That may be the stupidest statement I've read in a long time. Because I like sports I should go to DirecTV and not Dish? If you don't think SPORTS is the engine that runs TV in general then you're not living in the real world. Even people that hate sports realize where the largest advertising dollars are generated. Take away one major sports channel, ESPN, and Dish would be gone in 12 months.
Any chance new Dish/Fox deal will involve HD RSN's going 24/7??
- Thread starter db2
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 37
- Views 7K
I agree. Scott is always saying the same thing. When it comes to any other programming Scott is always going to "fight for the consumer!" and "make sure we get what we deserve" but when it comes to sports programming he says, "switch to DirecTV."
Double standard.
Actually, it isn't stupid. Direct makes sports a priority. Dish does not. This is fact.
You ARE NOT about to get FULL TIME HD RSN's on Dish. There, is that better, less stupid for you? If that is what you want, churn to the other side.
If sports was such the engine, why is not prime time wall to wall sports? After all prime time is when most people watch TV (i.e. called prime time for a reason). Why did ABC move Monday night football to ESPN? This is not to discount sports, but to point out that sports is not the single driving engine of TV. Sports programming obviously has a large audience, but it does not run prime time or TV in general. Sports is generally available 24x7 on cable/DBS, but if you only do OTA your sports watching is very limited. People would miss one of the big 4 more than they would miss ESPN. It is the fact that ABC and ESPN are both owned by Disney is that ESPN has the leverage. The same reason the RSNs had such clout, it was settled right before FOX locals were to go off air. If the FOX locals were not up, the RSNs would probably still be off Dish.
The MNF move to espn was financial related, IF ESPN can move their most watched program off of free tv, where its only advertisor supported, to a channel where everyone pays 5.00 bucks a month, plus ad related revinue, I would be taking the cable channel.
Also, every time I take a look at my what's hot app on directv wich shows what peoples watching, MNF is allways number 1 or 2 behind network programming if not the number one slot. A simple solution would be to take a look at the ratings, here, ESPN Wins Basic Cable Ratings Race In October - SportsNewser
Clearly shows that the world series and MNF football consistanly gets 17 million viewers, where as the only thing to beat out MNF is Dancing with the stars and NCIS.
Nielsen Television (TV) Ratings for Network Primetime Series - Zap2it Nelson's TV ratings speaks volumes! ADD FULL TIME HDRSN's Allready, so we all can live in harmony!
Also, every time I take a look at my what's hot app on directv wich shows what peoples watching, MNF is allways number 1 or 2 behind network programming if not the number one slot. A simple solution would be to take a look at the ratings, here, ESPN Wins Basic Cable Ratings Race In October - SportsNewser
Clearly shows that the world series and MNF football consistanly gets 17 million viewers, where as the only thing to beat out MNF is Dancing with the stars and NCIS.
Nielsen Television (TV) Ratings for Network Primetime Series - Zap2it Nelson's TV ratings speaks volumes! ADD FULL TIME HDRSN's Allready, so we all can live in harmony!
No Double Standard.
DIRECTV is known for their sports. If you want NFL Sunday Ticket, or MLB Extra Innings you are not going to find it on DISH so if you want to get it on satellite DIRECTV is the way to go!
And as far as fighting for the consumer and making sure we get what we deserve if you followed the FOX case I didn't take anyones side on the matter. There was no me jumping and down trying to spead the gospel according to Scott.
Personally I hate this when these disputes come up because I understand both sides of the story... The cable networks need more money to make or obtain better programming for their channels and the satellite (or cable) companies fight to keep costs down so they dont have to pass high costs off to the consumer.
About the only disputes I am vocal about are the local station disputes where stations demand a large amount of money for their local channel to be carried as I feel that they should not be paid for satellite or cable to carry their FREE off air channels. I believe that if cable of satellite carries their signals it is helping the stations by bringing them more viewers who can not get their local stations signal or do not want to put up an outdoor antenna. Cable and Satellite not only pay the stations to rebroadcast their FREE off air station, but also cover all costs to transmit it. If the locals were not carried on cable or satellite the local stations ratings would take a huge hit and for the stations the ratings are the most important thiing for them. I dont see why stations fight with them when cable and satellite is doing them a favor by helping t hem broadcast their signal.
With all due respect Scott, this is not how you've positioned it before. I agree that if you want out of market sports packages you should head to DirecTV. I'm talking about when people have brought up things like ESPNUHD, 24x7 HD RSN's your response has been if you want sports, go to DirecTV. Yet when people have brought up non-sports HD channels before Dish had them you didn't "say go to DirecTV if you want that channel."
That is the double standard to which I'm referring.
Scott, you did not say' if you like the NFL Package or the MLB package you will only find it at "D". You said "if you LIKE SPORTS" you should go to "D". Then you threw in "churn to the other side". Not a very friendly gesture I must say. I get plenty of sports watching the Sunday NFL games, the Saturday college football and basketball games, the NBA on TNT, my local sports teams on the RSN's. Last I looked these are all on "E", not just "D". As far as sports being the main driving advertising $$$ for television. The NFL signed a ONE BILLION dollar contract with CBS, FOX, ESPN and both "D" and "E" enjoy a nice slice of that pie. Check and see what it cost advertisers for a one minute spot during the Super Bowl. Sports is the major, not the only, driving force for television revenue.
Can you please post the link where I say that.
When choosing which satellite provider is best for you (and you don't have one now) I have always said if you like sports go to DIRECTV, If your not into sports then you want DISH.
My advice still doesn't change today.
Can you please post the link where I say that.
