DISH Reaches Long Term Agreement with DISNEY / ESPN / ABC

[chicagonettech]

How about making all sports channels a separate tier- NOT included in basic packages and OPTIONAL!

I'm really tired of paying for something I don't watch.

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 4

 

[fhsucade07]

How about making all sports channels a separate tier- NOT included in basic packages and OPTIONAL!

I'm really tired of paying for something I don't watch.

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 4

All of us are paying for things we don't watch...


Posted Using The New SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[Tampa8]

It isn't about things we don't watch, it isn't weather you do or do not watch Sports. Not only is that not the point, but take away the channels we don't watch and as most everyone agrees, you may pay more for what you do want in the end.

It's about the unequal cost of Sports. Fine when there was one or two RSN's in a DMA and just a very few other sports channels. In that respect the cost of ESPN wasn't such a big deal under those conditions. But with more and more RSN's and many other sports channels popping up, the system starts to not work if they have to be all included in the packages especially when they tend to cost more then other channels.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

If a deal was not close then this would be the week where you would see the ads and crawls start saying that DISH is planning on removing ESPN.

I am happy (and so is my gut) that we have not seen any of these yet or heard anything yet.

 

[tigerfan33]

Was there a scroll when ESPN removed their other hd channels a few years back?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Was there a scroll when ESPN removed their other hd channels a few years back?

Nope but that was not contract negotiations... in fact it was a surprise to DISH at the time.

 

[slick1ru2]

It isn't about things we don't watch, it isn't weather you do or do not watch Sports. Not only is that not the point, but take away the channels we don't watch and as most everyone agrees, you may pay more for what you do want in the end.

It's about the unequal cost of Sports. Fine when there was one or two RSN's in a DMA and just a very few other sports channels. In that respect the cost of ESPN wasn't such a big deal under those conditions. But with more and more RSN's and many other sports channels popping up, the system starts to not work if they have to be all included in the packages especially when they tend to cost more then other channels.

There are a ton of channels I would take off, including the sports channels that don't show football. But what is really a crime about all of this is how ESPN has used the money to reshape the college landscape behind the scenes and pretty much made college football a huge money making machine whose goal is to cull off the best and ditch the rest. In doing so they have destroyed long standing rivalries, disrupted and pretty much destroyed conferences, fostered an age of prima donna millionaire coaches, etc. and the NCAA has pretty much let them. I would not be adverse to Congress naming a czar to get some of the sleaze out of the game. We are talking a system made of mostly public schools and ESPN has pretty much decided who gets millions and who gets chump change.

 

[Yespage]

There are a ton of channels I would take off, including the sports channels that don't show football. But what is really a crime about all of this is how ESPN has used the money to reshape the college landscape behind the scenes and pretty much made college football a huge money making machine whose goal is to cull off the best and ditch the rest. In doing so they have destroyed long standing rivalries, disrupted and pretty much destroyed conferences, fostered an age of prima donna millionaire coaches, etc. and the NCAA has pretty much let them. I would not be adverse to Congress naming a czar to get some of the sleaze out of the game. We are talking a system made of mostly public schools and ESPN has pretty much decided who gets millions and who gets chump change.

I think your antiquated view of what College Football used to be is a bit hazy eyed. All you need to do is watch The Male Animal (1942) film to see that the business that is College Football has not changed much.

 

[redelephants]

Here's the bottom line with this dispute. As a consumer, we will undoubtedly pay more for our programming packages next year. While we may get the HD feeds of channels we all want, understand this will come at a price. As an avid sports fan, I would hate to see Dish drop ESPN, however, at what point does this madness end or will it ever end? I'm pretty fed up with the constant level of greediness on both sides of these negotiations!

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

at what point does this madness end or will it ever end? I'm pretty fed up with the constant level of greediness on both sides of these negotiations!

I honestly don't think it will end. And honestly I understand the sides of both parties.

?The fine line is where they meet in the middle and make a deal which is good for both of them.

 

[Laddyboy]

If a deal was not close then this would be the week where you would see the ads and crawls start saying that DISH is planning on removing ESPN.

I am happy (and so is my gut) that we have not seen any of these yet or heard anything yet.

