http://blog.chron.com/sportsmedia/2013/05/att-official-on-csn-houston-we-didnt-need-to-pay/ “We’re not carrying certain regional sports networks in one of our biggest markets,” he said. “We’re not carrying it, and we knew we didn’t need to because the data was crystal clear about how intense those viewers were. “We looked at not just viewership. Everybody can have access to that. We looked at how many of our customers watched zero of those games, one, two, all the way through 150 games for baseball and 80 games for the basketball team that we’re talking about, and you could see that if a customer watched 30 games, pick a number, that’s a pretty intense viewer, and they are really passionate and the likelihood that they are going to churn goes up. “We could compare that against a bunch of other teams, and it was very clear that the viewership intensity in that particular market was low, and therefore we didn’t need to pay the rates that were asked, and we’re not.” An AT&T spokesman was not available for additional comment. Weber presumably was using 2011-12 data in reference to Astros and Rockets viewership on Fox Sports Houston, which obviously was considerably down from previous numbers because the Astros were in the midst of their second consecutive 100-loss season and the Rockets had another season in which they did not make the NBA playoffs. Weber said AT&T used comparable data, based on 2012-13 games, to determine that it should carry the new SEC Network that ESPN will launch next year. U-verse, which is one of two major nationwide carriers to air the Longhorn Network, was the first major carrier to sign a deal to carry the SEC channel. Regarding sports prices in general, in what was again an apparent reference to Houston and CSN Houston, he said, “Eighteen months ago, the thought of going without an RSN in one of our biggest markets, not carrying the pro baseball team and the pro basketball team, was not something I would have contemplated. You don’t compete that way, because that’s not how the way the world works. “You start getting under this sort of (competitive financial) pressure, and you really need to use the data we have that allows us to have better insight of our customers. You start making those hard decisions, and it turns out that with the data, they are not as hard as I thought they were going to be, and we’re going to see more and more of them going forward.” I think the onus is on the rockets and astros to cut their prices.
Jim Crane won't budge until he gets a deal like Seattle did. That's the only way he'll be willing to have a top 10 payroll.
Couldn't switch if I wanted to, and I do want to watch the Rockets and Astros. Deal won't get done anytime soon. Wish Les would say something about the situation.
As this moves forward MLB and NBA will have to share local TV revenues or they're going to have some even more permanent haves and have nots. Also, this guy's data isn't going to maintain once the Rockets (getting Dwight) and Astros improve. If anything, this puts the Rockets all in on acquiring a big name free agent this summer.
You can only watch the Rockets away games with NBA LP. I knew once this deal didn't get done before the start of the season(s), it meant we were going to be in for a really long wait. How long has Portland had this issue? 7-8 years now? Be prepared for this.
This has always been the case and they will eventually cave to get a deal done. Getting 100% penetration at the true market rate is better than getting 40% penetration at their pipe dream rate. At some point, money will talk loud enough for Jim Crane to swallow his pride. It's a shame he's held out this long. The only losers so far have been the fans, Rockets, Astros and CSN. U-Verse, Dish and Direct TV are doing just fine.
And CSN, obviously.... there's no question about this. Crane made that admission quite publicly about 2 weeks back now through the media. This group has no leverage for negotiation at this point.
No way Crane is calling the shots on this...not given his comments a couple of weeks back in the media about the network basically being dry of money. You don't make those sort of comments if you're the one driving the train for negotiations...you make those kind of comments when you want to put pressure on one of your partners to pull the trigger on a deal. Namely, CSN. Crane wasn't even a direct player in the negotiations until recently after Postolos resigned. I know what the ownership structure is...but it doesn't necessarily follow that voting rights on this issue follow that structure. Nor does it make sense to me that sports franchises are the ones leading negotiations of carriage rights with providers when CSN, who does that all the time, is at the table with them.
The Rockets/Astros should not have gotten into bed with NBC/Comcast. They have a history of bad faith negotiations. And for all the talk that if the Rockets get good ratings will jump, the truth is that Rockets/Astros are never talk of the town in this city unless they are championship good. And even then it is fleeting. I wish it were different, but this is not a hotbed sports town.
Yep...I knew nothing about that before all this went down..but seems to be a pattern..or so I've read.
IF/(WHEN?) Dwight signs with us does anyone think that it would suddenly cause an outrage for the public that really could give a damn in the first place? You know the "bandwagon" fans. Not trying to derail just seeing if, possibly, that would become leverage for the Rockets so that we can get a deal in place.
What does the long-term data say? Last year is one season, in which it happened to be the worst in 51 years, and the other failed to make the playoff in a league where over half the teams do make it. When looking at doing a long-term deal, the short-term data doesn't carry the same meaning. Would be nice though for them to have a short-term deal that maybe becomes a long-term deal if certain criteria are met, or something like that. Help everybody involved.