When choosing which satellite provider is best for you (and you don't have one now) I have always said if you like sports go to DIRECTV, If your not into sports then you want DISH.
My advice still doesn't change today.
I'm not talking about people who don't have either provider. When dish subscribers have whined (yes, i have whined a lot) about lack of ESPNUHD and lack of 24x7 HD RSN's your response has been if you like sports, you should have DirecTV. You have said this on your podcasts and in other threads. An no, I'm not going to dig through posts to find it.
Let me put it this way, there are plenty of folks like me who have Dish and enjoy sports. I have no interest in the sports packages but I would like to see locally and nationally broadcasted games from the major sports. I think it's unacceptable that as of November 2010 dish is still not showing all HD RSN games in HD. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect all games broadcast in HD to be shown in HD. Again, I'm not talking sports packages.
I don't accept "move to DirecTV" as a resonable recommendation. Here's wishing you'll go to bat for folks like me on this issue. Would you be willing to write another column on it? Talk to any of your contacts at Dish about it?
What is Scott supposed to do? He cannot turn on 24x7 HD RSNs? All he can do is point out that if you want things like ESPN U HD or 24x7 HD RSNs, go to DIRECTV.
Dish network has demonstrated over and over again that they are not serious about the sports fan. They will do what they can to provide the bare minimum. Look at the YES dispute. They will ignore a MLB club to avoid paying too much for spots. They did not bother to buy into MLBEI when they hand the chance, it was too much for them to spend. They seem to think having more non sports channels in HD is more important than 24x7 RSNs. I have to agree with Scott's position, if you want sports go to DIRECTV, they cater to sport enthusists. If you are a casual sports watcher (how I would categorise myself), Dish will probably have enough to satisfy you.
Dish network has demonstrated over and over again that they are not serious about the sports fan. They will do what they can to provide the bare minimum. Look at the YES dispute. They will ignore a MLB club to avoid paying too much for spots. They did not bother to buy into MLBEI when they hand the chance, it was too much for them to spend. They seem to think having more non sports channels in HD is more important than 24x7 RSNs. I have to agree with Scott's position, if you want sports go to DIRECTV, they cater to sport enthusists. If you are a casual sports watcher (how I would categorise myself), Dish will probably have enough to satisfy you.
No necessarily a casual sports fan, but more like if you're fine with getting your local (or "local") sports teams and don't mind having to wonder if the game will be or not in HD. Then I'd say I'm fine with E*.
During the giants run dish had a Hugh churn in the bay area. The winners were comcast and direct not dish.
This was form causal fans who wanted to see the post and pre game show from comcast in hd.
Comcast became the station to watch for all giants.
This was form causal fans who wanted to see the post and pre game show from comcast in hd.
Comcast became the station to watch for all giants.
The problem is when the causal sports user goes to watch a game and its not on. That's the major issue. Also the casual sports fan wants to tune in and see more than the games, they want to see the local area highlights. I would also say that the majority of users do care about more than game time only games. You also have users whom are casual sports fans, but are major fans of teams, for instance one person could love hockey and the blackhawks and can care less about the nba and bulls. The only way to get around this issue and the issues of people missing games is to simply broadcast them all.
Dish is the only provider out there that doesnt braudcast these channels in HD full time, and dish is the only provider out there that has complaints about sports programming not being in HD, aside from any espnu issues. Its clear that there is a link between dish's lack of broadcasting hd rsn's and the complaints.
The easyst way to get rid of the complaints, and straighten the lineup is to simply provide the programming.
I would love to have FSNAZ in HD 100% 0f the time. I can only speak for Arizona but we have 90+% of the Diamondback games in HD, 100% of the Suns games in HD, 70% of the Coyote games in HD and only about 50% of the ASU football and basketball games in HD. That's not perfect but it's not too bad. With the exception of the high priced packages (NFL etc) I think "E"pretty much offers most everything that "D" does. I consider myself pretty much of a sports nut but I'm not paying for packages that allow me to watch games I don't care about. I barely have time to support the local teams. I don't think my viewing habits warrants being told "if you like sports go to Directv". I see all I can handle just fine on "E".
I'm sorry because 1.) there is another thread mentioning this and 2.) I didn't read all the posts, but I (along with others) are experiencing a blackout of many Boston Celtics HD games, usually when they are away. The channel is a CSN. Is anyone else in Chicago or California or etc. (with a CSN) experencing this problem? Luckly I'm a bigger Boston Bruins fan than Celtics fan so I've gotten all my Bruins games from NESN in HD.
I agree. However with more of total games in HD and no additional bandwidth given to sports by DISH, the net result is you will see less games every year. It was noticeable last summer and less than 90% of games not in HD is --not-- acceptable this day in age. DISH is already my secondary provider, just for, yep, HD sports. <insert laughter> I have stayed with DISH for about 4 years after they dropped MLB-EI 2 months after I paid for a leased DVR but I am pondering D* due to lack of HD feeds. I would get the lowest package with D*, perhaps with just 1 or 2 receivers. Hopefully there are more Center Ice games in HD this season going forward from a really bad start. I also have been noticing DISH sound dropouts on my free Showtime East HD.
For the eighth time now, the answer to the OP is no.
Fox signed a deal a few weeks back to allow DirecTV to air only the live games from Fox Soccer Plus HD, i.e. "part time", even though the same channel is full time on some cable systems.
So, Fox clearly does not care about it, and it is not part of any contract.
Fox signed a deal a few weeks back to allow DirecTV to air only the live games from Fox Soccer Plus HD, i.e. "part time", even though the same channel is full time on some cable systems.
So, Fox clearly does not care about it, and it is not part of any contract.
