Turn Off Ads?
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 101

Thread: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

  1. #61
    Member kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    17,851

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R View Post
    Yes, DirecTV offers the BTN as part of their Choice package.

    Some people cannot get a satellite dish. We had a similar discussion when MLB wanted to put Extra Innings on DirecTV only. Eventually MLB, Dish and the cable companies came to an agreement and you can get Extra Innings on cable.

    It seems like it has been such a PITA for cable companies to get these new channels on their systems. NFL Network, ESPNU, BTN, etc. I feel for the folks who can't get satellite. It's like when there's a baseball strike. You have two sides squaring off against each other and the consumer is the loser and there's nothing they can do about it.
    Interesting point about people not being able to have a dish...at one point my apartment faced the wrong direction so I was stuck with digital cable for 2 years instead of Directv, so I was in that boat at one time....I guess my question is, how often occurence is it that one can't get a dish? I would have thought the vast majority of people would be able to get a dish...maybe I'm mistaken.


  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #62
    Member Reds Fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Piqua, OH
    Posts
    19,727

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Quote Originally Posted by kaldaniels View Post
    Interesting point about people not being able to have a dish...at one point my apartment faced the wrong direction so I was stuck with digital cable for 2 years instead of Directv, so I was in that boat at one time....I guess my question is, how often occurence is it that one can't get a dish? I would have thought the vast majority of people would be able to get a dish...maybe I'm mistaken.
    It depends I know a lot of people that live in apartments are not allowed to have them by the rules of where they live. Also you need a clear view of the southern sky. That is why I can't have a dish because the trees in my neighbor's yard block the view I would need of the southern sky.

  4. #63
    Member cumberlandreds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Mid Atlantic, USA
    Posts
    16,164

    DISH has added Big 10 Network

    I know a lot of you are Ohio State and Big Ten fans in general so I thought I would let the folks who have DISH know that they have just added the Big 10 Network just this afternoon. It is on channel 439 and alternate Big 10 channels on 440-444 for all the games Saturday. Enjoy!
    Reds Fan Since 1971

  5. #64
    The Future GoReds33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    2,468

    Re: DISH has added Big 10 Network

    Quote Originally Posted by cumberlandreds View Post
    I know a lot of you are Ohio State and Big Ten fans in general so I thought I would let the folks who have DISH know that they have just added the Big 10 Network just this afternoon. It is on channel 439 and alternate Big 10 channels on 440-444 for all the games Saturday. Enjoy!
    Thats awesome. I was going through the channels, and spotted a big 10 alternate channel. This really sucks for Time Warner customers though.
    If you can't build a winning team with that core a fire-sale isn't the solution. Selling the franchise, moving them to Nashville and converting GABP into a used car lot is.
    -LTlabner

  6. #65
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    18,231

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Look for more full page ads in area newspapers in the BTN vs. TWC on-going war...

    http://www.cleveland.com/sports/plai...330.xml&coll=2

    Big Ten Network pulls plug on negotiations with Time Warner
    Time Warner claims their talks are ongoing; OSU game to be unseen by many
    Wednesday, October 31, 2007
    Doug Lesmerises
    Plain Dealer Reporter

    Columbus- To the argument that the Big Ten Network is a niche channel featuring second-tier football games and minor sports, the Big Ten presents Exhibit A: the No. 1 team in the country.

    Top-ranked Ohio State hosts Wisconsin at noon Saturday in a game unavailable to about two-thirds of the homes in Ohio. Time Warner Cable, with about 1 million customers in its Northeast Ohio branch, remains locked in a struggle with the Big Ten Network. Comcast and Charter, the other two largest cable providers in the Midwest, also do not have deals with the Big Ten Network.

    Actually, the Big Ten Network claims negotiations are off, while a Time Warner spokesperson said talks are always ongoing. The Big Ten Network is available in Northeast Ohio on DirecTV, Dish Network and AT&T U-verse.

    Either way, nothing is happening before Saturday, which leaves millions of Buckeyes fans out of luck, forced to sports bars or the home of friends. It's just one game, but it also presents the Big Ten Network with an opportunity in a public battle shaped by spin on both sides.

    "I think this is a monumental game for us," said Mark Silverman, president of the Big Ten Network. "I think it shows the Big Ten Network is relevant on the college athletics scene, and at times we'll have very important games. This is not a fluke."

