Senators Send Letter To NFL

[Neutronite]

Judiciary committee senators Leahy and Specter sent a letter to the NFL regarding the NFL making their televised games to more viewers or face a reconsideration of the antitrust exemption. Read details:
Senators Send Letter to NFL - EarthLink - Sports News

 

[charper1]

Pardon my french, but F those senators and that committee. The cable industry has had an all to lopsided path for far too many decades and they stooped to no ends to keep satellite in the stone age; turnabout is fair play and they should just negotiate in good faith and keep the GOVT out of it; be it the NFL now or with DBS. So if they want to NFL Network, pay for it and place it where the NFL wants it and forget about finding a way to get your subs to pay even more money.

 

[salsadancer7]

Pardon my french, but F those senators and that committee. The cable industry has had an all to lopsided path for far too many decades and they stooped to no ends to keep satellite in the stone age; turnabout is fair play and they should just negotiate in good faith and keep the GOVT out of it; be it the NFL now or with DBS.

Sorry Charper...but F**K the NFL, MLB, NBA and ALL those professional sports leagues! It's bad enough that they screw the fans by holding their cities hostage DEMANDING multi-million dollar stadium and in some cases charging a "lincensing fees" just for the RIGHT TO BUY TICKETS. So THEN, they said, 'F**K the average fan, we are gonna put a package together where a fan can see ALL games....but lets do it on only ONE cable/sat company.....' No Charper, F**K THEM 3 times over. The next thing they will be saying is "we need this because we have to feed our families..."

It kills me that people bitch about 'the average fan is being left out in the cold'...YET here is another example of this and you wanna side with the Leagues??!!

 

[charper1]

I separate the league and its media and this from the franchises and their ownership and how each deals with its community.

 

[duckydan]

It's been said many times but Specter is not one that should ever take an antitrust to court as he has Comcast with their hand in his back pocket. Meanwhile Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia is not distributed on any medium other than Comcast Cable meaning no Philadelphia team other than the Eagles can be seen on tv barring the occasional national game. As for the NFL every company with the exception of Comcast is carrying it and it is Comcast that is charging the additional fees (up to $10 for the sports package per month) I get it on Dish in the top 200 and I am pretty sure Direc has the same tiering for it. Specter has taken the NFL to court yearly and every year he fails... he's just an ass.

 

[Cranked]

Sorry Charper...but F**K the NFL, MLB, NBA and ALL those professional sports leagues! It's bad enough that they screw the fans by holding their cities hostage DEMANDING multi-million dollar stadium and in some cases charging a "lincensing fees" just for the RIGHT TO BUY TICKETS. So THEN, they said, 'F**K the average fan, we are gonna put a package together where a fan can see ALL games....but lets do it on only ONE cable/sat company.....' No Charper, F**K THEM 3 times over. The next thing they will be saying is "we need this because we have to feed our families..."

It kills me that people bitch about 'the average fan is being left out in the cold'...YET here is another example of this and you wanna side with the Leagues??!!

No kidding, if they actually cared about the fans then they would worry about getting their sunday ticket to ALL the fans, not just D* subs. I can see both sides of the arguement and I say F em all. They should have never taken those FREE games off the air and moved them to their chan in the first place. They want to make more money by doing that, thats fine. But the cable companies arent obligated to carry it. People can switch to sat. if they dont like it. And they NFL doesnt care about the fans, they only care about the $$$ hence the reason they let D* buy the sole ownership to the ticket.

 

[charper1]

They want to make more money by doing that, thats fine. But the cable companies arent obligated to carry it. People can switch to sat. if they dont like it. And they NFL doesnt care about the fans, they only care about the $$$ hence the reason they let D* buy the sole ownership to the ticket.

EXACTLY, so no need for cable to go to court or for the Govt to get into it. Just two businesses trying to hash out a deal.

 

[Derwin0]

How is there not coverage?

Both the NFL Network & ESPN games are shown OTA in both teams home markets. And the cable companies have the same chance to carry the NFL Network as they do ESPN.

