Crane again said the Astros need to “cut a good deal” to stay competitive with the Rangers and other AL West teams. With full carriage of CSN Houston, the Astros could stand to get an average of $80 million per year in rights fees. They also own a share in the network along with the Rockets.
If so... pretty myopic on his part considering the other providers have had no issues ignoring the Rockets all season.
Believe me, there is nothing to negotiate between the two sides. Each side has a price. The question is who caves first, my money is on csn.
If he's not budging on the asking price like he said, there's no reason to believe the carriers would suddenly and inexplicably say "OK". I think it's a matter of when CSN is gonna cave. I don't think there's going to be the max exodus away from the other carriers that Crane was predicting to justify the carriers paying CSN's asking price.