I think both sides want a deal, but the devil is always in the details which is usually what scuttles the "deal" at the last moment. There is no reason that deals have to go down to the last second. Either both sides have come to agreement and are just waiting to make an announcement or simply let the new deal take hold when the old expires without much fanfare or the details have not yet been agreed to. If it's the latter, there may not be a deal. That's not to say the two parties might not agree to continue under existing terms while they negotiate. I'm pretty sure The Mouse thinks they have Dish over a barrel. Heck, they think they have everyone over a barrel. That attitude doesn't help making deals. Also The Mouse is going to want its pound of flesh for the Hopper. They're going to have to haggle over the price per pound.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Yes but the house of the mouse also understand that they need the BILLIONS of dollars that DISH pays them per year too.

 

[Tampa8]

Scott, is it possible we would see uplinks (NA) for things to come with ESPN this Wednesday?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Anything possible. But to be honest I have not heard of anything.

 

[jagowar]

I hope so. Yesterday I had to watch my Texas A&M Aggies is glorious SD on ESPNU. Really hope the new deal brings this channel in HD.

Same... although I was at the game so its was in hd for me.

Although really the SEC network is the more important channel going forward so hopefully a deal will be included for that as well.... would suspect going forward most games will be on there.

 

[king3pj]

Same... although I was at the game so its was in hd for me.

Although really the SEC network is the more important channel going forward so hopefully a deal will be included for that as well.... would suspect going forward most games will be on there.

If it is anything like the Big Ten Network most games won't be on there. The top tier Big Ten games still end up on ABC or ESPN. I think everyone from the Big Ten has to play on BTN at least twice a season. The best teams usually just play their cupcake games on BTN where the weaker teams might end up there more often. They get better match ups once conference play starts but ESPN/ABC still get the best ones.

 

[Scherrman]

If it is anything like the Big Ten Network most games won't be on there. The top tier Big Ten games still end up on ABC or ESPN. I think everyone from the Big Ten has to play on BTN at least twice a season. The best teams usually just play their cupcake games on BTN where the weaker teams might end up there more often. They get better match ups once conference play starts but ESPN/ABC still get the best ones.

Usually the weaker match ups are on BTN. I believe each year they networks go through the schedule and get to pick the games they want. The larger networks have first say and the other games trickle down to BTN and ESPNU.

 

[jagowar]

If it is anything like the Big Ten Network most games won't be on there. The top tier Big Ten games still end up on ABC or ESPN. I think everyone from the Big Ten has to play on BTN at least twice a season. The best teams usually just play their cupcake games on BTN where the weaker teams might end up there more often. They get better match ups once conference play starts but ESPN/ABC still get the best ones.

That is what makes the SEC network different.... CBS gets first pick each week but after that ESPN controls the rest of the lineup. Now I'm sure some games will still be on ESPN/ESPN2 but I will be shocked if very many end up on espnU. I would expect a majority to go to the SEC network. Having one company (espn) control the vast majority of the games each week is what makes the SEC network different imo.

For example: http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-network-launches-with-texas-am-at-south-carolina.php

 

[cosmo_kramer]

Yes but the house of the mouse also understand that they need the BILLIONS of dollars that DISH pays them per year too.

I agree. Combine that with the fact that ESPN is opening their state-of-the-art digital center soon and find themselves competing with FS1 and NBCSN, they don't want to risk losing any eyeballs at this point. I'm usually bad at prognosticating, but I'll try anyway. I predict an on-time agreement with no dropped channels and HD restored to those that were missing....

 

[slick1ru2]

I think your antiquated view of what College Football used to be is a bit hazy eyed. All you need to do is watch The Male Animal (1942) film to see that the business that is College Football has not changed much.

Its nothing like it was, today we are talking a multi-billion dollar industry. Million dollar prima donna coaches on the sidelines acting however they want. If a player acted that way they would be ejected.

Emory did a study of the FMV of what college football players provide for every school. That is, TV revenue divided by the number of players, subtract tuition and room and board and multiply it by the NFL collective bargain agreement rate and even at mid majors you are talking 70k per player per year. Basketball players brought in significantly more due to few players. If they want to do the money route, include the players. Without them, there is no college football. And that crap about they get an education is ridiculous. Read the SI investigation. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130911/oklahoma-state-part-2-academics/ That has been going on forever too.

Television has changed college football -- and all of college athletics, for that matter -- for better and for worse, and despite a host of new distribution methods already in use and on the horizon, television's influence doesn't appear in danger of eroding anytime soon.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20.../tv-college-football/index.html#ixzz2fjMlbRz3