 

[Ramy]

The cable companies need to negotiate for the channel.

 

[akodoreign]

The cable companies need to negotiate for the channel.

Cable companies refuse to carry it in their basic package (at least charter does). and thats what the NFL wants.

Charter wants to charge people $5 extra a month to get it. NFL says offer it for free.

one of the reasons I switched to E*

 

[IcEWoLF]

Cable companies refuse to carry it in their basic package (at least charter does). and thats what the NFL wants.

Charter wants to charge people $5 extra a month to get it. NFL says offer it for free.

one of the reasons I switched to E*

Cable companies deserve it, they want 5$ extra, well they are screwed now.
Most cable companies don't offer the NFL network or even NFLHD.
They are digging their own graveyard, why not just increase people's monthly bill by 5$, that may help them instead of adding another package.
That is the only way they can get out of this whole mess.

 

[Paul Wozniak]

Isn't this just a case of the "freemarket" at work. Won't be a "free market" if the government gets involved. At the moment I'm having a hard time thinking of anything that got better after the government got involved.

 

[akodoreign]

Isn't this just a case of the "freemarket" at work. Won't be a "free market" if the government gets involved. At the moment I'm having a hard time thinking of anything that got better after the government got involved.

Yup, defiantly would not help anyone but the cable companies. (like they need anymore help)

 

[vurbano]

Isn't this just a case of the "freemarket" at work. Won't be a "free market" if the government gets involved. At the moment I'm having a hard time thinking of anything that got better after the government got involved.

:up:up:up

 

[Greg Bimson]

Understand part of the history here.

Special legislation was required to allow the NFL and the AFL to merge back in the late 1960's. Therefore, the NFL monopoly was created by the government, with some oversight.

However, as was mentioned earlier, Specter heading up the call for the NFL to change it's views on the NFL Network is akin to asking your dentist to extract your colon. Specter is in the back pocket of Pennsylvania-based Comcast. Comcast is the one company that holds Philadephia sports fans hostage because the own most of the local cable systems, they own Comcast Sports Net Philly and they own the NBA 76ers and the NHL Flyers. Therefore, Comcast direct the Sixers and Flyers local broadcast rights to their own sports channel and then refuse to sell it to meaningful competition, such as DirecTV and Dish Network, because there isn't a program-access requirement for the fibre-delivered Comcast Sports Net Philadelphia.

 

[vurbano]

What tier cable places it on is cables business. Forcing them to do anything against their will undermines the free market.

 

[akodoreign]

What tier cable places it on is cables business. Forcing them to do anything against their will undermines the free market.

I will disagree. NFL network wants to give their programing away for free to cable and dish companies. So why would the consumer want to pay more for it?

Basically NFL doesn't want the cable companies to make money on something they are not charging for.

 

[Peter Parker]

I will disagree. NFL network wants to give their programing away for free to cable and dish companies. So why would the consumer want to pay more for it?

Basically NFL doesn't want the cable companies to make money on something they are not charging for.

I don't think that is correct. Everything I can find indicates that the NFL charges $.61 per sub. the controversy is over whether they can tell a cable company that it must be in the lowest tier and therefore allow them to collect that $.61 from ALL subs including those that do not want the channel. many cable companies have preferred to place it in a higher or a digital tier to encourage people to move up.

The NFL is not giving the product away so that they can collect ad revenue.

 

[akodoreign]

I don't think that is correct. Everything I can find indicates that the NFL charges $.61 per sub. the controversy is over whether they can tell a cable company that it must be in the lowest tier and therefore allow them to collect that $.61 from ALL subs including those that do not want the channel. many cable companies have preferred to place it in a higher or a digital tier to encourage people to move up.

The NFL is not giving the product away so that they can collect ad revenue.

I was under the impression it was the other way. Not the first time I have been wrong though.

But AD revenue would be better than the subscribed base currently attached.

 

[Peter Parker]

Of course now they get the $.61 AND the ad revenue. The NFL thinks that the cable companies will have to give in. We wills see.