    The Buckeyes have appeared on the network three times previously this season (compared to, for instance, eight for Indiana), but those nonconference matchups against Youngstown State, Akron and Kent State were of far less interest than a showdown with a 7-2 Wisconsin team ranked No. 21 in the BCS ratings.

    Under the conference's television contract, ABC has the first pick of a game each week, but that contract includes the caveat that every team must play at least one conference game on the Big Ten Network. Since Ohio State has not done that yet, the Network had to get either Wisconsin or next week's game with Illinois. Even Silverman was surprised when ABC chose to televise Michigan-Michigan State this week, leaving the Buckeyes-Badgers to the Big Ten Network.

    "Do I wish the Big Ten Network were on everyone's TV? Absolutely," said Ohio State coach Jim Tressel. "Do I understand exactly why it is or it isn't? No. I empathize because I would want everyone in the world to see us play. . . . I guess if I don't have the Big Ten Network, I go to my friend's house that does. There's nothing I can do about that. I'm hoping one day that that's not the case."

    That one day may not be soon. Chris Thomas, a spokesman for Time Warner's office in Northeast Ohio, expects the Network to promote this heavily, and he said he hoped there was progress before the brunt of the network's basketball coverage kicked in.

    He said nothing will change until the Big Ten Network backs off its demand, considered unreasonable by Time Warner, to be included on extended basic cable.

    Thomas could not confirm it, but Silverman said Time Warner's most recent proposal to the Big Ten included placement in a sports package that charges only subscribers who want to pay extra for it, or placement in extended basic cable if the Big Ten Network was provided to Time Warner for free.

    With agreements with 150 other cable or satellite companies already in place, Silverman said giving away the programming to the largest cable providers to produce more viewers, and higher advertising revenue, isn't an option. He didn't sound hopeful about the future of a Time Warner deal.

    "There's nothing going on," Silverman said. "There's zero chance of getting this network carried anytime soon. That's a fact."
    She used to wake me up with coffee ever morning

  7. #66
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    26,041

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Thomas could not confirm it, but Silverman said Time Warner's most recent proposal to the Big Ten included placement in a sports package that charges only subscribers who want to pay extra for it, or placement in extended basic cable if the Big Ten Network was provided to Time Warner for free.

    With agreements with 150 other cable or satellite companies already in place, Silverman said giving away the programming to the largest cable providers to produce more viewers, and higher advertising revenue, isn't an option. He didn't sound hopeful about the future of a Time Warner deal.
    In case there was any doubt, let it be known: It's all about the money. It's not that the Big Ten thinks everyone ought to have the network on their cable package, it's that they want to be paid by everyone having it on their cable package.

  8. #67
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,719

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Of course its about the money, I don't think either side has disputed that. It's just a matter of how much money the product is worth.
    Somewhere between 2nd most expensive station behind ESPN and Free is my guess.
    Quote Originally Posted by BuckeyeRed27 View Post
    Honest I can't say it any better than Hoosier Red did in his post, he sums it up basically perfectly.

  9. #68
    Member Cedric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Monroe
    Posts
    6,606

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea Ray View Post
    In case there was any doubt, let it be known: It's all about the money. It's not that the Big Ten thinks everyone ought to have the network on their cable package, it's that they want to be paid by everyone having it on their cable package.
    Well they want their network to make money. Is that shocking or is there something I'm missing in what you wrote?
    This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.

  10. #69
    REDSBROWNSBUCKEYES
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Dayton Ohio
    Posts
    771

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Quote Originally Posted by SMcGavin View Post
    That's actually not what they are doing. The BTN only wants to be basic cable in Big Ten states, and the cable companies are saying no. I read a couple of articles last week, one from a BTN guy and one from a Comcast spokesman, both implied that once/if this basic cable thing got resolved BTN would be on digital sports tiers in non-Big Ten states.

    That being said the Big Ten is still in the wrong here. Most Big Ten fans that live in the area saw all of their team's football/basketball games last season, and now it's looking like that won't happen. I am excited about BTN getting put on in Columbus right before the start of OSU football (at least I think that's what happened), hopefully a similar arrangement happens when people here realize we will miss IU basketball games.

    Just my two cents as I have been following this situation pretty closely.
    I have a hard time saying that the big ten network is in the wrong. If what they are asking for from TWC is so off base then why has Dish and Direct TV not had a problem with complying with the demands. The only reason TWC hasn't caved on this yet is because they are the big dog in this area and they do not want to be told what to do. For those of you that follow Ultimate Fighter time warner is Matt Hughes and Direct Tv is Matt Serra. We all know Hughes has had a far superior carreer and is more known in his field but it looks like eggo is going to bight them on the butt.

  11. #70
    Member Cedric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Monroe
    Posts
    6,606

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    I've never had worse tv than Time Warner. Directv has absolutely everything you can want. Directv has Setanta sports and other options that you just can't get with regular cable. And the picture is much better.

    And I don't work for them either. Honestly.
    This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.

  12. #71
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    18,231

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    By golly, when OSU fans can't see the Buckeyes, politicians listen...

    http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.d...20356/1062/SPT

    The annual playoff cable flap
    State rep steps in; Says there ought to be a law against shutting out sports viewers
    BY JON CRAIG AND JOHN KIESEWETTER | JCRAIG@ENQUIRER.COM AND JKIESWETTER@ENQUIRER.COM

    COLUMBUS - As football fans brace for less access to televised NFL and Ohio State Buckeye games, a Cincinnati-area lawmaker is calling for a timeout - including legal arbitration and penalties - in broadcast disputes between cable companies and TV sports networks.

    State Rep. Louis Blessing, R-Colerain, introduced legislation Thursday that he says will protect Ohioans from losing out on television viewing options due to clashes between cable operators and programmers.

    Blessing said he has received numerous calls asking him to investigate why TV audiences can't get access to some sporting events.

    "With ... games on the NFL Network in only three weeks ... and the recent decision ... to place Saturday's Ohio State-Wisconsin game on the Big Ten Network, there is no time like the present to encourage cable operators and programmers to work together for the benefit of Ohio cable viewers," Blessing said.

    A Bengals spokesman said his football team supports the bill. But a spokeswoman for Time Warner Cable cried foul over government intervention into private business negotiations.

    Karen Baxter, public affairs director for Time Warner's southwestern Ohio division, said, "There is no proper basis to compel businesses to enter into agreements at all or on terms they don't accept voluntarily."

    Time Warner, which serves about 640,000 customers in Southwest Ohio, is at an impasse in talks with the Big Ten Network, which has exclusive rights to televise Saturday's OSU-Wisconsin football game.

    The BTN, which could charge Ohio cable operators as much as $1.30 a month per subscriber to carry its content, wants to be shown on expanded basic cable. The BTN charges cable companies in non-Big Ten states an average of 30 cents per month. Kentucky customers pay 10 cents a month.

    Time Warner and Comcast have declined to fold the BTN's Ohio fee into their basic cable rate and say they don't want to pass that extra cost onto Ohio customers who aren't interested in BTN content.

    Instead, the cable operators want to put the BTN on a premium-priced sports tier.

    Titled the "Cable Anti-Discrimination and Dispute Resolution Act of 2007," House Bill 377 calls for a third party to help mediate any dispute when cable operators and programmers can't reach an agreement. It also can be applied to disagreements over news, public affairs, entertainment and other cable programs.

    Blessing's bill proposes that arbitration agreements get filed with a Common Pleas Court and can result in monetary penalties if one side's conduct is unreasonable. The legislation also sets a specific timetable for settling cable programming disputes.

    The NFL Network's 24-hour football programming is also unavailable on cable, and Bengals spokesman Bob Bedinghaus said the majority of Bengal fans living outside the Greater Cincinnati area probably will miss out on the NFL Network's broadcast of the Bengals-San Francisco 49ers game Dec. 15.

    "Obviously we are supportive of the legislation," Bedinghaus said Thursday.

    For the second year, WLWT-TV will simulcast the Bengals' NFL Network game, said Richard Dyer, Channel 5 president and general manager.

    But Time Warner customers elsewhere in Ohio might not see it, Dyer said.

    Insight Communications, the major cable operator throughout Northern Kentucky, provides both the BTN and the NFL Network.

    DirectTV, DISH Network, Wide Open West and about 150 other cable companies have added the BTN to their expanded basic level of service without a price increase to consumers.

    HOUSE BILL 377

    House Bill 377 can be found on the internet at: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/b...?ID=127_HB_377
    She used to wake me up with coffee ever morning

  13. #72
    Member Cedric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Monroe
    Posts
    6,606

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    It seems that Time Warner is the only company that fights the NFL network, Big Ten network, and ESPNU. Why does every other company make deals and Time Warner just refuses?

    Satellite companies are growing at a huge rate right now and Time Warner says they aren't losing money. That just doesn't add up. The real numbers show that Time Warner is losing ground. They also haven't created the bandwidth to compete with Directv who has over 100 HD channels. If they don't fix that soon they are going to lose more and more customers. I think their ego is gonna end up losing them a ton of money.
    Last edited by Cedric; 11-02-2007 at 11:35 AM.
    This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.

  14. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,719

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Comcast is fighting them as well. Much to the chagrin of IU fans.
    Quote Originally Posted by BuckeyeRed27 View Post
    Honest I can't say it any better than Hoosier Red did in his post, he sums it up basically perfectly.

  15. #74
    Member Cedric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Monroe
    Posts
    6,606

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    I personally think that the basketball season will be the breaking point for Time Warner. Football games are only once per week and the best teams are nationally covered. It's a COMPLETELY different story with basketball. I think Hoosier fans, Buckeye fans, and Michigan/Michigan State fans are going to switch to satellite or go nuts.

    Over half the Big Ten games are on the Big Ten network. That's gonna cause some serious heat for Time Warner.
    This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.

  16. #75
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,189

    Re: NY Times: Not Everyone Wants Channel That’s All Big Ten, All the Time

    Quote Originally Posted by Cedric View Post
    I've never had worse tv than Time Warner. Directv has absolutely everything you can want. Directv has Setanta sports and other options that you just can't get with regular cable. And the picture is much better.

    And I don't work for them either. Honestly.
    It seems that Time Warner is the only company that fights the NFL network, Big Ten network, and ESPNU. Why does every other company make deals and Time Warner just refuses?

    Satellite companies are growing at a huge rate right now and Time Warner says they aren't losing money. That just doesn't add up. The real numbers show that Time Warner is losing ground. They also haven't created the bandwidth to compete with Directv who has over 100 HD channels. If they don't fix that soon they are going to lose more and more customers. I think their ego is gonna end up losing them a ton of money
    I have a hard time saying that the big ten network is in the wrong. If what they are asking for from TWC is so off base then why has Dish and Direct TV not had a problem with complying with the demands. The only reason TWC hasn't caved on this yet is because they are the big dog in this area and they do not want to be told what to do. For those of you that follow Ultimate Fighter time warner is Matt Hughes and Direct Tv is Matt Serra. We all know Hughes has had a far superior carreer and is more known in his field but it looks like eggo is going to bight them on the butt.
    I don't want to pay extra for my cable because some of you want to watch the B10 network. The sticking point is that they want to be included in basic cable and that has been the sticking point since the beginning. That and they want TWC to pay them more than ESPN currently gets. Why would TWC put a channel that only appeals to a fraction of its viewing audience on basic cable, especially when it would raise prices for everyone? The sports pack seems like the most reasonable spot for the channel to any normal person. The BTN has tried to make TWC look like the bad guy, but the truth is that the only sticking point that the sides can't agree on is where the channel will be. The BTN is the reason that it isn't on cable yet, not TWC. At last check, TWC was even willing to compromise price for position, but BTN was unwilling to budge. BTW, ESPNU is now on TWC.

    Also, people don't understand that bargaining for satalite companies and cable are completely different. Satalite doesn't have a true government regulated basic package as cable does. The satalite companies are far less regulated on frequencies also, so they aren't as limited as cable companies. They can add 50 more channels with no problem, but cable companies have only a certain amount of space to work with. They have to subract before they add. They only have a certain frequency range to work with.

    The BTN doesn't make sense for TWC the way BTN wants to be offered. It just doesn't make sense. Period, and yes TWC is being bullied by the BTN. All of those adds asking people to call and complain to cable compaines and picking certain games to show that affect the area with the cable companies.

    Yes TWC takes more time to negotiate, but to believe that TWC won't have these commercials in the end is just crazy. They will, but they will be on reasonable terms. Terms that don't affect customers who don't want these networks. Even as upset as some of you are about not having it, trust me, TWC will go through a lot more crap if they have to raise everbody's prices over this.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | Gallen5862 | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator