Directv has both Fox Sports 1 & 2 however there are no plans for them to carry the PAC12 network.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
I wonder why the leader in sports will not get pac 12...cost im guessing???
At least fs2 is in hd for direct
Directv has both Fox Sports 1 & 2 however there are no plans for them to carry the PAC12 network.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
The reason why ESPN demands higher prices is their exclusive contracts. For example, I am an Iowa State fan. They have 18 basketball games on ESPN, ESPN2 or ESPNU this upcoming season. I very RARELY watch ESPN other than when games are on. I watch movies much more than I watch ESPN, but I don't subscribe to the movie channels because I can get movies in so many other ways (Netflix, Amazon, Redbox, many other channels on dish, free previews of movie channels). I have over 250 movies recorded right now on several different hard drives so I can watch a movie anytime I want. But none of the channels that I watch the movies on (except maybe TCM) would be a problem if they went away. But if ESPN went away and I missed the Iowa State games, then I would switch providers in a minute.
Not as gross as Iowa. (We could do this all day.)?Iowa St.? Gross! JK
I'm very surprised that "D" still doesn't carry the PAC-12 Network. I understand not jumping on board right away but the 2013 season is starting as I type. Scott, they do not show FS1 or FS2 on their package channel line up and still no AMC.I wonder why the leader in sports will not get pac 12...cost im guessing???
At least fs2 is in hd for direct
The reason why ESPN demands higher prices is their exclusive contracts. For example, I am an Iowa State fan. They have 18 basketball games on ESPN, ESPN2 or ESPNU this upcoming season. I very RARELY watch ESPN other than when games are on. ................... But if ESPN went away and I missed the Iowa State games, then I would switch providers in a minute.
...................... Second, the fact there is no other channel like it (perhaps FS1 will be) is even more of a fact in their favor. Lose it and where do those viewers turn to? With AMC except for maybe three or so programs, there are other alternatives as DISH pointed out. Can't say that with ESPN. Again, not defending their cost, but it is more of a mainstream channel than is sometimes being given credit.
Will it still take until October to take effect or earlier?
That seems to be the word on the street as that would be the start of the new contract
Same answer as last month, nothing until october....Any news?
IS a deal with Espn the same as a deal with DISNEY and ABC as well,since they are all one big company?
Not available to non subscribers.
Mr. Ergen last month already hinted at his willingness to use what some might see as the nuclear option—going without Disney's channels permanently. "Disney is not going to go out of business without Dish Network and vice versa," he told analysts on a conference call.
He added that, taking a "really long-term view," a pay-TV provider could offer TV service without sports channels. "We're prepared to go either way," he added. Dish will try to strike a deal "with Disney that makes sense for our customers." But "if we don't get that deal, we'll part ways."
@kbohls
Texas AD DeLoss Dodds said Time Warner picking up Longhorn Network "is huge, and we hope we will pick up another one in a month." Prob DISH.
yeah he said that a long time ago.Dish Network's Charlie Ergen has hinted at the nuclear option: not carrying ESPN. http://on.wsj.com/1dI8R1G
You had already put this to rest yet your gut continues to be questionedyeah he said that a long time ago.
Why do people keep posting old stuff?
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys