# Latest on the Big Ten Network



## nmetro

The following is from today's Columbus Dispatch. You'll notice that BTN is asking $1.10 per subscriber to carry the channel. This does not bode well for carriage on the DISH network.

BIG TEN NETWORK
Agreements with cable companies not imminent
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Ken Gordon
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Don't be surprised if the Big Ten Network and major cable companies don't announce an agreement this month, next month or even well into August.

In any game of brinksmanship, urgency does not build until the last minute. In this case, the network plans to launch in late August, maybe only a week or so before football season.

"There's nothing to flip a switch on, there's no programming right now," said Elizabeth Conlisk, the network's vice president of communications. "Deadlines are deadlines. I think you will see that we likely will reach some of the larger agreements closer to launch."

Ohio State confirmed Tuesday that its first two football games will be aired on the Big Ten Network: Sept. 1 against Youngstown State and Sept. 8 against Akron.

Right now, central Ohio's three major cable providers - Time Warner, WOW and Insight - have not agreed to pick up the network on their expanded basic tiers.

The Big Ten Network hopes to persuade cable companies in the league's eight-state home area to carry it on their expanded basic tiers; Big Ten fans outside the Midwest likely will have to watch it on digital cable or satellite.

"We're optimistic," Time Warner spokesperson Judy Barbao said. "This type of discussion is typical for channel additions."

Satellite providers DirecTV and AT &T have forged agreements with the network. In mid-May, the network announced a deal with Buckeye CableSystem, which serves more than 150,000 households in northwest Ohio and southeast Michigan.

The stumbling block, of course, is money. A report in Street and Smith's Business Journal said the network is seeking $1.10 per subscriber from cable providers compared with the 70 to 90 cents the NFL Network sought last year. That cost was a factor in Time Warner's decision not to add the NFL Network to its digital tier.

Conlisk remains hopeful.

"I can't speak to specifics, but I think we are continuing to have productive conversations," she said. "With the bigger operators, things are a little bit more complicated."

[email protected]


----------



## angiecopus

My dad gets two tickets to each home game, If i don't get to go to any of the games this will leave me out of watching games if its on the big ten network such as the akron game and my brother lives in akron. Not sure about the Youngstown state game. hopefully i will get to go with my dad to that game.

angela


----------



## M. Campbell

> Satellite providers DirecTV and AT &T have forged agreements with the network.


So does the agreement with AT&T involve Dish or does it only involve their affiliation with D*?


----------



## nmetro

While The Dispatch was not clear on this, it is most likely D*. Ohio was merged into SBC then ATT,from what was Ameritech, so it is possible Ameritech had an agreement with D*. I live in Colorado, so I cannot really confirm this.


----------



## mhowie

M. Campbell said:


> So does the agreement with AT&T involve Dish or does it only involve their affiliation with D*?


If it is relevant sports-related content, the odds that Dish will pick it up are slim.


----------



## allargon

I would actually pay an extra $5/mo. DURING football season for it. However, I doubt if Dish will carry it if they are making NFL Network style demands.


----------



## heisman

M. Campbell said:


> So does the agreement with AT&T involve Dish or does it only involve their affiliation with D*?


Neither, U-Verse has signed on with BTN.


----------



## jrbdmb

mhowie said:


> If it is relevant sports-related content, the odds that Dish will pick it up are slim.


If it is *limited* relevant sports-related content (remember that all the big games will still be on ESPN / ABC / CBS), and the price is far too high for what the channel is offerring ($1.10/mo. for some 3rd tier football and men's basketball games and a bunch of non-revenue sports that have extremely limited appeal), you are correct that the the odds that Dish will pick it up are slim.

Considering that the NFL is having trouble being picked up at $0.75/sub, the BTN at $1.10 a sub is ridiculous. I'd like the channel, but don't blame Dish one bit if they pass on this one.

And the problem with being carried on expanded cable is that in most cases these channels are already jam packed. To add the BTN something has to be dropped, which may be tough considering all the contracts in place for the channels already on the local cable system.


----------



## iublue

Do they have to guarantee so many subscribers?

I want the BTN and I am presently waiting to see if they pick it up before I commit to HD. To get the BTN I am willing (not wanting) to go the Direct.

Choice is the key.


----------



## gopherscot

Same thing here .... I am not wanting to go to Direct but willing to as well!


----------



## Codeman00

I'll pay $5 a month for it, I don't really care. Just make it available to me to make that decision..thats all I ask.

It really ticks me off that we are all in the dark about this. Charlie could tell us on Charlie Chat what is going on but no...here we sit wondering until the last minute.


----------



## iublue

just because Dish can't or won't carry the BTN? Painter and Sampson has the rivalry headed back to the Knight/Keady days and it should be good fun for several years. I have not missed watching an IU game for probably 20+ years and I can't/won't miss one in the future and if I have to go to Direct I will.

Have you emailed Dish? I did and told them bluntly that if they did not carry the BTN then I was gone even after years of being with dish.

I would still like to know how much it costs Dish to carry a channel. I find it hard to believe that they would not at least break even on the deal and keep customers like me, you and gopherscot in the process.

Like you said choice is the key.


----------



## lionsrule

......if direct has this channel in HD come labor day and dish doesn't, I'M GONE....


----------



## PghGuy

iublue said:


> I have not missed watching an IU game for probably 20+ years and I can't/won't miss one in the future and if I have to go to Direct I will.


If you have not missed watching a game in 20 years, why would not having the BTN cause you to switch to Direct? You obviously are not missing these games well before BTN even existed...


----------



## jcrandall

Codeman00 said:


> I'll pay $5 a month for it, I don't really care. Just make it available to me to make that decision..thats all I ask.
> 
> It really ticks me off that we are all in the dark about this. Charlie could tell us on Charlie Chat what is going on but no...here we sit wondering until the last minute.


Charlie will give you the same negotating answer for years past the last minute.

I called in on a chat last year about FSN Detroit HD, and was told they planned to have 11 or 21 (can't remeber) RSN launced by spring 07, and they aren't even close to that many.


----------



## iublue

PghGuy said:


> If you have not missed watching a game in 20 years, why would not having the BTN cause you to switch to Direct? You obviously are not missing these games well before BTN even existed...


From what I have read some games are going to be ONLY on the BTN. No local feeds or ESPN+, so if you do not have the BTN then you don't watch the game.

That is unacceptable to me.


----------



## M. Campbell

heisman said:


> Neither, U-Verse has signed on with BTN.


Thank you. I appreciate the reply and I was not aware of this affiliation with AT&T.


----------



## DCSholtis

iublue said:


> From what I have read some games are going to be ONLY on the BTN. No local feeds or ESPN+, so if you do not have the BTN then you don't watch the game.
> 
> That is unacceptable to me.


Correct. Big Ten games will no longer be in the Game Plan Package. The schedule is already up for the first few weeks, the BTN will be carrying 5 games each of the first 3 Saturdays. As far as pricing they are charging $1.10 per sub in Big Ten territory. Outside of Big Ten territory they are asking for .10 per sub.

Link for the schedule (1st 3 weeks only):

http://www.bigtennetwork.com/news/index.asp?ArticleSource=24

They will have an HD feed which D* will carry.

This is their FAQ page:

http://www.bigtennetwork.com/managex/index.asp?ArticleSource=418


----------



## OrangeandBlue33

For people who want this channel I think it's time to take a couple of minutes and send a polite request, urging Dish Network to add the Big Ten Network. If you don't do something now, when September rolls around and E* still hasn't added the channel, don't come on here complaining. Action needs to be taken now to let E* know that we are serious about our Big Ten Sports.

I've been an E* customer for over 9 years, but I will make the switch if they can't figure out some means to deliver this channel to my receiver. The Big Ten Network will be the ONLY place to see those games which don't make it to ABC, ESPN.

Emails and calls can make a difference. I just wrote a note at this link:

DISH Network -- Contact Us

If there are other addresses or phone numbers that others know of that may be beneficial, post them so everyone that wants to can easily voice their opinion.

Do it now! Don't wait!


----------



## nmetro

The only question left open with BTN, other than will Dish carry it or not, is:

What happens when ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 chooses to broadcast in regions, i.e. Big12 game in Colorado at the same time a Big 10 game is shown in Ohio, where will the regionals end up? Last year they were broadcasted on ESPN GamePlan. BTN is not showing all the Big 10 games, only 35 of them. So, if the games don't show up on ESPN GamePlan or BTN, then what will be the arrangement. Iasked this question on the BTN web site a couple weeks ago; still no answer.

Finally, BTN plans to show all their games in HD, so in addition to the $1.10 (or $.10) per subscriber cost, you also have a bandwidth issue for showing games on multiple channels. Things are really going to get interesting over the next 10 weeks!

Nick


----------



## heisman

M. Campbell said:


> Thank you. I appreciate the reply and I was not aware of this affiliation with AT&T.


Both of the giant landline telco's have launched video services--Verizon with FIOS, and ATT with U-Verse.


----------



## DCSholtis

nmetro said:


> The only question left open with BTN, other than will Dish carry it or not, is:
> 
> What happens when ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 chooses to broadcast in regions, i.e. Big12 game in Colorado at the same time a Big 10 game is shown in Ohio, where will the regionals end up? Last year they were broadcasted on ESPN GamePlan. BTN is not showing all the Big 10 games, only 35 of them. So, if the games don't show up on ESPN GamePlan or BTN, then what will be the arrangement. Iasked this question on the BTN web site a couple weeks ago; still no answer.
> 
> Finally, BTN plans to show all their games in HD, so in addition to the $1.10 (or $.10) per subscriber cost, you also have a bandwidth issue for showing games on multiple channels. Things are really going to get interesting over the next 10 weeks!
> 
> Nick


You'll still have regionals on ABC, ESPN. They will have first choice over games and the BTN will have third, fourth, fifth choices etc each week.


----------



## scooper

If getting the Big Ten Network is REALLY important to you, I would suggest another provider besides Dish. If you're under contract - either keep it going or suspend during your sport season.


----------



## iublue

scooper said:


> If getting the Big Ten Network is REALLY important to you, I would suggest another provider besides Dish. If you're under contract - either keep it going or suspend during your sport season.


Do you know something that apparently no else knows?

Do you think or know that there is no hope of Dish picking up the BTN?

What kind of antenna are you talking about? Won't the BTN will only be on cable and satellite? If so what good is an antenna going to do.


----------



## iublue

OrangeandBlue33 said:


> For people who want this channel I think it's time to take a couple of minutes and send a polite request, urging Dish Network to add the Big Ten Network. If you don't do something now, when September rolls around and E* still hasn't added the channel, don't come on here complaining. Action needs to be taken now to let E* know that we are serious about our Big Ten Sports.
> 
> I've been an E* customer for over 9 years, but I will make the switch if they can't figure out some means to deliver this channel to my receiver. The Big Ten Network will be the ONLY place to see those games which don't make it to ABC, ESPN.
> 
> Emails and calls can make a difference. I just wrote a note at this link:
> 
> DISH Network -- Contact Us
> 
> If there are other addresses or phone numbers that others know of that may be beneficial, post them so everyone that wants to can easily voice their opinion.
> 
> Do it now! Don't wait!


I have contacted Dish twice. Once about two months ago when I politely asked if they were going to carry the BTN and about a week ago when I was much more blunt. I stated that if they did not carry the BTN then I would be forced to go to Direct.

If you know anything else I can do just let me know and it will be done. I don't want to switch but if I must then so be it.

Missing even a single IU bball game is not an option.


----------



## mhowie

scooper said:


> If getting *sports* is REALLY important to you, I would suggest another provider besides Dish. If you're under contract - either keep it going or suspend during your sport season.


Corrected above.


----------



## iublue

mhowie said:


> Corrected above.


Dish has plenty of sports for me under the OLD system but the game has changed with the BTN. I know that it is just another regional sports network but if I am correct you can (I don't) get other regional sports networks on Dish.

I would like to know how much it will cost Dish to carry the BTN?

Does Dish have to guarantee so many subscribers? If the answer is no then what would be the reason that they don't sign on to the BTN network and give the consumer the choice?

I would like to know what the sticking point is?


----------



## TBoneit

Am I the only one that thinks these sports networks are:

1. Being Greedy?
2. Shooting themselves in the foot in the long term?
3. Example, Yes network. Now many Yankees games not on OTA. How many future fans will not even start to become fans? Same for any regional network IMHO.

It is just an opinion that having sports for free on local channels has built a large fan base. Now they are doing their best to erode that base with greed and low class behavior by players.


----------



## DCSholtis

iublue said:


> Dish has plenty of sports for me under the OLD system but the game has changed with the BTN. I know that it is just another regional sports network but if I am correct you can (I don't) get other regional sports networks on Dish.
> 
> I would like to know how much it will cost Dish to carry the BTN?
> 
> Does Dish have to guarantee so many subscribers? If the answer is no then what would be the reason that they don't sign on to the BTN network and give the consumer the choice?
> 
> I would like to know what the sticking point is?


BTN is resisting any moves to put it into a sports tier. D* will have it on their Total Choice Plus basic tier and above.


----------



## Codeman00

I have emailed Dish 4 times about it and have spread their coveted [email protected] email address to all of my Boiler friends on the internet that have Dish Network. They are helping out also. If you guys frequent any Big Ten message boards, I would suggest that you do the same.

Wow...I didn't think anything about the ABC Regional games. You're right, we won't be able to see them if we are out of our region. I thought it was all solved but I forgot about that issue. And its a BIG BIG issue because it could knock out several good games this season from actually being seen in my area. No Big Ten on Game Plan = no access to all the ABC Regional games.

So now not only do I have to worry about Dish picking up the Big Ten Network, I also have to worry about them picking up the HD and all of the other regional Big Ten games (on Big Ten Network) AND wondering how the REGIONAL ABC games are going to be handled. There is no one at Dish to listen to our issues on this. Please update us on the ABC Regional issue if you find out anything.

This sucks.


----------



## Codeman00

iublue said:


> just because Dish can't or won't carry the BTN? Painter and Sampson has the rivalry headed back to the Knight/Keady days and it should be good fun for several years. I have not missed watching an IU game for probably 20+ years and I can't/won't miss one in the future and if I have to go to Direct I will.
> 
> Have you emailed Dish? I did and told them bluntly that if they did not carry the BTN then I was gone even after years of being with dish.
> 
> I would still like to know how much it costs Dish to carry a channel. I find it hard to believe that they would not at least break even on the deal and keep customers like me, you and gopherscot in the process.
> 
> Like you said choice is the key.


Yeah, we are both headed in the right direction. I watch every Purdue basketball and football game thats on TV and I will pay for the privilege to do so...just give me that chance. I have emailed them several times now...and I will keep emailing them.


----------



## DCSholtis

Codeman00 said:


> Yeah, we are both headed in the right direction. I watch every Purdue basketball and football game thats on TV and I will pay for the privilege to do so...just give me that chance. I have emailed them several times now...and I will keep emailing them.


BTN Press Conference held today here are the links if your interested in reading:

http://bigten.cstv.com/genrel/062107aab.html

http://cbs.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10233159 (More of the same but blasting Comcast here)

http://bigten.cstv.com/genrel/062107aaa.html (Archived Audio Feed)


----------



## iublue

TBoneit said:


> Am I the only one that thinks these sports networks are:
> 
> 1. Being Greedy?
> 2. Shooting themselves in the foot in the long term?
> 3. Example, Yes network. Now many Yankees games not on OTA. How many future fans will not even start to become fans? Same for any regional network IMHO.
> 
> It is just an opinion that having sports for free on local channels has built a large fan base. Now they are doing their best to erode that base with greed and low class behavior by players.


I totally agree but this is the time that we live in. Everyone and every institution is looking at maximizing profits. I noticed yesterday at the gas station that I frequent they had put a small ad zip tied to the gas pump hose.

The Big Ten knows it has a valued product and is looking at cashing in. I don't think anyone is looking at the possible long term effects and I don't know if there will be any. People are getting used to an ala cart life. Some airlines are now charging for each soda you get.

There are HUNDREDS of thousands Michigan football fans and you can add equal amounts of OSU and Penn State fans. The BT leads the country each year in basketball attendance. The state of Indiana lives and breaths basketball - mostly IU and PU. Dish needs to look at the numbers and realize that many if not most of these fans are truely fanatical in every sense of the word. They diligently follow their teams and IMO the Dish customers among them will go to Direct to watch their teams. Even on this board you have Iowa, PU and IU fans stating as much.

IMO Dish will be making a TERRIBLE financial decision if thery do not carry the BTN.


----------



## scooper

iublue said:


> Do you know something that apparently no else knows?
> 
> Do you think or know that there is no hope of Dish picking up the BTN?
> 
> What kind of antenna are you talking about? Won't the BTN will only be on cable and satellite? If so what good is an antenna going to do.


Going on past history - Dish has historically been rather reluctant about adding these upstart regional sports networks... Professional, nevermind collegiate....

Example - I don't believe YES is carried on Dish to this day.


----------



## tsmacro

scooper said:


> Going on past history - Dish has historically been rather reluctant about adding these upstart regional sports networks... Professional, nevermind collegiate....
> 
> Example - I don't believe YES is carried on Dish to this day.


And many people predicted the demise of Dish because they didn't (and still don't) carry YES. They were sure that there was no way that Dish could survive w/out carrying the Yankees RSN in the nations largest DMA, in fact I think YES was counting on the idea that Dish would be afraid not to carry it and would just agree to pay whatever YES asked. Well years later Dish still thrives as very profitable business w/out YES. Unfortunately this doesn't look good for BTN being carried by Dish if Charlie feels they're asking too much. He knows that life will go on and money will still come in hand over fist with or w/out BTN. That's too bad because I also would like to see this channel added as my fiance is a big IU basketball fan and wouldn't like the idea of missing games because BTN wanted more than Charlie was willing to pay.


----------



## TBoneit

Not only has Dish survivied not carrying the YES channel I beleiev their subscriber addition numbers are as good as or better than before YES came into being. 

It looks like DirecTV has decided to become the Sports source and Dish the lower cost alternative and it seems to be working for both so far.

Just imagine if Dish had bought D*....

Go back to cable? Ack!

Or maybe we wouldn't even be seeing this sort of issue once YES happened the others would have realized not to be so greedy? Who knows.


----------



## Codeman00

Looks like multiple Big Ten games will not be carried on ABC at the same time....

This is from the agreement on the Big Ten Network website...
All regional afternoon football games aired on ABC will be aired by ESPN/ESPN2 in outer-markets, making these games nationally available;


----------



## mhowie

Codeman00 said:


> Looks like multiple Big Ten games will not be carried on ABC at the same time....
> 
> This is from the agreement on the Big Ten Network website...
> All regional afternoon football games aired on ABC will be aired by ESPN/ESPN2 in outer-markets, making these games nationally available;


So if I understand this correctly, if one purchases the GamePlan (college football) package, the Big 10 games will not be broadcast to those GamePlan subscribers living in Big 10 country?


----------



## mhowie

iublue said:


> I have contacted Dish twice. Once about two months ago when I politely asked if they were going to carry the BTN and about a week ago when I was much more blunt. I stated that if they did not carry the BTN then I would be forced to go to Direct.
> 
> If you know anything else I can do just let me know and it will be done. I don't want to switch but if I must then so be it.
> 
> Missing even a single IU bball game is not an option.


I sent a similar email earlier this evening. If Dish again refuses to provide programming important to some of us, I suggest we Big 10 brethren band together and ensure that DirecTV gives us a very favorable deal to switch. Not stepping up and providing the Extra Innings package was one thing, and still refusing to provide the Indy local channels in high definition (DirecTV has them) yet another...but denying at least the option to purchase the BTN will drive me away after over a decade as a customer and after lining Charlie's pocket with a frighteningly large amount of money during that timeframe.


----------



## Hound

TBoneit said:


> Not only has Dish survivied not carrying the YES channel I beleiev their subscriber addition numbers are as good as or better than before YES came into being.
> 
> It looks like DirecTV has decided to become the Sports source and Dish the lower cost alternative and it seems to be working for both so far.
> 
> Just imagine if Dish had bought D*....
> 
> Go back to cable? Ack!
> 
> Or maybe we wouldn't even be seeing this sort of issue once YES happened the others would have realized not to be so greedy? Who knows.


TBoneit,

As I have posted before, I have a choice of four HD providers in central NJ and
Dish's basic HD package with locals is the most expensive. Also, the other
three providers all provide YES HD. It is not visible to me where Dish is saving
the subs money by not providing YES. I see many posts where subs apparently
go on about Dish being the low cost provider. My opinion is that these subs
like making Charlie rich.

I have gone back to cable (Fios and digital cable). It is cheaper, better picture
quality and it has the programming that I want which Dish does not provide.


----------



## TBoneit

I have the same four choices available to me + of course OTA.

They are all available to me as YES is not a manditory selection criteria anymore.

DVRs are a must have though.

I keep hearing bad things about the FIOS and CableCo DVRs from customers where I work. DirecTv has finally gotten it's HR20 good to go and Dshnetworks DVR is OK too. Or a Tivo HD OTA box excluding the subscription charge.

Bottom line is Fios may be cheaper but I would need 5 tuners worth of DVR to equal what I have and a Digital Video Recorder (DVR) at $12.99/month per dual-tuner HD/DVR box will that really be cheaper or higher? or to feed more than one room a Multi-Room DVR is $19.99/month. 

So I would need at least 3 HD Dual tuner DVR at $12.99 per. Since they don't offer a cheaper SD Dual tuner box they'll need to be dual tuner HD DVRs so that add $38.96 a month to the price. Now from that Fee we take out the $6 Rental fee and the $10 mirroring fee I'm paying now and then we have a true comparison in my case.

BTW I did a quick check and it looks like DIsh has more HD for now. DirecTv may be the highest in the semi-near future. Depends on how their satellite launches go.


----------



## nmetro

Well, things are getting hot in Chicago, and it is not due to the late June Summer heat. The following article is from today's Columbus Dispatch. Suffice it to say getting BTN on cable networks is not an easy sell. Also, you know things are getting nasty when "the powers that be" resort to name calling.


CHICAGO(AP) -- Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said cable TV giant Comcast should apologize for remarks that he claimed were "intended to denigrate institutions and teams" in his conference.

And the company responded emphatically: Forget it.

The Big Ten and Comcast are at odds over the price of the new Big Ten Network and whether it should be offered on basic cable. And they're also feuding over a news release in which Comcast said the network will show "second- and third-tier sporting events," called it "a niche sports channel" and added: "Indiana basketball fans don't want to watch Iowa volleyball, but the Big Ten wants everyone to pay for their new network."

Delany took exception during a conference call with reporters yesterday -- the one-year anniversary of the day the Big Ten announced plans to form the network.

"In the Midwest, when you're talking about a women's sports team, you talk about them with respect," Delany said. "They're not second tier. Certainly, games at Michigan and Penn State and Ohio State -- I don't care who the opponent is, those are not second-tier games. To the extent that those remarks were intended to denigrate institutions or teams or, in particular the women's volleyball team at Iowa, I think they ought to be rethought. I think if clarifications are necessary, that's fine. And really, if they were intended to denigrate, there ought to be an apology."

Rich Ruggiero, a Comcast spokesman for the greater Chicago region, said the company was simply stating fact -- that ABC and ESPN get the top games -- and "was not denigrating anybody."

Comcast executive vice president David L. Cohen then wrote Delany, blasting him for insinuating the company is against women's sports.

"Commissioner, you are a representative of an athletic conference made up of some of the finest academic institutions in the country," Cohen wrote. "Those institutions -- and the students they seek to educate -- should expect all of their representatives to maintain basic standards of integrity. Your mischaracterizations and overstatements are not consistent with such standards. Our hope is that we can keep our differing opinions regarding this carriage issue from resulting in any further personal attacks."

Cohen reiterated that the top games would go to ABC and ESPN and the Big Ten Network would simply serve a niche market. He said the cable company would like to carry the network, but not if it means sticking customers with "a burdensome Big Ten tax."

The Big Ten Network, which is set to launch in August, has agreements with about 40 smaller cable companies and DirecTV -- but not Comcast, which has 5.7 million subscribers in the eight states with Big Ten schools.

Delany is adamant that companies in Big Ten markets carry the network on basic cable. Comcast says the cost is too high and it should only be offered on its digital tier or as part of a subscription package.

"We'd like to make the network available to those who want to watch it and not force customers who have no interest in the content to have to pay for it," Cohen told The New York Times this week.

The Chicago-based Big Ten Network, which is co-owned by the conference and Fox Sports, plans to show all the conference's football games that aren't broadcast elsewhere. It also plans to broadcast at least 105 men's basketball games, 55 women's basketball games, 170 other events from sports such as softball and track, and Big Ten championships.


----------



## nmetro

Codeman00 said:


> Looks like multiple Big Ten games will not be carried on ABC at the same time....
> 
> This is from the agreement on the Big Ten Network website...
> All regional afternoon football games aired on ABC will be aired by ESPN/ESPN2 in outer-markets, making these games nationally available;


So, where will these games be aired? Last year they were aired on GamePlan. Will they be aired on the ESPN/ESPN2 alternate channels? If so, then OSU fans will not get at least three games if BTN does not end up in Dish. If the games are not aired on the alternate channels or GamePlan, and you live outside the Big 10 region, this could amount to at least 8 OSU games not being aired. Multiply this by 11 and you see where this is going... very angry alumni.

Another note. It looks like BTN is also aiming for the number of subscriber model, as opposed to the possibility of BTN being offered "ala-carte". In't it nice to have so much uncertainty with football season only 10 weeks away?


----------



## DCSholtis

There will be at least 3 OSU games exclusive to the BTN. I posted the link to the first 3 weeks of the season on page 1 of the thread. Those games shown on that link are BTN exclusive. Big Ten games will NO longer appear on Game Plan.


----------



## nmetro

After searching the internet, I found the following 21 June, 2007 article. The end result, regional games on ABC will be shown on ESPN/ESPN2 nationally for folks who live outside of the Big Ten region. This fact was posted earlier, so this message it to provide the actual announcement from the Big Ten. The bottom line, if a game is an ABC regional game, then the game will be shown nationally on ESPN/ESPN2. 

The worse case scenario, if you don't get BTN, you will miss out only on the 35 or sio games being televised by BTN. The bad part of this deal is not Big Ten games will be broadcast "over the air" except on ABC (football) or CBS (basketball). 

By the way, I am still waiting to hear from DISH about BTN. 

PARK RIDGE, Ill. -- The Big Ten Conference has reached two milestone media agreements that will provide the organization with its greatest media exposure ever and ensures long-term vitality for its member institutions' broad-based athletic programs, it was announced today by Big Ten Commissioner James E. Delany. The conference has signed a new 10-year national rights contract with ABC/ESPN and has reached a landmark deal with Fox Cable Networks to create the Big Ten Network, a national network devoted to Big Ten athletic and academic programs. The ABC/ESPN contract takes effect, and the Big Ten Network is expected to launch, in August 2007.

ABC/ESPN Contract

Big Ten action has been featured on ABC since 1966 and on ESPN since 1979, the network's first year. Details of the new ABC/ESPN agreement include, but are not limited to:

* Up to 41 Big Ten football games will be televised - up to 17 on ABC and up to 25 on ESPN or ESPN2;
* All regional afternoon football games aired on ABC will be aired by ESPN/ESPN2 in outer-markets, making these games nationally available;
* Approximately 60 men's basketball games will air on an ESPN network (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPN360), including games on each Tuesday and Thursday of the nine-week conference season, plus up to eight Saturday games during conference play;
* A total of 100 women's basketball and volleyball events on an ESPN network, including the championship games of the Big Ten Women's Basketball Tournament, over the course of the agreement; and,
* Through ESPN's collection of new media outlets such as ESPN.com, Mobile ESPN, ESPN360 and ESPN VOD, fans will receive live events (including simulcasts), extended video highlights including in-progress games, features and more. In addition, Big Ten coverage will be available on ESPN Classic and throughout the world through ESPN International.


----------



## M. Campbell

My point being that they offered what I would call a low demand sports channel like Sports Time Ohio at no charge, following Time Warner and D*. Maybe that is more indicative of their intentions than what was decided concerning YES. 

I would guess that if one of the large cable companies signs an agreement with the BTN, then Dish would follow through rather quickly.


----------



## mhowie

Interesting read: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19360558/


----------



## nmetro

Congressman questions Big Ten about cable network
Tuesday, June 26, 2007 12:25 AM
By KEN THOMAS
Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell said yesterday he was concerned about the ability of fans to watch Big Ten sporting events on a new television network debuting this summer.

Dingell, D-Mich., wrote Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany with questions about the Big Ten Network, which is expected to launch sometime in August.

The congressman said many constituents have expressed worries about being able to watch University of Michigan football games this season because none of the state's cable systems carry the network.

"While I understand the motivation on the part of the Big Ten Conference and its member schools to create a new all-Big Ten cable channel, I am increasingly concerned about the migration of previously free, over the air content to a pay television tier," Dingell wrote.

Dingell, whose committee has jurisdiction over telecommunications, asked Delany about the status of negotiations with cable systems, whether they would be concluded before football season and how the conference reached the per-household monthly rate it plans to charge cable systems.

He also noted that all 13 of Michigan's football games last season were available on either free, over-the-air broadcast or on cable channels widely available to subscribers. Requesting details for each school, he asked how many of the games will be on free or basic cable TV.

Delany, in a statement, said he looked forward to "continuing our conversation with Congressman Dingell and his staff to bring more Big Ten sports to more Big Ten fans across the country."

Delany said: "Seeing 35 football games, 105 basketball games, more women's sports and more Olympic sports on the first major college conference sports network is a win-win for everyone."

Big Ten spokesman Jeff Smith said the conference expects to request $1.10 per household per month from cable systems within the eight states that comprise the conference, and about 10 cents per month outside the Big Ten region.

The Big Ten and Comcast Corp. have been at odds over the price of the new network and whether it should be offered on basic cable. The network has agreements with about 40 smaller cable companies and DirecTV, but not Comcast, which has 5.7 million subscribers in the eight states with Big Ten schools.

The Chicago-based network, which is co-owned by the conference and Fox Sports, plans to show all the conference's football games that aren't broadcast elsewhere. It also plans to broadcast numerous other events, including at least 105 regular-season men's basketball games.

Fox Sports is a division of News Corp.


----------



## WebTraveler

After being irritated against the satellite and cable companies over the carriage problems with the sports channels, including the Big 10 Network, NFL Network, the MTN, etc., I am now feeling something different. Instead of being the fault of Dish, etc., maybe the fault lies with the Big 10, NFL, etc. Maybe it is the GREED of the Big 10, NFL, etc. that is creating this whole mess?

Here in Oregon we have a new sports channel starting this fall, Comcast Sports Northwest, with the Trail Blazers as the lead programming. So now we have half of our sports on FSN-NW and the other half on CSN-NW, or whatever acroynm they will use. I know there will be an issue for the providers on this one and its really the same battle.

But let's remember something else - there is not enough sports programming out there period for all of these channels. ESPN and FSN show poker all the time now- WTF, that is not a sport, period. ESPN used to show CFL football and rugby from down under to fill the void - they don't anymore, but at least those were sports.

A great example is ESPNU - what a freaking worthless channel. I upgraded my package to get this channel for the NCAA baseball playoffs - we'll, aside from a few games here and there it is almost all re-runs of events played already. What real value is there in this channel? Nada.

In the end if every conference or league wants there own sports channel there simply will not be available bandwith to do so without an increase in costs. None of these new channels have enough real content to fill 24 hours of time. So why should Dish (or anyone else) even offer them a full channel on the low tier? In the end all these sports channels will probably result in lower viewership to events because there will be fewer people watching. I do anticipate cable companies in the midwest will pick up the Big 10 Network, but thats it, so the Big 10 will have the luxury of knowing it is reducing its audience for its games. At least with GamePlan the games are available for a reasonable cost. 

I think in the end the Pac 10 & Big 12 will get more airtime on FSN, ABC, ESPN, etc. because of the Big 10's greed factor. I think the country (as a whole) would much rather watch the Big 10, but it won't be available for most of the country aside from the one big game a week - and the void will be filled with other games from these two conferences (or in the alternative, total college football on national TV will end up being reversed.)

So enough with the greed of the conferences and NFL. Their greed will result in less viewership in the end.....what they want? Probably not......and POKER is not a sport.


----------



## Hound

M. Campbell said:


> My point being that they offered what I would call a low demand sports channel like Sports Time Ohio at no charge, following Time Warner and D*. Maybe that is more indicative of their intentions than what was decided concerning YES.
> 
> I would guess that if one of the large cable companies signs an agreement with the BTN, then Dish would follow through rather quickly.


If you are an Indians fan, Sports Time Ohio is not a low demand channel. It is a
must have to be a sub. MLB HD last week had two of the Phillies/Indians games
on the HD Sports Times Ohio feeds. I watched both games in their entirety, because Comcast Sportsnet only provided an SD feed. Sports Time Ohio HD is
a great channel. I am glad that Dish picked it up, but if Dish does not offer the
HD channel and I lived in the Cleveland area, I would sub to another provider.

Same thing for the BTN channel. Subs will have options with local cable and
Directv. IF BTN is a must have channel for a sub, they will have to change
providers.

I agree with all the posters that all of the sports channels are very greedy, 
whether it be MLB, NBA, NHL, NFL, Golf and now BTN. They all want to jump on the bandwagon and collect outrageous monthly fees from satellite or cable subs, whether the subs are interested in the programming or not. Comcast does not like
getting a taste of its own medicine. For carriage of Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia, a cable operator is not allowed to carry it on a sports tier. CSN must be in expanded basic (about 90% of subs). But that is also true of any other
RSN without exception. No RSN can be in a sports tier.

Unfortunately since the sports content is owned by MLB, NBA, NHL, NFL, Golf
and BTN, the multi video providers have no choice. The fees have to be paid
or they walk away from that niche market of fans. When a local area is served
by three or four multi video providers, one of the providers will most likely
pick up the programming. CHOICE IS FANTASTIC!! Because there is choice,
the multi video provider does not have the leverage in negotiations with the
content provider to force the price down. Its take it or leave it.

Also, Delany's remarks about Comcast were very inappropriate and Delany should apologize. Comcast was using general industry expressions to summarize their impression of BTN's terms. Delany twisted the meaning and made an outrageous
attack hiding behind women's team sports, insinuating that Comcast was
denigrating women's athletics and men's events that were not the number one
interest event of the day. I have prosecuted a successful Title IX action, and I
hope that the women's programs get 50 percent of the BTN revenues as
required by Title IX. The multi video providers should have a Title IX clause requiring a 50/50 split in any carriage agreement after Delany's remarks.


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> If you are an Indians fan, Sports Time Ohio is not a low demand channel. It is a must have to be a sub.


The same has been said for YES Network. E* somehow survives.

STO is there and YES isn't because STO made the price right. Perhaps BTN is having similar problems making themselves worth the cost of carriage?


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> The same has been said for YES Network. E* somehow survives.
> 
> STO is there and YES isn't because STO made the price right. Perhaps BTN is having similar problems making themselves worth the cost of carriage?


The United States is a big enough market that a provider of services does not
have to serve every niche market to be successful. No matter what business you are in.

YES and E* illustrates my point that because there are three or four multi video providers available to every niche market, one multi video provider (E*) does not have the leverage to force a content owner (YES) to lower its price (or change its
terms).

I will hazard a guess that the Yankee and Nets fans in the New York, CT, NJ, PA
region have signed up with another multi video provider than E*. However, there are many subs in this region that could care less about YES.

Same thing for BTN. Since BTN already has a carriage agreement with a multi
video provider that serves the entire 8 state area, and the rest of the United States, the terms are not going to change. Just like YES, there are subs in the
8 state area that could care less about BTN.


----------



## nmetro

Considering The Big Ten Conference is a non-profit organization, all the Big Ten athletic departments are also non-profit, and that 10 of the 11 Big Ten schools are public institutions, what are implications of BTN? It is one thing for MLB , NHL, NBA, NFL, etc. to start networks, but it is quite another for the Big Ten to do so. Also, it is one thing to revenue share from ESPN or Fox, but it is quite another when a non-profit, a supposed amateur sports organization is trying to do the same thing. 

I think the Big Ten is a powerful sports conference, but remember this is college sports and not pro sports. This is an attempt by the Big Ten to earn revenue and a profit. BTN will be above and beyond what the conference now receives from bowl games, championships, TV contracts, etc. The Big Ten may open up a can of worms about the whole issue of amateur vs pro athletics. The line has been blurred for years, but BTN may push things over the line. I think that there may be some NCAA and government scrutiny over BTN and the Big Ten. Considering the SEC is going to try to create their own network, this Pandora's box may end up sending echoes through all of college sports. Especially, when the Big Ten has potential to make millions on this deal and the Big Ten athletes will be playing for mere peanuts in comparison. 

In addition to the issues above, what are the implications of just angering alumni, students and fans of the Big Ten? There are many people in rural areas who do not subscribe to satellite or cable; the were receiving the games over the air. Telling an farmer in southeast Indiana that they will no longer be able to see IU basketball over the air is going to leave a large void, the same goes for that farmer in Ohio in regard to Ohio State football. Substitute sport, state and school for similar situations across the mid-west. There are going to be a large number of angry and sad people out there.

The Big Ten draws millions of fans to their games each year. What is the implication of reducing exposure on BTN? I know games will still be aired on ABC and ESPN, but no free over the air Big Ten sports except for a few games on ABC is not going to placate the masses. It is very possible that fan support could wane. I know what Columbus is like for Ohio State, and the same goes for places like Madison, East Lansing, Ann Arbor, etc. Also, my personal experience is how folks in Wisconsin support UW, folks in Ohio for OSU, Michigan - MSU and UM; folks who never went to these schools, but are die hard fans. Theses same folks would give anything to see a game in person; so much so that 75,000 people showed up for the OSU spring football game. In Columbus you see scarlet and gray everywhere and it starts at the airport and it transcends the who metropolitan area. The Big Ten in an effort to make more money could destroy what prompted creating BTN in the first place.

Yes, this is way off the topic of status of the Big Ten Network, but it was time to take a step back and see what implications BTN could be creating. I guess we'll see come August.


----------



## lionsrule

As stated before, bottom line for ME is that if dish doesn't add BTN in HD then I am a direct customer for the first time ever this fall. I care ZERO how my business affects dishnetwork. I am first and foremost a college football/NFL FANATIC. Give me what I want. If YOU can not provide it, then THEY will. Lucky for dish, I feel that the average joe football fan will be caught uninformed and blindsided by this new big ten network. I would like to think that the thought of dish losing 10's of thousand of customers because they want to get their college football fix would MAKE THEM ACT SOONER rather than later.


----------



## mhowie

lionsrule said:


> I care ZERO how my business affects dishnetwork. I am first and foremost a college football/NFL FANATIC. Give me what I want. If YOU can not provide it, then THEY will.


I hold the same opinion about football, but we are both hypocrites. DirecTV is the only outlet for the NFL Ticket. I've stuck around only because I get enough different NFL games on distant network stations. That said, a true NFL fanatic would have DirecTV.


----------



## lionsrule

ah, not so fast my friend....college football = love many teams, NFL = Love only ONE and that love comes in nice and clear in HD via my OTA here in sw michigan.

Yeah....bring it on lion haters. Talk to me after #81 is rookie of the year


----------



## WebTraveler

lionsrule said:


> Lucky for dish, I feel that the average joe football fan will be caught uninformed and blindsided by this new big ten network. I would like to think that the thought of dish losing 10's of thousand of customers because they want to get their college football fix would MAKE THEM ACT SOONER rather than later.


The average Joe is not going to pay more to tons of more channels that show just a few hours a day of live programming, period. For folks in Big 10 territory, yes its reasonable they want the Big 10 Network and will hold firm. For me in Pac 10 territory, I'd like to have the Big 10 Network, but I am not going to issue any ultimatiums on it. In fact, in the end the Big 10 will have less viewership with its new channel than before. The overall question will be that with less viewership will it generate more revenues? Now we can get GamePlan and be pretty well covered. If the games are not on GamePlan then I won't see them. I am not paying more for the Big 10 games. ABC, ESPN, FSN will end up showing more with Pac 10 and Big 12 games to accomodate the missing Big 10 games. So these two conferences will end up with more viewers in the end.

If every conference and league wants its own dedicated channels all of our costs will go up. That has a boundary. As it is most of the channels cannot even meet a reasonable coverage of sports and end up showing OLD tapes from decades ago or show things (like POKER) that are not even sports. I am not paying for that garbage and if ESPN things poker is a sport then they are fools.


----------



## Hound

nmetro said:


> Considering The Big Ten Conference is a non-profit organization, all the Big Ten athletic departments are also non-profit, and that 10 of the 11 Big Ten schools are public institutions, what are implications of BTN? It is one thing for MLB , NHL, NBA, NFL, etc. to start networks, but it is quite another for the Big Ten to do so. Also, it is one thing to revenue share from ESPN or Fox, but it is quite another when a non-profit, a supposed amateur sports organization is trying to do the same thing.
> 
> I think the Big Ten is a powerful sports conference, but remember this is college sports and not pro sports. This is an attempt by the Big Ten to earn revenue and a profit. BTN will be above and beyond what the conference now receives from bowl games, championships, TV contracts, etc. The Big Ten may open up a can of worms about the whole issue of amateur vs pro athletics. The line has been blurred for years, but BTN may push things over the line. I think that there may be some NCAA and government scrutiny over BTN and the Big Ten. Considering the SEC is going to try to create their own network, this Pandora's box may end up sending echoes through all of college sports. Especially, when the Big Ten has potential to make millions on this deal and the Big Ten athletes will be playing for mere peanuts in comparison.
> 
> In addition to the issues above, what are the implications of just angering alumni, students and fans of the Big Ten? There are many people in rural areas who do not subscribe to satellite or cable; the were receiving the games over the air. Telling an farmer in southeast Indiana that they will no longer be able to see IU basketball over the air is going to leave a large void, the same goes for that farmer in Ohio in regard to Ohio State football. Substitute sport, state and school for similar situations across the mid-west. There are going to be a large number of angry and sad people out there.
> 
> The Big Ten draws millions of fans to their games each year. What is the implication of reducing exposure on BTN? I know games will still be aired on ABC and ESPN, but no free over the air Big Ten sports except for a few games on ABC is not going to placate the masses. It is very possible that fan support could wane. I know what Columbus is like for Ohio State, and the same goes for places like Madison, East Lansing, Ann Arbor, etc. Also, my personal experience is how folks in Wisconsin support UW, folks in Ohio for OSU, Michigan - MSU and UM; folks who never went to these schools, but are die hard fans. Theses same folks would give anything to see a game in person; so much so that 75,000 people showed up for the OSU spring football game. In Columbus you see scarlet and gray everywhere and it starts at the airport and it transcends the who metropolitan area. The Big Ten in an effort to make more money could destroy what prompted creating BTN in the first place.
> 
> Yes, this is way off the topic of status of the Big Ten Network, but it was time to take a step back and see what implications BTN could be creating. I guess we'll see come August.


The tax implication to the non profit schools is that the TV income is unrelated
business income subject to a Federal Excise Tax. Title IX requires that all outside
athletic fundraising be distributed equally among women and men's programs.
It does not matter which program raised the money.


----------



## M. Campbell

> If you are an Indians fan, Sports Time Ohio is not a low demand channel.


Obviously, but when given the number of subs who have access to STO versus the number of subs who watch STO, I would think the demand to be relatively low, yet DISH added the channel.

Which gets to my original point that adding STO could be an indicator that DISH might be willing to add the BTN even though there is a perception that it is a pricey sports channel similar to YES which they decided not to add.

Regarding the price of the BTN, this link from the New York Times would indicate that the BTN is not that high in price when compared to similar offerings including the YES network.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/06/18/sports/18sandomirgraphic.jpg


----------



## scooper

I don't want MY subscription raising just because some of YOU want a regional sports channel. If the people who want the channel were allowed to buy that one channel (and pay the true costs of it) , the problem would be solved. But no - the content provider (Big Ten in this case) has said they want their channel in the same tier as the other sports channels.

As far as comparing BTN to YES - well you still don't see YES on Dish now either, do you ?

As I see it, the case for Ala carte programming choices keeps getting stronger and stronger...


----------



## Hound

M. Campbell said:


> Obviously, but when given the number of subs who have access to STO versus the number of subs who watch STO, I would think the demand to be relatively low, yet DISH added the channel.
> 
> Which gets to my original point that adding STO could be an indicator that DISH might be willing to add the BTN even though there is a perception that it is a pricey sports channel similar to YES which they decided not to add.
> 
> Regarding the price of the BTN, this link from the New York Times would indicate that the BTN is not that high in price when compared to similar offerings including the YES network.
> 
> http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/06/18/sports/18sandomirgraphic.jpg


The cable and satellite Nielsen ratings for baseball RSNs around the US is very low. 1-2% on many nights. YES is higher than the average RSN and supposedly the highest. The local interest in STO is probably the same for a baseball channel in most other markets. However, when 200 channels are offered, there are many other non baseball channels with much lower ratings and lower per subscriber
costs. Since Dish does provide baseball RSNs in most markets, the addition
of STO is not unexpected. The BTN is a new expensive concept. Maybe Dish
will feel compelled to offer it because they do not offer Sunday ticket, MLB EI,
Setanta, YES, Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia, HD RSNs in many markets, etc. Or maybe Dish will decide it is too expensive. I do not think the addition of STO is
an indication of where Dish is going.


----------



## tdw

I just threw my email in for support of the channel. If BTN wanted 1.10 a sub in midwest and .10 elsewhere it couldn't be anywhere near what NFL got per sub nationwide. Anybody did any figuring on that? HMMMM


----------



## TBoneit

BTN wil be a RSN?

If so why should I as a eastcoaster have any fee attached to its carriage?

IOWs they can charge for people that are in their area but shouldn't charge for every subscriber. 

That is one disadvantage for satellite vs cable. Each system only covers part of the country and can pay in one locale and not on another system in a different local. E* and D* cover the country. 

If E* & D* have to pay for everybody then everybody needs to get the channel.

And I could have totally misunderstood the situation too.


----------



## DCSholtis

At least in D*s case the BTN will be in the Total Choice Plus packages and above. So everyone will be getting it.


----------



## Hound

TBoneit said:


> BTN wil be a RSN?
> 
> If so why should I as a eastcoaster have any fee attached to its carriage?
> 
> IOWs they can charge for people that are in their area but shouldn't charge for every subscriber.
> 
> That is one disadvantage for satellite vs cable. Each system only covers part of the country and can pay in one locale and not on another system in a different local. E* and D* cover the country.
> 
> If E* & D* have to pay for everybody then everybody needs to get the channel.
> 
> And I could have totally misunderstood the situation too.


The concept of BTN is that it is a college sports RSN for eight states, plus they want carriage in the other 42 states on a basic tier for 10 cents per subscriber.
One of those eight states is Pennysylvania, our neighbor. I am not sure what
the proposal to Comcast is, but it sounds like BTN is requiring Comcast to put
it in expanded basic for all the other 42 states that Comcast services.


----------



## James Long

DCSholtis said:


> At least in D*s case the BTN will be in the Total Choice Plus packages and above. So everyone will be getting it.


The "Total" packages ended earlier this year ... and TC+ wasn't the low end. The low end is now called "Choice" ($49.99) ... TC+ is now "Choice Xtra" ($54.99) with "Choice Plus" being Choice Xtra plus DVR service (for $59.99).

Based on the statement on the Big Ten Network website: "_DIRECTV has signed on as first affiliate and will deliver the Network at launch to subscribers of its Total Choice package;_" that would translate to it being in D*'s lowest tier ("Choice"). So you are right and wrong at the same time. 

If E* adds it it will likely be in E*'s $42.99 package. BTN may be having the same problems as YES demanding "lowest tier" placement ($29.99). That is not going to happen (for either network).


----------



## jrbdmb

Hound said:


> The United States is a big enough market that a provider of services does not
> have to serve every niche market to be successful. No matter what business you are in.
> 
> YES and E* illustrates my point that because there are three or four multi video providers available to every niche market, one multi video provider (E*) does not have the leverage to force a content owner (YES) to lower its price (or change its
> terms).
> 
> I will hazard a guess that the Yankee and Nets fans in the New York, CT, NJ, PA
> region have signed up with another multi video provider than E*. However, there are many subs in this region that could care less about YES.


*Anecdotal* evidence points to DirecTV and cable trouncing Dish in NYC and area, and why not? If the cable and DBS options (excluding Dish's $19.99 mini plan) all cost around the same, I would expect consumers to pick a plan with YES included, even if they are not big baseball fans. Unfortunately, I have never seen detailed info on sub percentages in NYC and area, and Dish / DirecTV don't volunteer this info.

It has also been stated that the lowest DBS penetration rates in the country are in Philadelphia, where the local sports channel is unavailable to DBS. Sports *do* matter for market share more than some here would like to think ...


----------



## jrbdmb

James Long said:


> The same has been said for YES Network. E* somehow survives.


But from anecdotal evidence Dish is far far behind DirecTV in Yankees territory. If RSNs were really optional, Dish would just drop all of them, but obviously they haven't because for many local subs the local RSN is a requirement.

Note that I do agree than the BTN demands are ridiculous. $1.10/mo. for bottom tier football and basketball, with a healthy dose of non-revenue sports.


----------



## jrbdmb

M. Campbell said:


> Regarding the price of the BTN, this link from the New York Times would indicate that the BTN is not that high in price when compared to similar offerings including the YES network.
> 
> http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/06/18/sports/18sandomirgraphic.jpg


I'd counter that the BTN will show about the same content as ESPNU (some football and basketball not picked up by ABC / CBS / ESPN / ESPN2, and a lot of minor non-revenue sports). If I recall ESPNU cost around $0.10 a sub, so I'll be generous and say this channel is worth no more than $0.25 a month. Remember this channel is showing games like Florida Intertnational vs. Penn State, not Ohio State vs. Michigan.


----------



## M. Campbell

jrbdmb said:


> I'd counter that the BTN will show about the same content as ESPNU (some football and basketball not picked up by ABC / CBS / ESPN / ESPN2, and a lot of minor non-revenue sports). If I recall ESPNU cost around $0.10 a sub, so I'll be generous and say this channel is worth no more than $0.25 a month. Remember this channel is showing games like Florida Intertnational vs. Penn State, not Ohio State vs. Michigan.


The BTN will carry more games then ESPNU currently carries because it will also pick up all of the regional games that were called ESPN+. It will also allow for viewing of multiple games on multiple channels if the carrier decides to dedicate the bandwidth like DirecTV has decided to do. It will be in HD and it will have video on demand as well as podcasting. As far as I know, none of this can be said for ESPNU.

I don't think it is really a comparison to ESPNU at all other than the fact that it focuses on college athletics. It is more of a comparison to Fox Region or Comcast Regional with some added capability.


----------



## M. Campbell

> Since Dish does provide baseball RSNs in most markets, the addition
> of STO is not unexpected.





> The BTN is a new expensive concept.


Dish also provides Fox Regional Sports as well and Fox is a majority owner in the BTN. The BTN is also about 2/3rds the cost of FSN, so I would not consider that an expensive concept. Some of the other channels you mention (Comcast Sportsnet, YES) are nearly 75% to 100% higher than the BTN. Now that is an expensive concept. They most likely will be compelled to offer it because the price will justify the content and value to the subscriber base.



> If RSNs were really optional, Dish would just drop all of them, but obviously they haven't because for many local subs the local RSN is a requirement.


I seems like you are making stuff up as you go. That is the end of this topic for me.


----------



## Paul Secic

scooper said:


> I don't want MY subscription raising just because some of YOU want a regional sports channel. If the people who want the channel were allowed to buy that one channel (and pay the true costs of it) , the problem would be solved. But no - the content provider (Big Ten in this case) has said they want their channel in the same tier as the other sports channels.
> 
> As far as comparing BTN to YES - well you still don't see YES on Dish now either, do you ?
> 
> As I see it, the case for Ala carte programming choices keeps getting stronger and stronger...


I too don't want higher rates due to a neiche Sport ch. I resubed to AT 250 because it has lots of movies: Encore, TMC. Sports nets such as Soccar & tennis should be placed in Sports pak.


----------



## James Long

jrbdmb said:


> But from anecdotal evidence Dish is far far behind DirecTV in Yankees territory. If RSNs were really optional, Dish would just drop all of them, but obviously they haven't because for many local subs the local RSN is a requirement.


The only requirement is that they sell service to someone. In this case, 13 million someones.

E* is likely doing better because they have the RSNs they have ... but I refuse to label ANY channel as must have, because every time someone picks a channel or service that E*can't live without they end up being wrong.

E* doesn't have NFL Sunday Ticket, they lost MLB Extra Innings, they are behind on HD RSNs and locals and they lost distant networks (including significantly viewed) --- yet they survive. They have given up channels more often that I care to remember in negotiations --- yet they survive. And more than survive, they are adding more subs per quarter than D*.

Anecdotal evidence is that they are doing fine.


----------



## jrbdmb

M. Campbell said:


> I seems like you are making stuff up as you go. That is the end of this topic for me.


OK, Mr. Long expressed an opinion that Dish is doing just fine without YES Network. I offered the opinion that Dish is not doing particularly well in the New York area (though nationally I agree they are doing quite well  ).

I added that if Dish really thought they could make more money by dropping all of the RSNs and marketing themselves only to the the non-sports market (or anti-sports market) they would have been smart enough to have already done so. The fact that they have not done this, and in fact have added Comcast-Chicago, MASN, Sportsnet-New York, NFL Network, and ESPNU in the recent past says that they do consider sports channels important. The fact they have not picked up YES says that Dish does have limits for what they will pay for sports. We will see if Dish thinks $1.10 for the BTN is reasonable.

I'm not clear what I am "making up as I go." I'm just voicing an opinion (from a sports fan and PSU grad) that the BTN is overpriced. I guess that we'll have to disagree on that one.


----------



## James Long

M. Campbell said:


> Dish also provides Fox Regional Sports as well and Fox is a majority owner in the BTN. The BTN is also about 2/3rds the cost of FSN, so I would not consider that an expensive concept. Some of the other channels you mention (Comcast Sportsnet, YES) are nearly 75% to 100% higher than the BTN. Now that is an expensive concept. They most likely will be compelled to offer it because the price will justify the content and value to the subscriber base.


E* is likely "in negotiations" as they often are. Just don't forget that the other RSNs are AT200 and above and only in their own RSN area (except a few customers who pay extra to see everything except blacked out content). $3 or $4 per customer who is paying $5 or $13 more to upgrade AT100 to AT200 isn't bad.

It appears BTN wants more ... if they are demanding the AT100 level then E* collects zero dollars more per customer and pays a lot. The $1 per customer in 8 states adds up, but the 10c per every customer in the US is a lot of money on it's own. That frames the decision - is the channel worth $2 million or more a year to E*?

The NFL Network would be a better comparison. Somehow they came up with a price E* could accept and everyone gets the channel. Part of that may be just so E* can say they have football, but whatever the deal is E* saw enough value to make the buy.

They will probably end up with BTN ... perhaps even at AT100 ... right now isn't the time to cave in and pay whatever BTN wants (the way D* negotiates - just send them the bill and they will pass the non-savings on to the customer). E* will get a good deal ... at minimum the ability to put BTN in AT200 instead of AT100 (if they wish).

Or perhaps the deal is done and they just not have announced it. Not likely but possible!


----------



## projectorguru

Thought you guys may like this, its an article on my local news about pushing for the Big Ten Network on comcast here in pa, the comissioner wants it to be put on basic cable, but Comcast wants their big money for a package. It also says Direct TV has plans for it already, how about Dish Network? I would love this channel, whats the latest? Oh yeah heres the article.

http://www.abc27.com/news/stories/0607/435056.html


----------



## Upstream

projectorguru said:


> Thought you guys may like this, its an article on my local news about pushing for the Big Ten Network on comcast here in pa, the comissioner wants it to be put on basic cable, but Comcast wants their big money for a package. It also says Direct TV has plans for it already, how about Dish Network? I would love this channel, whats the latest? Oh yeah heres the article.
> 
> http://www.abc27.com/news/stories/0607/435056.html


Comcast doesn't want to have to pay $1.10 for every subscriber in Pennsylvania. While the BTN might have decent share in central PA, it's appeal is not so apparent in Philly or Pittsburgh. Especially since Comcast in headquartered in Philadelphia, the executives making the decisions are quite aware of the BTN's limited appeal where they live.


----------



## Ira Lacher

I'll bet right now that DISH won't carry it unless they drop the price to a dime or so per customer!


----------



## James Long

BTN is having some problems with Comcast ... there is even a link to the following on the BTN homepage -
Delany calls on Comcast to apologize
It seems that Comcast insulted the schools.

BTW: BTN isn't anywhere yet ... so it is just a promise of being worth the money.


----------



## Upstream

James Long said:


> BTN is having some problems with Comcast ... there is even a link to the following on the BTN homepage -
> Delany calls on Comcast to apologize
> It seems that Comcast insulted the schools.


Or maybe Comcast didn't insult anyone and Delany is just nuts.

Delany is demaning an apology for something Comcast officials never said


----------



## Hound

Upstream said:


> Or maybe Comcast didn't insult anyone and Delany is just nuts.
> 
> Delany is demaning an apology for something Comcast officials never said


I agree Comcast did not insult anyone. Delany's remarks were offensive to
women's sports and Title IX.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> The only requirement is that they sell service to someone. In this case, 13 million someones.
> 
> E* is likely doing better because they have the RSNs they have ... but I refuse to label ANY channel as must have, because every time someone picks a channel or service that E*can't live without they end up being wrong.
> 
> E* doesn't have NFL Sunday Ticket, they lost MLB Extra Innings, they are behind on HD RSNs and locals and they lost distant networks (including significantly viewed) --- yet they survive. They have given up channels more often that I care to remember in negotiations --- yet they survive. And more than survive, they are adding more subs per quarter than D*.
> 
> Anecdotal evidence is that they are doing fine.


A better way to say it is E* has a different audience than the NFL Sunday ticket,
MLB EI, YES, CSN Phila, Setanta, HD RSN crowd. When there are over 250
channels to choose from, there are millions of subs who have no interest in the
aforementioned programming.

Now that Setanta is uplinked maybe E* is trying to cultivate that niche market.

For a college only sports network, I believe the $1.10 price is high and unprecedented. The FSN networks also have professional sports.


----------



## projectorguru

Hound said:


> The FSN networks also have professional sports.


Yeah but i can't get them in my area, so FSN means nothing to me:nono:


----------



## WebTraveler

Sounds like things are getting nasty on this. Its begining to be crunch time. To get advertisers to line up, they need to show viewers. To date there are minimal viewers for this channel, and thus advertising sales are probably in the tank. The Mtn tried to do this and failed, and if the Big 10 can't pull it off, then the entire concept will fail. Perhaps many of the TV operators see this as a way to stop the potential that everyone will want their own dedicated channel.


----------



## OrangeandBlue33

Interesting update as to what's going on:

Chicago Tribune

"Silverman says the BTN's asking price is reasonable when you consider that Comcast SportsNet charges $3.75 per customer within 150 miles of Chicago and $2 outside."


----------



## James Long

The sports on CSN Chi are _*better*_.


----------



## gopherscot

James Long said:


> The sports on CSN Chi are _*better*_.


Well that's a matter of opinion! :uglyhamme


----------



## nmetro

The following is from today's Columbus Dispatch:

CHICAGO -- The Big Ten Network will launch at 8 p.m. EDT on Aug. 30, officials at the new network announced today.

Included among the initial programming will be Big Ten Tonight, a studio-based, news, information and highlight show.

The network also said it has achieved distribution commitments for more than 75 cable systems that serve communities in the eight states where Big Ten schools are located. Subscribers to these cable systems will receive the Big Ten Network on an expanded basic level of service.

Central Ohio's three major cable providers - Time Warner, WOW and Insight - have not agreed to pick up the network on their expanded basic tiers.

The network's first game coverage will be Sept. 1 with regional coverage of football games between Youngstown State and Ohio State; Appalachian State at Michigan; Florida International and Penn State; and Northeastern and Northwestern.

That night in prime time there will be coverage of Bowling Green at Minnesota and Indiana State at Indiana.

Among the local cable systems planning to carry the Big Ten Network as part of their expanded basic level of service:

* Altatec Alta Municipal Utility
* Cedar Falls Utilities, Celect Communications
* Consolidated Communications Network Services
* City of Wadsworth Cable TV
* Dixon Telephone Company
* Grundy Center Municipal
* Harlan Municipal Utilities
* Hiawatha Broadband
* Horizon Telecom
* Independence Communications
* Iowa Network Services
* Mid-Century Communications
* Moultrie Telecommunications
* Muscatine Power & Water
* Oneida Cablevision
* Spencer Municipal Utilities
* The Community Agency and USA Communications

The Big Ten Network has a national distribution agreement with DirectTV , as well as a regional agreement with Buckeye Cable.

More information can be found at the network's Web site, www.bigtennetwork.com


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> The sports on CSN Chi are _*better*_.


Heisman's household disagrees. In fact, we don't even pay the extra $5 for that worthless station.


----------



## James Long

Heisman should look at the ratings for the channel, and look beyond himself.


> CSN broadcasts some 170 Cubs and White Sox games, not counting spring training, plus about 40 Bulls and 40 Blackhawks games. The network also features the Fire, the Rush, news and highlight shows plus pregame and postgame coverage of every local team, including the Bears.
> 
> The BTN plans to televise 35 football games, 105 men's and 55 women's basketball games, so-called Olympic sports and tons of archived events and campus-generated academic programming.
> 
> ... ABC Sports picks first each week. The BTN gets the second choice (ahead of ESPN) in three of 12 weeks and the third choice three other weeks. In six weeks it picks fourth after ABC, ESPN and ESPN2.
> Source: Chicago Tribune
> (Article linked previously in thread)​


Half of the time BTN will get 4th choice games, 75% of the time BTN will get 3rd or 4th choice games. BTN will not have first choice games (unless it is a sport nobody else is touching).

I hope E* carries the channel ... but I make no claim that BTN will be any better or more popular than CSTV ... certainly not on par with ESPN or a pro-sports RSN. Such claims would be humorous if I didn't believe those making them were serious.


----------



## garn9173

I think this whole thing is going to end ugly. If you've got smaller cable companies, those owned by local teleco's, that are adding BTN to their expanded basic lineup at the rates that the BTN is asking for, there goes the leverage of Comcast, Time Warner, Mediacom, etc. demanding BTN be added to their respective digital sports tiers and if I were those smaller cable companies, i'd darn well be making sure that potential customers know they carry Big Ten Network and the big boys don't.


----------



## James Long

If the small guys were competing against the big guys it might make a difference. As it stands it is just another charge to be passed on to the customer -- and yet another channel provider who believes that they know how to run a cable system better than the companies who actually run cable systems.


----------



## Hound

garn9173 said:


> I think this whole thing is going to end ugly. If you've got smaller cable companies, those owned by local teleco's, that are adding BTN to their expanded basic lineup at the rates that the BTN is asking for, there goes the leverage of Comcast, Time Warner, Mediacom, etc. demanding BTN be added to their respective digital sports tiers and if I were those smaller cable companies, i'd darn well be making sure that potential customers know they carry Big Ten Network and the big boys don't.


I would not say ugly. But you are correct, Comcast, Time Warner, Dish etc have no
leverage to get BTN to change the terms. Just like Dish has no leverage to get
YES to change their terms. The BTN terms will not change.

If the other providers do not pick up BTN, then the subs who really want BTN will
switch to Directv or drop Dish and go with local cable.

I would not say CSN Chi has better programming. CSN Chi may have a bigger
following, but there are certainly going to be subs who want BTN no matter what.
BTN is in the same position that Comcast is when Comcast offers CSN Chi, CSN
Philly, etc. Its called the catbird seat.


----------



## James Long

Except Comcast is a lion ... BTN? I thought I saw a puddy tat.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> Heisman should look at the ratings for the channel, and look beyond himself.


You stated that the "sports" were better on CSN. There is no better sport than Big Ten football. The attendance figures speak for themselves--yeah, even for the crappy games. Heck, the Buckeyes have more fans for their spring game than the Cubs, Sox, Bulls, or Blackhawks have ever witnessed in their pathetic existence. So, I'm probably speaking for more than just myself.


----------



## James Long

If people are looking for crappy games, they need look no further than BTN?
Is that what you are saying?


----------



## saltrek

It is possible that enough hold-outs will make a difference. Anyone remember Victory Sports One? What did they last, two months, maybe?


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> If people are looking for crappy games, they need look no further than BTN?
> Is that what you are saying?


That's not what I'm saying, but to address the point--yes, you are absolutely correct. I wouldn't expect non-fans to enjoy much on the network, much like I don't enjoy anything on CSN. The reason all the Big Ten fanatics are stoked about the network is because we don't have to play ESPN roulette anymore. ESPN has shown Big Ten games on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNCLASSIC, ESPNEWS, ESPN DEPORTES, ESPN+, ESPN GAMEPLAN, and ESPN FULL COURT. Enough is enough. Now, we can have all of the crappy games in one place. Thank God!


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> The reason all the Big Ten fanatics are stoked about the network is because we don't have to play ESPN roulette anymore. ESPN has shown Big Ten games on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNCLASSIC, ESPNEWS, ESPN DEPORTES, ESPN+, ESPN GAMEPLAN, and ESPN FULL COURT.


Did you not notice that BTN does NOT get first choice? You'll still be watching ABC for their first choice pick of games, and ESPN for other games most of the time. BTN gets fourth pick games six out of twelve weeks! So keep that roulette wheel spinning!


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> Did you not notice that BTN does NOT get first choice? You'll still be watching ABC for their first choice pick of games, and ESPN for other games most of the time. BTN gets fourth pick games six out of twelve weeks! So keep that roulette wheel spinning!


When the ABC and ESPN contracts expire, things will be different. I know that is not for this season. BTN is in this for the long haul.

There is a posting on DSL that Verizon has signed on with BTN. I do not know
if it is true. There is no press release or independent confirmation.


----------



## James Long

The network doesn't even light up for nearly two months. There will be more announcements when the time is right.

It doesn't surprise me that D* made an early announcement. They are good at announcing channels that they will eventually have. E* tends to announce channels the day after they are available. Different ways of promoting.


----------



## mhowie

James Long said:


> It doesn't surprise me that D* made an early announcement. They are good at announcing channels that they will eventually have. E* tends to announce channels the day after they are available. Different ways of promoting.


And lose prospective customers during these periods? Brilliant promotional tactics.


----------



## James Long

Better than making promises that are not met. They have tried that too!


----------



## jimborst

nmetro said:


> * Altatec Alta Municipal Utility
> * Cedar Falls Utilities, Celect Communications
> * Consolidated Communications Network Services
> * City of Wadsworth Cable TV
> * Dixon Telephone Company
> * Grundy Center Municipal
> * Harlan Municipal Utilities
> * Hiawatha Broadband
> * Horizon Telecom
> * Independence Communications
> * Iowa Network Services
> * Mid-Century Communications
> * Moultrie Telecommunications
> * Muscatine Power & Water
> * Oneida Cablevision
> * Spencer Municipal Utilities
> * The Community Agency and USA Communications
> 
> The Big Ten Network has a national distribution agreement with DirectTV , as well as a regional agreement with Buckeye Cable.


If they think these cable systems are going to support them, I expect they'll be out of business in a year. Most of the ones I see here are smaller towns in Iowa. For example Spencer Municipal utilities, about 11,000 population, MediaCom also in town not to mention Dish and Direct TV subs. Harlan a little smaller, and Alta a town of less than 1000. I don't know all but that doesn't look like much of a list!


----------



## colavsfaninnwia

Its still too early to know who all will be carrying this channel at launch.


----------



## Hound

jimborst said:


> If they think these cable systems are going to support them, I expect they'll be out of business in a year. Most of the ones I see here are smaller towns in Iowa. For example Spencer Municipal utilities, about 11,000 population, MediaCom also in town not to mention Dish and Direct TV subs. Harlan a little smaller, and Alta a town of less than 1000. I don't know all but that doesn't look like much of a list!


They will not be out of business in one year. There are no professional athlete
salaries to support. The Universities are not going out of business. The new network can afford to have a lower subscription its first year. In later years, the new Network will have an exclusive on the 2007 Disney programming. Lets say
theoretically, no other multi video providers sign on the first year. The subs
that really want the programming will sign up with Directv in 2007. The Universities already have a 2007 revenue stream from Disney (ABC and ESPN).
When the Disney contracts expire, more subs will sign up with Directv, and some
other larger multi video providers will pick up BTN.


----------



## DCSholtis

Agreed the BTN will not be going out of business anytime soon, least not with a 10 year contract that they currently have. (Big Ten just signed a new 10 year contract with ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 and I believe the Big Ten Network contract is even longer, 20 years I believe.)


----------



## jhamps10

garn9173 said:


> I think this whole thing is going to end ugly. If you've got smaller cable companies, those owned by local teleco's, that are adding BTN to their expanded basic lineup at the rates that the BTN is asking for, there goes the leverage of Comcast, Time Warner, Mediacom, etc. demanding BTN be added to their respective digital sports tiers and if I were those smaller cable companies, i'd darn well be making sure that potential customers know they carry Big Ten Network and the big boys don't.


yeah that is true, but most of these local telco's serve the same towns as the big guys. and to a big 10 fan, if you have a choice of switching to in our local case Consolidated Communications over Mediacom (the 800 lb gorrila) They'll switch in a heartbeat.

* Altatec Alta Municipal Utility
* Cedar Falls Utilities, Celect Communications
* Consolidated Communications Network Services
* City of Wadsworth Cable TV
* Dixon Telephone Company
* Grundy Center Municipal
* Harlan Municipal Utilities
* Hiawatha Broadband
* Horizon Telecom
* Independence Communications
* Iowa Network Services
* Mid-Century Communications
* Moultrie Telecommunications
* Muscatine Power & Water
* Oneida Cablevision
* Spencer Municipal Utilities
* The Community Agency and USA Communications

also Consolidated is a national company, and I would assume that the agreement is for their service in Illinois, AND in Texas.


----------



## jhamps10

also to add this to the disco, CSN chicago, which is on dish network, and has been since very close to their day 1 Charges TRIPLE the in-confrence rate of what BTN wants for subs within 150 miles of Chicago, and Double of that rate to everyone else. 

or 3.75 per sub for those within 150 miles, and 2 bucks per sub for everyone else. 

Where as BTN is wanting 1.10 per sub in confrence, and .10 per sub for out of confrence subs. Folks, that totally blows the theroy that dish thinks it is too expensive.


----------



## James Long

jhamps10 said:


> Where as BTN is wanting 1.10 per sub in confrence, and .10 per sub for out of confrence subs. Folks, that totally blows the theroy that dish thinks it is too expensive.


The fight may well be over AT200 vs AT100. If BTN is demanding AT100 placement that would cost E* a lot more money than being placed at AT200. "Too expensive" may still apply.

It appears from Comcast's statements that BTN is not requiring placement in the lowest tier ... they just want to be in the "expanded basic" package instead of a sports tier. In my mind that places the channel in AT200 ... along side CSTV (and ESPN Classic and Speed) plus at the level where RSNs are included. In addition, it is reported that BTN will be on D* in the "Total Choice Plus" package ... with naming, price and content changes TC+ has become "Choice Xtra", a $54.99 package. Choice Xtra is actually more comparable to AT250 on E* (CX is $3 less with 33 less video and 48 less audio channels) than AT200 on E* (CX is $7 more with 7 more video and 29 less audio channels). If BTN accepts "expanded basic" on Comcast and "Choice Xtra" on D* I hope they are not refusing to accept AT200 on E*.

BTN needs to price themselves the same as CSTV ... a comparable network ... and accept AT200 placement. It appears that placement isn't an issue (unless they are holding E* to a higher standard than D* and Comcast). What is left is that their price _is_ too high. Are they asking for more money than CSTV?

BTN likes to compare itself against popular professional sports RSNs but the truth remains that BTN is not a popular professional sports RSN.


----------



## mhowie

James Long said:


> BTN likes to compare itself against popular professional sports RSNs but the truth remains that BTN is not a popular professional sports RSN.


With the poor product often provided by the RSN pro sports (NBA in particular), I would submit there are many who would choose BTN (or its equivalent depending on the part of country) over the pro sports content on one's RSN.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> The fight may well be over AT200 vs AT100. If BTN is demanding AT100 placement that would cost E* a lot more money than being placed at AT200. "Too expensive" may still apply.
> 
> It appears from Comcast's statements that BTN is not requiring placement in the lowest tier ... they just want to be in the "expanded basic" package instead of a sports tier. In my mind that places the channel in AT200 ... along side CSTV (and ESPN Classic and Speed) plus at the level where RSNs are included. In addition, it is reported that BTN will be on D* in the "Total Choice Plus" package ... with naming, price and content changes TC+ has become "Choice Xtra", a $54.99 package. Choice Xtra is actually more comparable to AT250 on E* (CX is $3 less with 33 less video and 48 less audio channels) than AT200 on E* (CX is $7 more with 7 more video and 29 less audio channels). If BTN accepts "expanded basic" on Comcast and "Choice Xtra" on D* I hope they are not refusing to accept AT200 on E*.
> 
> BTN needs to price themselves the same as CSTV ... a comparable network ... and accept AT200 placement. It appears that placement isn't an issue (unless they are holding E* to a higher standard than D* and Comcast). What is left is that their price _is_ too high. Are they asking for more money than CSTV?
> 
> BTN likes to compare itself against popular professional sports RSNs but the truth remains that BTN is not a popular professional sports RSN.


I always thought that AT100+ was comparable to Comcast's expanded basic.
Cable expanded basic generally means 90 percent of subs. If BTN has accepted
D's CX, the comparable Dish tier of AT100+, 200 or 250 will be defined by
the percentage of Dish subs that is comparable to D's CX.

Although I have no information to support which is more popular, my intuition
tells me that pro sports RSNs have a larger audience than college sports RSNs.
However, when the Disney contracts expire and BTN has the number one
event, the ratings for that event may exceed the ratings for pro RSNs in the prime BTN markets.


----------



## Codeman00

It's still foggy too how the HD BTN channels and the secondary feeds are going to be handled. It might be simple to put the SD on AT200, but carrying the HD feed might be a different story? Or would they just add the HD feed for free with the current 25 HD channel HD package because it is being paid for in the AT200 package?


----------



## caseymeeps

Does anyone have any new information re Dish picking up BTN?


----------



## Codeman00

I just received an email today from Dish that said this:



> Thank you for your recent e-mail regarding Big Ten network. Although we have been in discussions to add this to our lineup there has not been a definite agreement. Because this channel does not launch until late this summer we do not have any further details. More specific information should be available closer to the launch date.


----------



## caseymeeps

Thanks. I guess by closer to the launch date they mean after football season has started...


----------



## James Long

They have seven weeks to sign a contract without missing a day.


----------



## iublue

Did anyone else get and email from Dish? I have emailed them twice about the BTN and did not get a response either time.

Maybe they don't like IU fans. VBG

Maybe I should email them again.


----------



## Codeman00

And this was another response from the normal Dish website email address:



> Thank you for your e-mail. Specific information regarding your request for Big Ten Network is not currently available. We would like to add that channel, to make viewers like you happy, but we do not know if or when this will happen. We will gladly forward your request to our Programming Department for further consideration.
> 
> We thank you for your input as we continually review our options in order to provide a compelling lineup for our viewers. Please stay tuned for consumer Charlie Chats that are broadcast monthly on Channel 101 or logon to our website for future programming announcements.
> 
> Your business is greatly appreciated and we thank you for allowing us to be of assistance to you. If you have any further questions or concerns, please refer to www.dishnetwork.com or reply to this email.


----------



## Mojito05

Below is the response I received. It's pretty much the same as Codeman00's, but at least it was acknowledged, I guess. Unless, that is, they're using a Dishbot to answer BTN-related questions. Lame.



> Thank you for your email. Upon reviewing your concern, we have found that previous agents have already forwarded requests for this channel to our Programming Department. We apologize if it is taking so long; however, we are under negotiations with multiple networks to provide our customers with more programs. As a courtesy, we would be sending another request to our Programming Department for you. Please be assured that we are doing our best to get more comprehensive channels that our customers would like to watch.
> 
> Your business is greatly appreciated and we thank you for allowing us to be of assistance to you. If you have any further questions or concerns, please refer to www.dishnetwork.com or reply to this email.


----------



## James Long

What to you expect? There are only so many ways of saying "in negotiations".


----------



## terfmop

iublue said:


> Did anyone else get and email from Dish? I have emailed them twice about the BTN and did not get a response either time.
> 
> Maybe they don't like IU fans. VBG
> 
> Maybe I should email them again.


Dish probably didn't take you seriously. Most folks chomping at the bit for Dish to get the BTN want to see their school during the upcoming football season.......Dish probably doesn't realize IU has a football team :grin: JK


----------



## iublue

terfmop said:


> Dish probably didn't take you seriously. Most folks chomping at the bit for Dish to get the BTN want to see their school during the upcoming football season.......Dish probably doesn't realize IU has a football team :grin: JK


IU has football?  Damn I need to read those memos that the IU alumni foundation sends out.

I started emailing Dish this early so that they would have it before BASKETBALL season.

Football never crossed my mind! VBG


----------



## nbajam

WebTraveler said:


> After being irritated against the satellite and cable companies over the carriage problems with the sports channels, including the Big 10 Network, NFL Network, the MTN, etc., I am now feeling something different. Instead of being the fault of Dish, etc., maybe the fault lies with the Big 10, NFL, etc. Maybe it is the GREED of the Big 10, NFL, etc. that is creating this whole mess?
> 
> Here in Oregon we have a new sports channel starting this fall, Comcast Sports Northwest, with the Trail Blazers as the lead programming. So now we have half of our sports on FSN-NW and the other half on CSN-NW, or whatever acroynm they will use. I know there will be an issue for the providers on this one and its really the same battle.
> 
> But let's remember something else - there is not enough sports programming out there period for all of these channels. ESPN and FSN show poker all the time now- WTF, that is not a sport, period. ESPN used to show CFL football and rugby from down under to fill the void - they don't anymore, but at least those were sports.
> 
> A great example is ESPNU - what a freaking worthless channel. I upgraded my package to get this channel for the NCAA baseball playoffs - we'll, aside from a few games here and there it is almost all re-runs of events played already. What real value is there in this channel? Nada.
> 
> In the end if every conference or league wants there own sports channel there simply will not be available bandwith to do so without an increase in costs. None of these new channels have enough real content to fill 24 hours of time. So why should Dish (or anyone else) even offer them a full channel on the low tier? In the end all these sports channels will probably result in lower viewership to events because there will be fewer people watching. I do anticipate cable companies in the midwest will pick up the Big 10 Network, but thats it, so the Big 10 will have the luxury of knowing it is reducing its audience for its games. At least with GamePlan the games are available for a reasonable cost.
> 
> I think in the end the Pac 10 & Big 12 will get more airtime on FSN, ABC, ESPN, etc. because of the Big 10's greed factor. I think the country (as a whole) would much rather watch the Big 10, but it won't be available for most of the country aside from the one big game a week - and the void will be filled with other games from these two conferences (or in the alternative, total college football on national TV will end up being reversed.)
> 
> So enough with the greed of the conferences and NFL. Their greed will result in less viewership in the end.....what they want? Probably not......and POKER is not a sport.


Actually, they're expanding their reach, because games that will be broadcast on the BTN are games now only available locally, or sometimes regionally on gameplan. Not to mention, the Big 10 reaps the benefits of operating the network.

Sure the games now might be 2nd, 3rd, 4th choice type games, but when the new ESPN/ABC deal expires in 10 years I'd venture to guess its going to be quite a bit different.


----------



## Codeman00

I love to see the Purdue vs Indiana jabbing...makes me feel like I'm back home!


----------



## jhamps10

Codeman00 said:


> I love to see the Purdue vs Indiana jabbing...makes me feel like I'm back home!


I didn't know that Purdue or Indiana had a football team.......

Oh wait They do, isn't it called the old XFL?:hurah: :hurah: 

I-L-L---- I-N-I!!!! Were gonna cream your butt this year in Football, and oh yeah IU basketball fans, the NCAA called, they want your coach to stop breaking recuriting rules (I.e Gordon).....

anyway dish told me the same thing on their e-mail back to me. Dish network is gonna lose a lot of subs by Basketball season if they don't have BTN on by then.


----------



## iublue

jhamps10 said:


> I didn't know that Purdue or Indiana had a football team.......
> 
> Oh wait They do, isn't it called the old XFL?:hurah: :hurah:
> 
> I-L-L---- I-N-I!!!! Were gonna cream your butt this year in Football, and oh yeah IU basketball fans, the NCAA called, they want your coach to stop breaking recuriting rules (I.e Gordon).....
> 
> anyway dish told me the same thing on their e-mail back to me. Dish network is gonna lose a lot of subs by Basketball season if they don't have BTN on by then.


I only see one problem with your post. KS did not break ANY rule in regards to Gordon. First, the Gordons contacted him. Second, there was an unwritten agreement in the basketball community to not recruit a player that had verballed but NO rule. Gordon had always wanted to play at IU but was not going to play for a fool like Davis. If Weber did not know MONTHS ahead of time that Gordon was not solid then he is a fool. All he had to do was go to any forum that discussed NCAA basketball.

Football on the other hand recruits players right up to the moment they sign.


----------



## WebTraveler

jhamps10 said:


> Dish network is gonna lose a lot of subs by Basketball season if they don't have BTN on by then.


Doubtful....isn't that what people said before on other channels and few left, while more signed up. The real die-hard Big 10 sports fan may leave, but most people don't wrap their lives around it.

Prediction - In the end Big 10 will cut its fee to Dish dramatically to get itself shown on Dish. Big 10 doesn't want to risk the idea of failure....


----------



## TBoneit

WebTraveler: Doubtful.

I suspect that in the contracts already signed BTN has to give the best rate to all. So if Dish gets a much lower price they'd have to drop DirecTV's rate for example. So they'll crunch the numbers and decide where the breakeven point is and want to stay up form that.

Edit. That was probably why YES never signed with Dish.


----------



## DCSholtis

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.co...ticle.main&articleId=55593&requestTimeout=900



> In the days before last week's July 4 holiday, senior executives from four of the five biggest pay-TV operators - Comcast, Time Warner Cable, EchoStar and Cox - told SportsBusiness Journal in separate interviews that they will not place the network on their analog tiers at the price the network is seeking. The Big Ten Network is asking cable and satellite operators to pay $1.10 per subscriber within the eight-state Big Ten market; and $0.10 per subscriber in the rest of the United States.
> 
> The unanimity is significant since together the four represent more than 55 million national subscribers. In addition, Comcast and Time Warner Cable have a major presence in the Big Ten markets.
> 
> Of the top pay-TV providers, only DirecTV, with about 15 million satellite subscribers, has committed to carry the channel at launch. The network also has deals with AT&T and as many as 75 small cable systems in the Big Ten footprint, the largest of which is the Toledo-based Buckeye Cable System, which has about 146,800 customers, making it the nation's 21st largest cable operator.
> 
> *"I doubt we will take it, as we see no reason to carry the service in our lowest tier of service nationwide," said Carl Vogel, vice chairman and president of satellite operator EchoStar.*


TBoneit your correct there was some sort of "sunshine agreement" in the YES contracts where if they were to offer reduced terms to any provider they would have to go back and offer the same to ALL providers in which they have signed deals.


----------



## James Long

> *"I doubt we will take it, as we see no reason to carry the service in our lowest tier of service nationwide," said Carl Vogel, vice chairman and president of satellite operator EchoStar.*


That is probably the issue ... placement. As noted previously in this thread, E*'s "lowest tier" isn't the appropriate place for the channel. If BTN is demanding AT100 instead of allowing placement in AT200 (equivalent to D*'s Choice and home of RSNs and CSTV) that would be deal killer.


----------



## mhowie

TBoneit said:


> WebTraveler: Doubtful.
> 
> I suspect that in the contracts already signed BTN has to give the best rate to all. So if Dish gets a much lower price they'd have to drop DirecTV's rate for example. So they'll crunch the numbers and decide where the breakeven point is and want to stay up form that.
> 
> Edit. That was probably why YES never signed with Dish.


How would D* know the rate a competitor might receive?


----------



## norton54

iublue said:


> I have contacted Dish twice. Once about two months ago when I politely asked if they were going to carry the BTN and about a week ago when I was much more blunt. I stated that if they did not carry the BTN then I would be forced to go to Direct.
> 
> If you know anything else I can do just let me know and it will be done. I don't want to switch but if I must then so be it.
> 
> Missing even a single IU bball game is not an option.


I'm with you brother!


----------



## TBoneit

As I understand it if it is in the contract that they get the same rate as the lowest rate being paid they do not have to know what that is. The entity that they pay would have to tell them.

I believe this was the one of the sticking points in E* getting Yes network. Even if Yes was willing to give them a lower rate it would have impacted revenues from other contractees.


----------



## caseymeeps

Any new information re E* getting BTN?


----------



## Codeman00

caseymeeps said:


> Any new information re E* getting BTN?


No, the last I heard is that they are still under negotiations. I want this channel bad...I'll post any info as soon as I get it.


----------



## iublue

I posted in a new thread so it would not get lost in this long thread. Maybe that was a mistake.

According to an IU website that interviewed the head of the BTN...

I know that there is a thread below regarding the BTN but I thought I would bring it to the top instead of burying this news on page 7.

As and IU fan I read this on an IU website. It sounds good and I hope it works out so that I can stay with Dish.

Q - A lot of people want to know where things stand with Dish Network right now?

With Dish Network we are in very active conversations. I would characterize them a little different than some of the other guys I am sure you are going to ask me about. But we are in conversations with them and hope to get a deal done shortly.

Q - Is that a little easier negotiation than with some of the larger cable companies given the way a satellite broadcaster is structured?

I don't think that is why. We have had more productive conversations with Dish than for example with Comcast. I don't think that is why, I think it is just that for whatever reason...Comcast is the biggest and they act in a certain manner and I think it is more about how they go about their business than the way Dish goes about their business. I really don't think it is about the specific platform.

Get the deal done.


----------



## Hound

The BTN is for real. I was watching FSN Wisconsin on MLB EI Friday night before
the Phillies/Padres game came on, and the women's basketball coach from
Univ of Wisconsin was interviewed by a Brewers' announcer and she said that
she drove three hours to the Brewers game just to plug BTN. She talked about
how BTN is going to help promote women's sports by broadcasting live games. She was talking about women's sports in addition to basketball such as field hockey, softball, etc. I do not think she ever mentioned football. Now obviously Fox set up this interview in advance, but the BTN is not going to back off its demands. Most TV viewers could care less about college field hockey (my daughter had a field hockey scholarship). But the point that I came away with is the BTN is serious.

With D* signed up, BTN is not going to offer the other four MVPs (E*, Cox, TW or Comcast) better terms than D* got. The MVPs are going to have to match
the D* tier in terms of percentage of subs. If a deal is not done, the subs that
really want the BTN will migrate to D* just like Sunday Ticket. BTN does not
have contractual obligations to pay millions of dollars to the universities or to
professional athletes. BTN can wait the MVPs out. When the Disney contracts
expire, BTN will be a hot property. The object of the BTN is to eliminate the
middleman, Disney.


----------



## TBoneit

And if it is only on D* the diehard fans will migrate others that would watch if it was there won't. how many new possible fans will never become fans?

It is my belief that all the limited types of deals such as BTN or YES are going to be losing fans in the future by now being easily available. 

Many fans became fans since it was available and they started watching.

This could be a huge opportunity for alternative sports that are willing to gamble on the future by being aired OTA.


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> If a deal is not done, the subs that really want the BTN will migrate to D* just like Sunday Ticket.


In other words, E* will continue to add subscribers at a faster rate than D* --- which they continue to do despite all the threats of migration.


> BTN does not have contractual obligations to pay millions of dollars to the universities or to professional athletes. BTN can wait the MVPs out.


Without the obligations they can afford to make their price affordable or allow the channel to be placed at the tier E* has placed similar content (AT200). $0 for Comcast and $0 from Echostar isn't going to help them keep their network running. They would be wise to accept what they can get, get popular, and THEN start making demands instead of pretending to be the best thing since ESPN before they air a single game.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> In other words, E* will continue to add subscribers at a faster rate than D* --- which they continue to do despite all the threats of migration.Without the obligations they can afford to make their price affordable or allow the channel to be placed at the tier E* has placed similar content (AT200). $0 for Comcast and $0 from Echostar isn't going to help them keep their network running. They would be wise to accept what they can get, get popular, and THEN start making demands instead of pretending to be the best thing since ESPN before they air a single game.


IF D* is the only provider of BTN, D* will have a BTN audience, and E* and the other MVPs will not. In a 200 channel plus environment, regional sports channels have a small percentage of the market. If E* continues to add more subs than
D*, it will be for other reasons. E* trails D* in monthly revenue per sub.
So the D* subs are at D* for different reasons. D* has a different audience than E*.

BTN may be getting $0 from E* and the other MVPs, but the Big Ten schools are still getting money from Disney. The strategy seems to be to wait it out.


----------



## DCSholtis

E* asking for FCC help in BTN dispute
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6462418.html



> EchoStar Communications asked the Federal Communications Commission to declare Big Ten Network a regional sports network, which would allow the direct-broadcast satellite provider to seek arbitration so that it can secure carriage of the service "on reasonable terms."
> 
> EchoStar, parent of Dish Network, filed a 19-page petition with the FCC Friday seeking expedited treatment regarding Big Ten Network, a joint venture that is 51%-owned by the Big Ten Conference and 49%-owned by Fox Cable, a unit of News Corp.
> 
> Fox Cable had not seen EchoStar's FCC filing yet and, therefore, declined to comment, spokesman Tom Tyrer said Monday. Fox Cable is handling distribution for the new channel.
> 
> *EchoStar wants the FCC to declare the network, which launches next month, an RSN under the terms of the so-called 2004 News Corp.-Hughes order. That order set forth a number of conditions that News Corp. had to adhere in order to gain approval to acquire a stake in DirecTV.*


Question is with the sale of D* to Liberty is whether or not that 2004 order is still in effect. It should be interesting...IF this thing does go to arbitration though the rates BTN are asking for are consistent with rates of various other RSNs. There is no way they will be able to get this on the cheap.


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> IF D* is the only provider of BTN, D* will have a BTN audience, and E* and the other MVPs will not.


Only by default (since there will be zero audience for BTN on other MVPs unless BTN plays fair). But don't make it sound like every _POTENTIAL_ audience member for BTN would give up E* or their other MVP and storm over to D*. That just is not going to happen.

BTN is just not that important of a network to the masses. They would be better off getting on E* and other MVPs where they will be _AVAILALABLE_ to the masses instead of pretending to be a market player that they simply are not.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> Only by default (since there will be zero audience for BTN on other MVPs unless BTN plays fair). But don't make it sound like every _POTENTIAL_ audience member for BTN would give up E* or their other MVP and storm over to D*. That just is not going to happen.
> 
> BTN is just not that important of a network to the masses. They would be better off getting on E* and other MVPs where they will be _AVAILALABLE_ to the masses instead of pretending to be a market player that they simply are not.


The BTN die hards will give up E* or their other MVP, if D* is the only choice, or
some will pick up D* as a second service. (I believe the statistics of subs with
two services is about 3% nationwide.) I said that the people who really want
BTN will go to D*, if D* is the only choice (die hards). (There are no die hard
Yankee fans with E*, unless they have a second service). Die hard Yankee fan means watching baseball on TV is part of your regular routine.

To the masses BTN is not important. No RSN is. But when the Disney contracts
expire, BTN will have content that will be more attractive to subs.


----------



## scooper

I doubt it....

Look - I don't think the ACC could support it's own RSN, nevermind the Big 12 (which is where I hail from - Rock Chalk - Go Jayhawks). The Big 10 - please...


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> To the masses BTN is not important. No RSN is. But when the Disney contracts expire, BTN will have content that will be more attractive to subs.


Another "fact" that is only speculation. When the Disney contracts expire the schools will have to make the choice of renewing a contract that pays them a lot of money to get the schools on top rated sports channels or take a risk with a network that is having serious start up issues getting on major systems.  BTN _*will*_ have that content? That is not guaranteed. Why pay a premium price and agree to premium terms _*now*_ for a channel that isn't yet worth the premium?


----------



## WebTraveler

DCSholtis said:


> http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.co...ticle.main&articleId=55593&requestTimeout=900
> 
> TBoneit your correct there was some sort of "sunshine agreement" in the YES contracts where if they were to offer reduced terms to any provider they would have to go back and offer the same to ALL providers in which they have signed deals.


Perhaps this is true, but there are other ways around it. Dish is also a big advertiser and a big sponsor of events, so carry the channel at the going rate - but oh, give us some cheap advertising and we're in. It all works. In the end, if the channel is carried, Dish will get a better deal than the others, just wait and see....


----------



## DCSholtis

I doubt that very much as that would mean BTN would have to go back and re negotiate terms with everyone giving them the chance to match. BTN will not fall into that trap.


----------



## hoopsbwc34

Where is D* carrying this channel? As part of their Sports pak or on their choice tier?


----------



## DCSholtis

D* is carrying on their Choice Plus tier and up not the sports pack.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> Another "fact" that is only speculation. When the Disney contracts expire the schools will have to make the choice of renewing a contract that pays them a lot of money to get the schools on top rated sports channels or take a risk with a network that is having serious start up issues getting on major systems. BTN _*will*_ have that content? That is not guaranteed. Why pay a premium price and agree to premium terms _*now*_ for a channel that isn't yet worth the premium?


Yes, this is speculation. But the schools would not have agreed to the BTN,
unless this was part of the game plan. Eliminate the middleman, Disney completely. There must be enough money in eliminating Disney to make BTN
worthwhile. With one MVP signed up, who can theoretically provide content to all of its die hard fans, the risk/reward becomes a no brainer. The schools are not
going to go out of business, if they miss a payment from Disney. The schools
do not have professional athlete salaries to pay. And under Title IX, the money
from Disney could not be put exclusively into football. It has to be shared
equally with women's programs or go to the school's general funds (e.g., women's TV rights equals one and men's TV rights equals 11, 5 has to be made available to women's athletic programs). If eliminating Disney was not part of the
original concept, I would agree with you about BTN's negotiating stance on
carriage.


----------



## James Long

DCSholtis said:


> D* is carrying on their Choice Plus tier and up not the sports pack.


Another reason why E* should not put the channel in anything lower than AT200.


----------



## Codeman00

I just found this on Rivals.com. It's a Q&A from the Big Ten Network President Mark Silverman and mentions Dish. No real big news but more news than you had.

http://ohiostate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=693235


----------



## James Long

Codeman00 said:


> I just found this on Rivals.com. It's a Q&A from the Big Ten Network President Mark Silverman and mentions Dish. No real big news but more news than you had.
> 
> http://ohiostate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=693235


"When you subscribe to our network as an operator you are going to get the game we are going to put on that network, and that is going to be different games so in week one in Michigan it will be the Michigan State game and in week one in Ohio it will be the Ohio State game and in Pennsylvania it will be the Penn State game. So we are going to split our feeds in that first week, but in addition to that we are offering up, and DirecTV has already indicated they are going to carry it, all of the games so that an operator can air every single game, even the ones that aren't on the network (the main channel)."​It looks like they are looking for a lot! The question of what they are going to do in basketball season (potentially 11 games to split) is also noted on that page.
The way I look at it is that I categorize Dish (Network) at a different place than some of the other cable operators. The difference is that we are exchanging ideas with Dish and are in negotiations with them. They are active and I am hopeful with Dish (Network) that we are going to be able to get there and get the network carried. I don't think it is imminent by any stretch but we are talking with them and we are making progress slowly, but we are making progress.​People shouldn't be as worried as they are in this thread.


----------



## scooper

So they are potentially asking for 7-11 different games simultaneaously ?!?! good luck trying to get anybody else to sign up....


----------



## skizer

scooper said:


> So they are potentially asking for 7-11 different games simultaneaously ?!?! good luck trying to get anybody else to sign up....


It would be VERY unlikely you would ever have that many games on at the same time. For example, in bball IU / Purdue almost never play @ the same time. I would guess the story is the same w/ Michigan & Michigan St.

You may have to have a BTN - Alternate (as they do w/ESPN) or 2 but I would be surprised if there are ever more then 2 or 3 big ten teams playing at the same time / same day in hoops. That would also only be a big issue for 6 weeks until conference play starts too.

If they don't add the station, there are LOTS of people here in Indy that are going to be upset and moving to DTV. We're use to seeing the Hoosier / Boilermakers pretty much every game for bball....and if they don't have it come November, I'd be shocked if they don't lose a good chunk of their Indy market.


----------



## James Long

Plus there is the issue of ESPN/ABC taking first pick anyways. 
It does add another twist to the puzzle having multiple "alternate" versions.


----------



## nbajam

scooper said:


> I doubt it....
> 
> Look - I don't think the ACC could support it's own RSN, nevermind the Big 12 (which is where I hail from - Rock Chalk - Go Jayhawks). The Big 10 - please...


The Big 10 is only the most powerful conference in college athletics with most of the largest public universities in the country.

Yeah, no way they could support a network...


----------



## angiecopus

My dad only gets two tickets for each ohio state home game, and unfortunaly my mom will be going to the first game which The BTN will be showing. I hate that.
because its not the same when i can't watch it.


----------



## saltrek

James Long said:


> Another reason why E* should not put the channel in anything lower than AT200.


I wonder if E* trying to classify BTN as an RSN is an attempt to only offer the channel in Big 10 territory, and as part of sports pak to the rest of the country - signifigantly lowering the $0.10 per subscriber part of the deal.


----------



## garn9173

Less than 6 weeks until launch and it looks like the BTN is getting desparate, this luncheon is today:

http://www.kcci.com/newsarchive/13743213/detail.html



> The Big 10 commissioner is coming to Des Moines to convince fans the network is worth fighting for. He is hosting a free lunch at 11:45 a.m. Wednesday at the downtown Marriott. Get a reservation at 515-226-0129.


----------



## OrangeandBlue33

Doesn't sound like great news thus far for E* and BTN....

Indianapolis Star Article

"No major cable company has agreed to carry the channel, although such negotiations typically run close to a new channel's launch date. Satellite company DirecTV is offering the channel. Its parent company, News Corp., owns Fox, which has a 49 percent interest in the Big Ten Network. *Another satellite provider, Dish Network, recently appealed to the Federal Communications Commission, accusing the Big Ten Network of price gouging.*"

That doesn't sound as promising as other posts have indicated. Price gouging - ouch!


----------



## RAD

News story about E* and BTN, http://www.madison.com/tct/sports/202695


----------



## MarkoC

nbajam said:


> The Big 10 is only the most powerful conference in college athletics with most of the largest public universities in the country.
> 
> Yeah, no way they could support a network...


Well said! 

BTW, has it been confrimed that all of the BTN programming will be in HD or just some of it?


----------



## Lincoln6Echo

I saw an ad for the BTN on FSN-MW last night during the Cards-Cubs game, does this mean that E* is going to indeed get this network?


----------



## James Long

Unless you saw E* in that ad, no. It is likely BTN bought time from FSN for the ad.


----------



## DCSholtis

MarkoC said:


> Well said!
> 
> BTW, has it been confrimed that all of the BTN programming will be in HD or just some of it?


They are saying most not all in HD.


----------



## Michael P

In Cleveland the local news carried a story about how many will not see the Bucks on TV this season. IN a nutshell BTN wants the cable companies to pony up $1.10 per subscriber and be put in the LOWEST tier. 

I'd call that price gouging! BTN's argument is it's not just a "sports" network, that 60 hrs/week will be devoted to the educational offerings of the member universities. Yeah right, everyone with cable is going to want to pay $1.10 mor per month to see what amounts to infomercials about universities. They better check with their Economics departments first!


----------



## DCSholtis

All I know is I'll enjoy seeing the Bucks in HD weeks 1 and 2...


----------



## James Long

Perhaps. Are they going to be HD on day one?


----------



## Jason Whiddon

Michael P said:


> In Cleveland the local news carried a story about how many will not see the Bucks on TV this season. IN a nutshell BTN wants the cable companies to pony up $1.10 per subscriber and be put in the LOWEST tier.
> 
> I'd call that price gouging! BTN's argument is it's not just a "sports" network, that 60 hrs/week will be devoted to the educational offerings of the member universities. Yeah right, everyone with cable is going to want to pay $1.10 mor per month to see what amounts to infomercials about universities. They better check with their Economics departments first!


This is my biggest issue with the BTN.

That and they plan to show equal amounts of men and womens sports. Im not sexist, but I dont want to pay extra for womens softball.


----------



## Hound

Here is an interesting article about BTN's negotiating stance with Comcast.

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070724/SPORTS02/707240324/1152/NEWS

This indicates to me that BTN is serious and is going to hold the line in
carriage negotiations. When Comcast makes a deal to own a sports network,
RSN or Versus type, Comcast first makes a deal and guarantees money
to lets say the NHL for $60 million a year, before Comcast has any carriage
in place. Comcast figures it can recoup by just raising rates on its 25 million
subs. Then Comcast goes out and negotiates with other MVPs. Carriage with
other MVPs gives Comcast a profit. In the BTN's case, BTN may not have
any guarantees to the universities. So BTN can afford to take a hard stance
with Comcast. For the BTN universities, any carriage is a windfall, because
the universities will be getting paid for sports that were never on TV before,
such as field hockey and softball (like the Wisconsin women's basketball coach said on FSN Wisconsin the other night).


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> ... the universities will be getting paid for sports that were never on TV before, such as field hockey and softball ...


But will people pay to watch those "never seen before" sports? Should they pay at the same level as the sports that have been "seen on TV"? Or are they going to play the sexist card and claim that those that don't want to pay top rate for obviously less popular sports are somehow criminal?


----------



## TBoneit

Having read the news articles, links above, It appears that since they want carriage on the lowest tier most people will be getting a SD feed on cable or Satellite. BTN in the one article claims they want to be available to all, simple, make the price reasonable. $1.10 for what amounts to one channel, Give me a break. As I read the articles only one sports network is more expensive, ESPN. 

Despite what everybody clamoring for BTN thinks, Sports has a lower appeal than many channels, Just that its viewers are more fanatical about their team/player(s).


----------



## FTA Michael

It doesn't have to be sexist. How many people want to pay for college men's lacrosse? water polo? swimming? tennis? bowling?


----------



## Jason Whiddon

I agree, those rank up there with womens softball as far as Im concerned.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> But will people pay to watch those "never seen before" sports? Should they pay at the same level as the sports that have been "seen on TV"? Or are they going to play the sexist card and claim that those that don't want to pay top rate for obviously less popular sports are somehow criminal?


People will not subscribe to sports tier to watch those sports. BTN seems
adamant that sports tier is not an option for carriage. BTN seems to be banking
on the appeal of other sports to win carriage.

Universities are generally very intransigent. The dynamics of the BTN carriage
proposal is different than Comcast looking for carriage of Versus or CSN.
With one major MVP carriage agreement and many smaller ones, it appears
BTN is not going to back down. Without the pressure of financial commitments,
BTN seems to be sticking to its guns.


----------



## OrangeandBlue33

Another story with a little more info:

EchoStar to FCC: Big Ten Network is an RSN


----------



## Ira Lacher

Everyone notice that the Big Ten Network is owned by the same folks who own DirecTV?


----------



## RAD

Ira Lacher said:


> Everyone notice that the Big Ten Network is owned by the same folks who own DirecTV?


But not for much longer, being sold to the guy that started TCI cable, which eventually was sold to AT&T then to Comcast.


----------



## Hound

Ira Lacher said:


> Everyone notice that the Big Ten Network is owned by the same folks who own DirecTV?


Big Ten Network is 51% owned by the Universities, 49% by Fox. Obviously the
Fox affiliation is where the D* carriage agreement came from.

Ultimately, final decisions are made by the Universities.


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> With one major MVP carriage agreement and many smaller ones, it appears BTN is not going to back down. Without the pressure of financial commitments, BTN seems to be sticking to its guns.


Their loss. They just don't have the content to compel the level of carriage they demand.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> Their loss. They just don't have the content to compel the level of carriage they demand.


I will not predict who is going to blink first, BTN or an MVP.


----------



## scooper

I'll predict that E* won't 

IF BTN gets carried - it's going to be handled like any other RSN - AT100+ or AT200 or better.


----------



## Hound

scooper said:


> I'll predict that E* won't
> 
> IF BTN gets carried - it's going to be handled like any other RSN - AT100+ or AT200 or better.


I agree with that. I am sure that BTN would accept AT100+. BTN would accept
AT200 if it is similar to D*'s tier in terms of percentage of subs. Maybe the 
per sub fee is the major stumbling block with E* or AT100+ is?


----------



## James Long

Since you seem to know a lot about D*, what is their percentage of subs that subscribe to Choice Plus where D* is reportedly placing BTN?

If E* is pushing to make BTN and RSN they _may_ want to only provide it regionally, like normal RSNs. A normal RSN would be available in market in AT100+, not in every home that subscribes to AT100+. Another potential for stickyness.

BTN would be best off accepting AT200 to all regions (similar to CSTV) instead of pushing for any sub AT200 customers than be declared an RSN and only be available regionally (or in the Sports Pack).

If BTN is foolish enough to push for AT100 or AT100+ and every home (not regional) they are not likely to make it on to E*. AT200 is where it fits into how E* is treating current channels. There is no proof that BTN deserves any better treatment - especially at the price they are demanding.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> Since you seem to know a lot about D*, what is their percentage of subs that subscribe to Choice Plus where D* is reportedly placing BTN?
> 
> If E* is pushing to make BTN and RSN they _may_ want to only provide it regionally, like normal RSNs. A normal RSN would be available in market in AT100+, not in every home that subscribes to AT100+. Another potential for stickyness.
> 
> BTN would be best off accepting AT200 to all regions (similar to CSTV) instead of pushing for any sub AT200 customers than be declared an RSN and only be available regionally (or in the Sports Pack).
> 
> If BTN is foolish enough to push for AT100 or AT100+ and every home (not regional) they are not likely to make it on to E*. AT200 is where it fits into how E* is treating current channels. There is no proof that BTN deserves any better treatment - especially at the price they are demanding.


D* does not have a Choice Plus tier.

AT200 on BTN's terms, one rate for the 8 states and a lower rate for the other 42 states would be an outstanding deal for BTN. Would BTN accept AT200 when
BTN is insisting on Comcast placing BTN in expanded basic which generally is
90% of subs in the cable industry? I have no clue? But I agree AT200 is a good
deal.

With regard to E*'s FCC filing, generally it would be unlikely that E* would
get a response before the end of August. However, maybe the FCC has
expedited procedures. Has anyone read the FCC procedures? I have not. Because
of the filing, E* probably will not reach agreement with BTN by the end of
August (speculation on my part).

Since the FOX interest in BTN is only 49 percent, my opinion is that the E* FCC
filing will not be successful.


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> D* does not have a Choice Plus tier.


Sorry ... "Choice Xtra" (I recall a new plan called Choice Plus which was supposed to be Choice Xtra plus DVR. They are apparently calling that "Plus DVR".)

The FAQs on the BTN website have "Total Choice" listed, so I suppose whomever posted the plus level earlier in this thread was wrong (or the BTN website has been partially corrected).



> AT200 on BTN's terms, one rate for the 8 states and a lower rate for the other 42 states would be an outstanding deal for BTN. Would BTN accept AT200 when BTN is insisting on Comcast placing BTN in expanded basic which generally is
> 90% of subs in the cable industry? I have no clue? But I agree AT200 is a good
> deal.


Hard ball can be expensive. I hope E* is offering CSTV like placement in AT200. The loss to E* is negligible if they don't have the channel.



> Since the FOX interest in BTN is only 49 percent, my opinion is that the E* FCC filing will not be successful.


I see the FCC filing as a negotiating tool. It does place the issue on hold.


----------



## nmetro

Things still not looking up. 80% of the Big Ten states still do not have access to BTN.

The following is from today's Columbus Dispatch:

As kickoff nears, Big Ten TV deal incomplete
Wednesday, August 1, 2007 7:34 AM
By Bob Baptist
The Columbus Dispatch

CHICAGO -- If the Big Ten kicked off the football season today, 80 percent of cable television subscribers in the conference's eight-state region -- including everyone in central Ohio -- would not be able to watch the games carried by the Big Ten Network.

Network president Mark Silverman said yesterday that, a month before kickoff, the network has not agreed to terms with most cable operators in the Big Ten region, including Time Warner, which serves more than two of every three wired homes in Ohio.

Jim Delany, the conference's commissioner, suggested a month ago in a war of words with cable giant Comcast that if negotiations were not progressing by now, conference coaches should start lobbying fans to switch to DirecTV, a satellite provider that will carry the Big Ten Network.

Delany was more conciliatory yesterday, saying it is merely "halftime" of a high-stakes game he and Silverman hope is settled before Ohio State opens its season Sept. 1 against Youngstown State on the network.

Silverman agreed with Delany, describing the impasse as business as usual.

"We never expected the large-cable-operator deals to be done at this point," Silverman said. "It's not the way the industry works. They get done very late; mid- to late August is when these things typically heat up. I anticipate having productive conversations with cable operators in the coming weeks."

Silverman and Delany said one proposal remains non-negotiable: that cable providers put the network in their "expanded basic" service that also includes ESPN. The "vast majority" of holdout providers, Silverman said, have countered that the network belongs in a sports package with other "niche" offerings.

"We believe it is best suited (to) a sports tier," Time Warner spokeswoman Judy Barbao said. "It is expensive programming that we feel should be available as a choice for customers to pay for or not pay for. We don't believe it's fair to ask every customer, whether they're a Big Ten fan or not, to pay for this expensive programming."

Providers in the eight-state region have been asked to pay $1.10 per subscriber each month to carry the network. But when asked yesterday if that price was negotiable, Silverman seemed to indicate that the network was ready to back off, which could hasten negotiations in the coming weeks.

"Everything is negotiable other than the expanded basic (service) in the eight states," he said.

If the network lowers its asking price, will cable providers agree to include it in their expanded-basic package? Barbao said she could not speak for Time Warner negotiators, but Silverman said he was hopeful of a thaw in the standoff.

"As soon as they're amenable to expanded basic, I think we could sit down and get this deal done," he said.

"I would hope as we get into the next few weeks that whatever has transpired to date is put aside &#8230; it gets much more serious and it's time to really do what I think we owe the fans and get the network on the air."

Delany acknowledged the possibility that all might not be well at the start.

But "ultimately, if not in three weeks, (the network) will enjoy wide distribution," he said. "The vision is (that fans) will receive every game through cable and satellite and any other new technology that becomes useful. In the short term, I empathize and sympathize with the tension they feel about this issue."

So does Ohio State coach Jim Tressel, who said fans "deserve to see as much Big Ten as they can possibly see" and will be disappointed if they can't see the opener against Youngstown State.

But "knowing our fans," Tressel said, "they'll find a way to see it."

[email protected]


----------



## James Long

> Silverman and Delany said one proposal remains non-negotiable: that cable providers put the network in their "expanded basic" service that also includes ESPN. The "vast majority" of holdout providers, Silverman said, have countered that the network belongs in a sports package with other "niche" offerings.


The proper place on E* would be with CSTV in AT200 ... the tier above where ESPN is. BTN is not ESPN ... they need to realize that.

(Of course, if E* didn't have the AT100 tier it wouldn't be an issue. That's where D* wins by not having a decent $29.99 programming tier.)


----------



## garn9173

James Long said:


> The proper place on E* would be with CSTV in AT200 ... the tier above where ESPN is. BTN is not ESPN ... they need to realize that.
> 
> (Of course, if E* didn't have the AT100 tier it wouldn't be an issue. That's where D* wins by not having a decent $29.99 programming tier.)


Thing of it is, they don't realize that. Silverman and Delaney think their programming is just as valuable as ESPN if not more valuable because of all of the "local programming" BTN is going to carry, like RAGBRAI, which is an annual bicycle ride across Iowa (it's not a race, just a lesiurley ride with overnight stops along the way in various small towns), which is something Delaney said last week that BTN could televise.


----------



## James Long

I've attached E*'s cover letter explaining their view that BTN is an RSN.

The News Corp.-backed Big Ten Network plans to launch this August and provide regional coverage of sporting events of a single NCAA conference, the Big Ten Conference, which includes 11 schools in 8 midwestern states. EchoStar submits that such an offering fits neatly within any reasonable definition of a RSN, and has offered carriage terms comparable to those offered to other RSNs carried today on DISH Network. EchoStar's proposed carriage terms are supported by the intended core programming (regional college sports) and proposed pricing (substantially higher in-region rates) of the new channel. Notwithstanding the fact it offers only regional programming, Big Ten Network suggests it is a national network - even demanding carriage on DISH Network's basic tier. The only evidence Big Ten Network could offer in support of its carriage demands is a national affiliation deal with its sister company, DIRECTV, hardly an arms-length negotiation.​
The full 3mb petition is available here (at the FCC website).


----------



## jrbdmb

One problem with most cable companies is that their expanded basic lineup is already packed to the gills. To add the BTN they would have to drop a channel, and likely violate their agreement with that channel.

If the NFL Network was not able to force their way into expanded basic on many systems, then I doubt that that BTN will be able to either.


----------



## WebTraveler

jrbdmb said:


> If the NFL Network was not able to force their way into expanded basic on many systems, then I doubt that that BTN will be able to either.


That's exactly right. The NFL has more market appeal than the Big 10 and if they couldn't, its doubtful for Big 10 Network.

That said, I've been doing some research on this FCC complaint Dish filed. It looks like because of the Liberty Media deal, any network downed by Fox or Directv or related company is potentially subject to arbitration. This is something that Big 10 didn't figure into its analysis. In the end, the Big 10 Network will be classified as a Regional Sports Channel and will end up with all the RSNs on Dish under those rules. Big 10 will end up getting the RSN rate and not be across America, unless someone subscribes the sports pack - I wonder what this does to all of the analysis done by the Big 10....the tie in with Directv owning 49% of all of this really screws up their network.


----------



## Jason Whiddon

Very true. Comcast just put the NFL network in their extra sports pack.


----------



## nmetro

Dear Season Ticket Holders and Alumni,

On August 30, a new television network dedicated to showcasing the Big Ten will be launched nationwide. The Big Ten Network is a first-of-its-kind partnership between the eleven Big Ten universities and a major television provider. Through the network, fans will get to see an unprecedented number of Big Ten sporting events, including football and basketball. Ohio State and the other Big Ten universities will receive increased regional and national exposure while also establishing a stable source of funding to supplement our existing Big Ten contracts with CBS (basketball) and ABC/ESPN (football).

This additional revenue will help Ohio State, which has the largest athletics program in the country, remain completely self-supporting, without relying on any tax or tuition dollars to maintain its 36 men's and women's varsity sports. The new revenue will also benefit the university at large; for example, it is the source of funding for the Athletics Department's recent $5 million pledge to the university's main library renovation.

Programming that will be featured on the network and/or on other alternative platforms, like the internet, mobile/wireless, interactive and on-demand includes:

-Between 60 and 70 OSU events this season, including:
o Football
o Men's and women's basketball
o Olympic sports including baseball, gymnastics, soccer, tennis, volleyball, wrestling, swimming, diving and more

-A nightly studio show including segments from each campus

-Big Ten championship events, classic games and coaches' shows

The wide appeal of Ohio State sports calls for widespread distribution of the Big Ten Network. If you live in the state of Ohio, then you should receive the Big Ten Network among the 70 or so channels included with your standard or basic level of service. That service typically includes channels such as Food Channel, Discovery, ESPN, ESPN2, the Golf Channel, and two networks focusing on regional sports-FSN-Ohio and Sports Time Ohio, for example. Many cable operators also own regional sports networks and carry them on this same level of service.

The network is in discussions with all cable and satellite providers nationwide. National agreements have been reached with DirecTV and AT&T, and regional agreements are in place with more than 75 other cable providers. All agreements call for the network to be offered on the standard or basic level of service. DirecTV has designated 220 as the Big Ten Network's channel, and also has committed "overflow" channels at no additional charge to subscribers to accommodate the many occasions when the network produces multiple games simultaneously.

As a strong supporter of OSU, the most important thing you can do to get the network is to contact your cable or satellite company to ask that the Big Ten Network be added to your basic package. Please call 1-866-WANT-B10 to tell your cable operator that you want the Big Ten Network on your basic cable package. You can also go to www.BigTenNetwork.com to join Fans First, our fan loyalty program, to receive regular updates on the Big Ten Network.

Go Bucks!

Eugene Smith


----------



## James Long

Source?


----------



## paja

nmetro said:


> Dear Season Ticket Holders and Alumni,
> 
> On August 30, a new television network dedicated to showcasing the Big Ten will be launched nationwide. The Big Ten Network is a first-of-its-kind partnership between the eleven Big Ten universities and a major television provider. Through the network, fans will get to see an unprecedented number of Big Ten sporting events, including football and basketball. Ohio State and the other Big Ten universities will receive increased regional and national exposure while also establishing a stable source of funding to supplement our existing Big Ten contracts with CBS (basketball) and ABC/ESPN (football).
> 
> This additional revenue will help Ohio State, which has the largest athletics program in the country, remain completely self-supporting, without relying on any tax or tuition dollars to maintain its 36 men's and women's varsity sports. The new revenue will also benefit the university at large; for example, it is the source of funding for the Athletics Department's recent $5 million pledge to the university's main library renovation.
> 
> Programming that will be featured on the network and/or on other alternative platforms, like the internet, mobile/wireless, interactive and on-demand includes:
> 
> -Between 60 and 70 OSU events this season, including:
> o Football
> o Men's and women's basketball
> o Olympic sports including baseball, gymnastics, soccer, tennis, volleyball, wrestling, swimming, diving and more
> 
> -A nightly studio show including segments from each campus
> 
> -Big Ten championship events, classic games and coaches' shows
> 
> The wide appeal of Ohio State sports calls for widespread distribution of the Big Ten Network. If you live in the state of Ohio, then you should receive the Big Ten Network among the 70 or so channels included with your standard or basic level of service. That service typically includes channels such as Food Channel, Discovery, ESPN, ESPN2, the Golf Channel, and two networks focusing on regional sports-FSN-Ohio and Sports Time Ohio, for example. Many cable operators also own regional sports networks and carry them on this same level of service.
> 
> The network is in discussions with all cable and satellite providers nationwide. National agreements have been reached with DirecTV and AT&T, and regional agreements are in place with more than 75 other cable providers. All agreements call for the network to be offered on the standard or basic level of service. DirecTV has designated 220 as the Big Ten Network's channel, and also has committed "overflow" channels at no additional charge to subscribers to accommodate the many occasions when the network produces multiple games simultaneously.
> 
> As a strong supporter of OSU, the most important thing you can do to get the network is to contact your cable or satellite company to ask that the Big Ten Network be added to your basic package. Please call 1-866-WANT-B10 to tell your cable operator that you want the Big Ten Network on your basic cable package. You can also go to www.BigTenNetwork.com to join Fans First, our fan loyalty program, to receive regular updates on the Big Ten Network.
> 
> Go Bucks!
> 
> Eugene Smith


I've called DISH and stated that under no circumstances do I want to pay one additional penny for BTN.


----------



## Codeman00

paja said:


> I've called DISH and stated that under no circumstances do I want to pay one additional penny for BTN.


Well bah humbug to you too. Thanks for the support.


----------



## angiecopus

well i guess, no ohio state-youngstown state on tv for me. my mom really wants to 
go because its Alumni Band day.


----------



## gopherscot

paja said:


> I've called DISH and stated that under no circumstances do I want to pay one additional penny for BTN.


How about 110 pennies!:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## TBoneit

Codeman00 said:


> Well bah humbug to you too. Thanks for the support.


"The wide appeal of Ohio State sports calls for widespread distribution of the Big Ten Network." Wide appeal?

Support something that will most likely cost me money in the future? I guess I should run down to trenton and start lobbying for higher real estate taxes too?

It isn't personal, I sure I'm not the only one that has become tired of being nickel and dimed to death. All I hear is its only pennies a day, surely you can afford that? No because all those Pennies a day start to add up.

Just like the hidden price increases, The real reason channel providers want bundling. To avoid backlash when their greed causes the TV bill to go up.
I'm sure that sooner ro later we here in NJ will have self serve and the price will drop, for a short time until the state raises the sales tax on gas and then we'll be paying the same price and pumping it ourselves. 
Hidden price increases. smaller package and the same price, coffee used to be a one pound can, not a 12oz can so we end up paying more now for 3/4 of what used to be a whole pound. I've seen that creeping into ice cream, where it looks like a 1/2 gallon size, It isn't!

So nothing personal but I'm tired of price increases. NJ is squeezing me out of here with the increases in everything they touch. 

:rant: now I :feelbette


----------



## nmetro

Personally, I think the Big Ten may have gone overboard with trying to create their own network. Also, to those who oppose BTN, you must realize that Big Ten Alumni live in all 50 states and number well over a million when you add up all 11 schools. Yet, for what BTN wants to do is truly to do is serve a diffused audience, i.e. folks who are Alumni of the SEC, Pac10, Big12, etc.

What the Big Ten should have done was to provide a Big Ten sports through both BTN and local broadcasters. By restricting their broadcasts to cable and satellite it is causing issues throughout the Big Ten region. In addition, BTN is an RSN, should have allowed games to be shown on ESPN GamePlan and Full Court outside the Big Ten region. This compromise will still accomplish what the Big Ten is trying to do, get their sports more exposure, but doing so without alienating the Big Ten sports fan.

In the end, the current arrangement is most likely going to fail and anger many of the Big Ten supporters which BTN was trying to reach. Mad supporters = less donations and revenues to Big Ten schools. When the bottom line gets affected, then BTN will be relegated to the dustbin of failed cable networks. 

In the meantime, we the Big Ten Alumni and fans will have to go through a year without access to several football games (at least three for each school) and untold number of basketball games. By the way, as of today BTN is only widely available via DirecTV and that is about it. The chorus of screams in Ohio will reach its crescendo on 1 September, when OSU-YSU will be only available at Ohio Stadium and DirecTV. The only other choice, 1460 The Fan; oh how 1960s! We have come full circle! By the way, there is one more choice, you can pay $30 to get a radio stream via the internet. Hey Charlie, I hope you read this!

Go Bucks!

Nick

PS I'd bet if the SEC had their own network, Charlie would put it up in a New York minute. He wouldn't want to miss his Tennessee games!


----------



## James Long

BTN wanted the best of both worlds ... they wannabe ESPN with a national audience but they also wannabe a network of six (or more) RSNs serving specific states. They place an incredible burden on any carrier that chooses to add them to their system ... cable is lucky as it only has to add the BTN for their area. This mess of multiple BTNs to choose from is as much of a killer of the deal as their pricing demands and demand to be treated like ESPN ... when they clearly are _NOT_ ESPN.


----------



## nmetro

The following is from today's Columbus Dispatch. Basically, Time-Warner MAY show the first two OSU games. Thet are still arguing with BTN. Hey, so is about everyone else!

For Buckeye fans outside of Central Ohio, the Youngstown State, Akron and Kent State games are on BTN, Also, one Big 10 game will also end up on BTN. So, at least four games will not be availble unless Dish can get an arrangement.

Big Ten Network: Games might be shown without deal
Friday, August 10, 2007 6:32 AM
By Mike Pramik and Molly Willow
The Columbus Dispatch
No. 1 with a bullet?
Which quarterback do you think will end up taking the most snaps for Ohio State this season?
Todd Boeckman
Antonio Henton
Rob Schoenhoft

Time Warner Cable might show Ohio State's football opener against Youngstown State, even though the cable company hasn't reached an agreement with the Big Ten Network.

Time Warner, which serves two-thirds of wired homes in Ohio, including some 600,000 in central Ohio, said it would consider showing the Youngstown State game Sept. 1 and the Akron game Sept. 8 on one of its basic cable channels without a Big Ten Network deal.

"We would be happy to facilitate a 'freeview' of the live games on expanded basic cable," a Time Warner spokeswoman said.

Mark Silverman, president of the new network, didn't rule out the idea.

"I can't comment on that specific solution, but we're trying to get this (overall deal) done," he said. "I'm open to coming up with creative ways to solve this."

With three weeks to go before the Big Ten football season, the network has deals signed with only a few cable companies, none of them in central Ohio. In addition to the Buckeyes' games against Youngstown State and Akron, which will be shown in HD, the network expects to carry the Kent State game Oct. 13 and one of Ohio State's Big Ten games. The rest of the schedule will air on ABC, ESPN or ESPN2.

DirecTV is currently the sole local carrier of the network in central Ohio.

Last week, conference commissioner Jim Delany proclaimed negotiations with cable companies at "halftime." Yesterday, he bumped the analogy to "near the end of the third quarter."

The key stumbling block is the network's insistence on being part of a basic cable package. Time Warner and other cable companies want it to be on a premium "sports tier" programming.

The network will launch at 8 p.m. Aug. 30. Big Ten's Greatest Games will begin at 9 p.m. with a two-hour version of the 2006 Ohio State-Michigan game, featuring interviews with Buckeyes coach Jim Tressel and others.

Further talks with Time Warner are scheduled for the next few days, Silverman said. Officials at central Ohio's other major cable companies, Wide Open West and Insight Communications, said negotiations also are continuing with the Big Ten Network.

Dispatch reporters Bob Baptist, Tim Feran and Tracy Turner contributed to this report.

[email protected]

[email protected]


----------



## DCSholtis

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070809/SPORTS08/708090354/1055/SPORTS



> BTN wants its network to be placed on cable's expanded basic level, a request agreed to in the deals the network has made with more than 80 smaller carriers, plus DirecTV and AT&T cable.
> 
> *Silverman said BTN also is close to completing a deal with Dish Network*.


----------



## Codeman00

Update...

I just talked to Dish Network Customer Service. I just asked about how the negotiations were going with the Big Ten Network... He said

"We're not going to be carrying that channel!"


----------



## WebTraveler

Codeman00 said:


> Update...
> 
> I just talked to Dish Network Customer Service. I just asked about how the negotiations were going with the Big Ten Network... He said
> 
> "We're not going to be carrying that channel!"


I bet they will after the FCC rules on the arbitration and defines it is a RSN and Dish ends up with the same rates as the other RSNs for it.


----------



## angiecopus

Guess i gotta watch the ohio state-Akron Game on the Radio.


----------



## James Long

Codeman00 said:


> "We're not going to be carrying that channel!"


Do you happen to know what level of employee you were talking to and what country they were in? In my opinion, this kind of statement by a CSR is just as bad as the installer that is telling customers that FIOS is taking over. People who represent the company making statements that reflect on the company but do not represent the company's opinion.

If there were a press release or other statement from someone in a position to make an authoritative statement I'd trust it more. So far the only statements we have had by authoritative people have been positive. Until they say otherwise I would not trust an extreme negative like the statement quoted.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> BTN wanted the best of both worlds ... they wannabe ESPN with a national audience but they also wannabe a network of six (or more) RSNs serving specific states. They place an incredible burden on any carrier that chooses to add them to their system ... cable is lucky as it only has to add the BTN for their area. This mess of multiple BTNs to choose from is as much of a killer of the deal as their pricing demands and demand to be treated like ESPN ... when they clearly are _NOT_ ESPN.


So D*, AT&T, and the 80 cable networks now have an incredible burden on their hands?


----------



## James Long

Yes. How they handle that burden is a question. It is likely that local operators will just choose the one feed that best matches their local audience. Woe to the Michigan fan who gets the Indiana game because their local system chose another feed.

It has been noted that D* plans on carrying the "alternate feeds" ... which is good but still a burden on their system. Every channel burned on BTN is one they cannot use for something else. There may be times where they have so many different alternate channels of BTN and other RSNs that they will not be able to carry all of the alternatives. What will they do then? Someone is going to lose.

I have not seen BTN announce what they will do after the game. If you are in a "Michigan" primary area and want to watch the "Indiana" game will they air that later on the "Michigan" channel? Or will it just become lost content?


----------



## Codeman00

James, he spoke very good English...so I will assume that he was from the US. I'm not saying at all that they aren't going to carry Dish but I only posted it because he made a without a doubt 100% "we're not going to carry it" statement. I agree that we need to wait and get an official announcement.

It just pisses me off when we hear nothing from Dish at all.



James Long said:


> Do you happen to know what level of employee you were talking to and what country they were in? In my opinion, this kind of statement by a CSR is just as bad as the installer that is telling customers that FIOS is taking over. People who represent the company making statements that reflect on the company but do not represent the company's opinion.
> 
> If there were a press release or other statement from someone in a position to make an authoritative statement I'd trust it more. So far the only statements we have had by authoritative people have been positive. Until they say otherwise I would not trust an extreme negative like the statement quoted.


----------



## James Long

It probably ticks Dish off that a CSR made such an absolute statement. 
We still have a couple of weeks for E* to get a deal done.


----------



## Paul Secic

paja said:


> I've called DISH and stated that under no circumstances do I want to pay one additional penny for BTN.


I just wrote...


----------



## Paul Secic

DCSholtis said:


> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070809/SPORTS08/708090354/1055/SPORTS


AT&T doesn't own cable, U-serve fiber.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> Yes. How they handle that burden is a question. It is likely that local operators will just choose the one feed that best matches their local audience. Woe to the Michigan fan who gets the Indiana game because their local system chose another feed.
> 
> It has been noted that D* plans on carrying the "alternate feeds" ... which is good but still a burden on their system. Every channel burned on BTN is one they cannot use for something else. There may be times where they have so many different alternate channels of BTN and other RSNs that they will not be able to carry all of the alternatives. What will they do then? Someone is going to lose.
> 
> I have not seen BTN announce what they will do after the game. If you are in a "Michigan" primary area and want to watch the "Indiana" game will they air that later on the "Michigan" channel? Or will it just become lost content?


Yeah, that 11am Saturday morning burden that tens of millions will be watching.  They might take some bandwidth away from some important infomercials at that time.


----------



## heisman

Paul Secic said:


> AT&T doesn't own cable, U-serve fiber.


Exactly, which is why BTN is sitting so pretty.


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> Yeah, that 11am Saturday morning burden that tens of millions will be watching.  They might take some bandwidth away from some important infomercials at that time.


You just don't get it.

E* doesn't turn off channels to temporarily make room for other channels willy nilly like D*. The only channel that E* does that to is the HD PPV channel, which intentionally shares space with other HD Events channels.

Blast all you want, but BTN is asking for $1.10 per in market subscriber at the AT60 level and half a transponder for carriage of all of their channels. If all the games were at times when no other sports were on E* could use the sports alt channels generally used for other RSNs ... otherwise we're looking at an "X Games" style lineup nearly every weekend so people can get "their" BTN. With no promise of a return on that investment.

If BTN ends up on E* it will not be at the rate and positioning BTN is demanding. Hopefully BTN will agree to E*'s terms.


----------



## Jim5506

BTN is essentually asking national providers (DirecTV and DishNetwork) to tie up three or four channels every Saturday if they only broadcast their football games, it would get worse with basketball, 4 or 5 channels 2-3 times a week. PITA.

I guess since DirecTV has 150 HD channel "capacity" it is no problem for them, but Dish is actually using their channel capacity for HD channels, not smoke.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> You just don't get it.
> 
> E* doesn't turn off channels to temporarily make room for other channels willy nilly like D*. The only channel that E* does that to is the HD PPV channel, which intentionally shares space with other HD Events channels.
> 
> Blast all you want, but BTN is asking for $1.10 per in market subscriber at the AT60 level and half a transponder for carriage of all of their channels. If all the games were at times when no other sports were on E* could use the sports alt channels generally used for other RSNs ... otherwise we're looking at an "X Games" style lineup nearly every weekend so people can get "their" BTN. With no promise of a return on that investment.
> 
> If BTN ends up on E* it will not be at the rate and positioning BTN is demanding. Hopefully BTN will agree to E*'s terms.


None of what you just said has anything to do with backing up your ridiculous statement. You stated that BTN was a burden to its carriers. It's probably one of the most ludicrous statements I have ever heard. I have a funny feeling that AT&T, D*, and those 80 cable operators have a little more collective smarts than you (or me for that matter), and they obviously disagree with your assessment. Has carrying NFLST, MLBEI, YES, etc., etc., been a "*BURDEN*" to their carriers?


----------



## heisman

Jim5506 said:


> ... but Dish is actually using their channel capacity for HD channels, not smoke.


What's wrong with my system? Every time I flip through channels 9470-9486, I smell something burning!


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> None of what you just said has anything to do with backing up your ridiculous statement.


I'm sorry that you fail to understand. Perhaps if you read my posts slower with more thought?


> You stated that BTN was a burden to its carriers. It's probably one of the most ludicrous statements I have ever heard. I have a funny feeling that AT&T, D*, and those 80 cable operators have a little more collective smarts than you (or me for that matter), and they obviously disagree with your assessment.


LOCAL providers such as those 80 minor cable operators just have to pick one channel to carry. They will carry one BTN channel and pay their $1.10 or 10c per customer (depending on what state the system is in) and be done. They don't have the extra burden of alt channels. What they will have is annoyed viewers when the feed they choose is carrying the Michigan game live instead of the Indiana game ... or vice versa.

D* will likely use some of their "package" capacity ... or drop channels so they have room for multiple BTN feeds. That has been their practice.



> Has carrying NFLST, MLBEI, YES, etc., etc., been a "*BURDEN*" to their carriers?


Hmmm. seems to be a list of stuff E* doesn't have. Are you sure you are in this thread to discuss BTN or just to bash E*?

YES is a single expensive RSN channel that, like BTN, has demanded lowest tier carriage. RSNs are not in E*'s lowest tier ... and E* still is the #3 cable/satellite provider in the US despite not having YES.

NFLST and MLBEI are repackaged RSNs ... the feeds are already there taking up satellite space serving their own local markets (and blacked out elsewhere unless one pays the big fee). Occasionally an extra feed has to be put up for a game that isn't on an RSN.

BTN games are not on other RSNs ... this is all new bandwidth. Reports are that D* has _promised_ to carry the various alternatives of BTN but when push comes to shove and they are out of space there isn't much they can do. Hopefully for D* subscribers (especially for new subs that signed up _for_ BTN) they keep that promise.

Learn a little, relax a little and figure out what you are yelling about. 



heisman said:


> What's wrong with my system? Every time I flip through channels 9470-9486, I smell something burning!


Voom channels are valid HD services. People once subscribed to Voom as an independent DBS service ... with 21 of those "special" HD channels plus a few others. Perhaps they are not your favorites, but they are HD.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> I'm sorry that you fail to understand. Perhaps if you read my posts slower with more thought?LOCAL providers such as those 80 minor cable operators just have to pick one channel to carry. They will carry one BTN channel and pay their $1.10 or 10c per customer (depending on what state the system is in) and be done. They don't have the extra burden of alt channels. What they will have is annoyed viewers when the feed they choose is carrying the Michigan game live instead of the Indiana game ... or vice versa.
> 
> D* will likely use some of their "package" capacity ... or drop channels so they have room for multiple BTN feeds. That has been their practice.
> 
> Hmmm. seems to be a list of stuff E* doesn't have. Are you sure you are in this thread to discuss BTN or just to bash E*?
> 
> YES is a single expensive RSN channel that, like BTN, has demanded lowest tier carriage. RSNs are not in E*'s lowest tier ... and E* still is the #3 cable/satellite provider in the US despite not having YES.
> 
> NFLST and MLBEI are repackaged RSNs ... the feeds are already there taking up satellite space serving their own local markets (and blacked out elsewhere unless one pays the big fee). Occasionally an extra feed has to be put up for a game that isn't on an RSN.
> 
> BTN games are not on other RSNs ... this is all new bandwidth. Reports are that D* has _promised_ to carry the various alternatives of BTN but when push comes to shove and they are out of space there isn't much they can do. Hopefully for D* subscribers (especially for new subs that signed up _for_ BTN) they keep that promise.
> 
> Learn a little, relax a little and figure out what you are yelling about.
> 
> Voom channels are valid HD services. People once subscribed to Voom as an independent DBS service ... with 21 of those "special" HD channels plus a few others. Perhaps they are not your favorites, but they are HD.


I'm not here to bash E*. I'm a subscriber. I would like them to get the channel, so that I don't have to switch providers. They are carrying 4 Buckeye football games this year and I will be attending 3 of those, so they have until hoops season to get BTN if they still want my money.

NFLST does not come from RSN's.

BTN will attract more subscribers than any Voom channel, so how can they be a burden? Voom is taking up bandwidth. No one watches those channels. I turn on Animania once in awhile for my 1 year old, but other than that, there's nothing there.

I wasn't yelling!!!


----------



## TBoneit

I watch the Voom channels so that makes me a no one, a unperson?. I looked at MHD... Not for me, I'll keep on watching Rave. World, Equator, MonsterHD and so on. 

Bottom line you not liking or watching the Voom channels does not equal no one watching. If they are so worthless how come I'm starting to see them appearing on cable systems?

The Voom channels and the content on them is why I decided to make the jump to HD a year ago. Along with the 622 having been out a while.


----------



## heisman

TBoneit said:


> I watch the Voom channels so that makes me a no one, a unperson?. I looked at MHD... Not for me, I'll keep on watching Rave. World, Equator, MonsterHD and so on.
> 
> Bottom line you not liking or watching the Voom channels does not equal no one watching. If they are so worthless how come I'm starting to see them appearing on cable systems?
> 
> The Voom channels and the content on them is why I decided to make the jump to HD a year ago. Along with the 622 having been out a while.


I don't name call. You are implying something that I did not do. I was obviously generalizing about the Voom channels. Check the ratings of any of those channels, and then check the ratings of Big Ten football. It's not rocket science.


----------



## scooper

BTN is NOT a "Must Have" channel to most of us - I'd rather keep my bills lower.

If BTN is THAT important to you - I'd suggest changing providers to one that IS going to carry it.


----------



## heisman

scooper said:


> BTN is NOT a "Must Have" channel to most of us - I'd rather keep my bills lower.
> 
> If BTN is THAT important to you - I'd suggest changing providers to one that IS going to carry it.


10 cents? I'll send you a check.


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> BTN will attract more subscribers than any Voom channel, so how can they be a burden? Voom is taking up bandwidth. No one watches those channels. I turn on Animania once in awhile for my 1 year old, but other than that, there's nothing there.


Ah, so your child is a no one too! 

Voom is on secondary satellites ... 61.5° and 129° ... and as noted in my previous posts proved itself as a valuable service when to occupied 21 HD channels on the standalone Voom DBS service operated by Cablevision. Voom also had subscribers when it was a $5 per month add on service with E*.

BTN will need to be placed on core satellites ... 119° or 110° where space is at a premium. E* charges $150,000 per month lease for one transponder on 119°. That places the cost of uplinking each channel at $12,500 per month. While BTN will not be feeding six versions 24x7 they expect E* to provide six feeds on demand. The space needs to be allocated and reserved by E* for BTN.


heisman said:


> II was obviously generalizing about the Voom channels. Check the ratings of any of those channels, and then check the ratings of Big Ten football. It's not rocket science.


Voom is currently an exclusive of E* ... a system with 13 million subscribers ... not all of them have HD receivers which limits the audience. While Cablevision is adding Voom to their lineup (finally) it still limits the marketplace. Consider that in your apples to oranges comparison.

BTN is not on the air ... which means their rating is ZERO. The football games may or may not be popular but it should be noted where those games are being aired. You are expecting free OTA ratings to transfer over to a subscription cable/satellite network. Apples and oranges and peaches.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> Ah, so your child is a no one too!


She wants to tell you what she thinks of your comment.


----------



## msmith198025

I have Dish and direct, so either way Im set on the BTN, although i hope dish picks it up too.
The other thing i saw, and i may have misinterpreted the intent was that D* will have to cut some other channels to carry the alt. feeds. With the new sats that shouldnt be any more of a problem than NFLST this year, and my understanding is that the days of shutting something down to broadcast those are over.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> Ah, so your child is a no one too!
> 
> Voom is on secondary satellites ... 61.5° and 129° ... and as noted in my previous posts proved itself as a valuable service when to occupied 21 HD channels on the standalone Voom DBS service operated by Cablevision. Voom also had subscribers when it was a $5 per month add on service with E*.


Lets keep the facts straight. When Voom was a stand alone service, it only
had about 40,000 subs and was hemorrhaging cash monthly. The Cablevision
board shut stand alone Voom down, prior to the E* deal.

I like Voom and it has some good channels like Equator, which I would sub to
a la carte, but the Voom package would not sway me in choosing an MVP. An
MVP has to look at its overall channel lineup and choose the niches it wants to
attract. I believe the Voom deal is the reason Dish's HD fee is $20. What does not make sense to me is that D*s most recent ARPU was $76.43 and E*s was 
$66.06. Over a $10 difference, yet E*s HD fee of $20 exceeds D*s HD fee by more
than $10. Sunday Ticket with about 1,000,000 subs is not increasing D*'s ARPU by
$20.

I believe the majority (over 50%) of E* or D* subs could care less about BTN. But that is true for every RSN or sports package provided by E* or D*. All of the sports
channels are niches with its own audience.


----------



## heisman

Well said Hound. I would only add that it's not just sports that appeals to only a certain niche. That's what cable/sat/non-network programming is all about.


----------



## msmith198025

Hound said:


> Lets keep the facts straight. When Voom was a stand alone service, it only
> had about 40,000 subs and was hemorrhaging cash monthly. The Cablevision
> board shut stand alone Voom down, prior to the E* deal.
> 
> I like Voom and it has some good channels like Equator, which I would sub to
> a la carte, but the Voom package would not sway me in choosing an MVP. An
> MVP has to look at its overall channel lineup and choose the niches it wants to
> attract. I believe the Voom deal is the reason Dish's HD fee is $20. What does not make sense to me is that D*s most recent ARPU was $76.43 and E*s was
> $66.06. Over a $10 difference, yet E*s HD fee of $20 exceeds D*s HD fee by more
> than $10. Sunday Ticket with about 1,000,000 subs is not increasing D*'s ARPU by
> $20.
> 
> I believe the majority (over 50%) of E* or D* subs could care less about BTN. But that is true for every RSN or sports package provided by E* or D*. All of the sports
> channels are niches with its own audience.


Yes well said, but when you think about it, if its just slightly over 50% or even 60 or 70% that still leaves a large sub. base(minimum of 30%, just a guess) that is or would be interested in it. That is usually enough to make any service provider take notice. 
Of course I love sports so maybe im a little bias


----------



## Hound

msmith198025 said:


> Yes well said, but when you think about it, if its just slightly over 50% or even 60 or 70% that still leaves a large sub. base(minimum of 30%, just a guess) that is or would be interested in it. That is usually enough to make any service provider take notice.
> Of course I love sports so maybe im a little bias


I do not know how what percentage of subs would want BTN.

My point is that I would choose or switch to an MVP to get the sports channel or sports package that I want. Like I previously posted that I signed on with Fios for
HD RSNs, not on E*, and local cable for MLB EI. Hard core sports fans are
passionate and do not like to miss a game (especially if they have bought a large screen HD set). I would guess that the
majority of hard core sports subs have HD and a higher than average ARPU.


----------



## msmith198025

Hound said:


> I do not know how what percentage of subs would want BTN.
> 
> My point is that I would choose or switch to an MVP to get the sports channel or sports package that I want. Like I previously posted that I signed on with Fios for
> HD RSNs, not on E*, and local cable for MLB EI. Hard core sports fans are
> passionate and do not like to miss a game (especially if they have bought a large screen HD set). I would guess that the
> majority of hard core sports subs have HD and a higher than average ARPU.


Oh i dont either, just a best guess.


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> Well said Hound. I would only add that it's not just sports that appeals to only a certain niche. That's what cable/sat/non-network programming is all about.


It helps that you don't like Voom.

Let's pick something you DO like and turn that off to add BTN.


----------



## Christopher Gould

James Long said:


> It helps that you don't like Voom.
> 
> Let's pick something you DO like and turn that off to add BTN.


How about 4 or 5 PPV on a saturday afternoon not a bad a loss. On D* we shut down the whole PPV on sunday afternoon.


----------



## James Long

We're trying to have E* do BETTER than D*. 

E* would have to look at sales to see if it is worth shutting down PPVs for unpaid programming. All of E*'s PPV (except HD PPV) run in "all day" mode from a first airing at 5:00 am through 6:30 am until 24 hours later. Turning off PPV during the day would interrupt this arrangement.

It isn't likely that E* would kill a PPV channel for any RSN. And it isn't needed. E* generally has space available for extra feeds. If BTN requires space on a regular basis for multiple feeds it could get in the way of other programs. Just because they have space available on a satellite does not mean that they should give it away. The demand BTN has on the system (providing multiple channels so everyone gets their area's game) is just part of the problem. The demand to be in AT100 is the killer.


----------



## James Long

Per http://www.bigtennetwork.com/ *BIG TEN NETWORK FOOTBALL SCHEDULE: WEEKS 1-3*

Saturday, September 1
Appalachian State at Michigan, Noon EDT (HD)
Youngstown State at Ohio State, Noon EDT (HD)
Florida International at Penn State, Noon EDT (HD)
Northeastern at Northwestern, Noon EDT
Bowling Green at Minnesota, 8 p.m. EDT (HD)
Indiana State at Indiana, 8 p.m. EDT (HD)

Saturday, September 8
Akron at Ohio State, Noon EDT (HD)
Nevada at Northwestern, Noon EDT (HD)
Bowling Green at Michigan State, Noon EDT (HD)
Miami (Ohio) at Minnesota, Noon EDT
Eastern Illinois at Purdue, Noon EDT
Western Illinois at Illinois, 7 p.m. EDT (HD)
Syracuse at Iowa, 8 p.m. EDT (HD)

Saturday, September 15
The Citadel at Wisconsin, Noon EDT (HD)
Buffalo at Penn State, Noon EDT (HD)
Akron at Indiana, Noon EDT (HD)
Duke at Northwestern, 8 p.m. EDT (HD)​
Looks like four feeds on September 1st, five on September 8th and three on September 15th. It will be interesting to see how many of them are carried on D* in HD.


----------



## TBoneit

heisman said:


> I don't name call. You are implying something that I did not do. I was obviously generalizing about the Voom channels. Check the ratings of any of those channels, and then check the ratings of Big Ten football. It's not rocket science.


However comparing what has been up to now available free against a subscription service is not a fair comparison.

In the past BTN has been available for free and available to more viewers.

A good comparison, IMHO is what percentage of possible viewers not total numbers. Just going by numbers of viewers skews results.

You may have been generalizing, however a better way to say it would have been very few watch those channels and not saying no one watches.


----------



## msmith198025

TBoneit said:


> However comparing what has been up to now available free against a subscription service is not a fair comparison.
> 
> In the past BTN has been available for free and available to more viewers.
> 
> A good comparison, IMHO is what percentage of possible viewers not total numbers. Just going by numbers of viewers skews results.
> 
> You may have been generalizing, however a better way to say it would have been very few watch those channels and not saying no one watches.


When has the BTN ever been available?


----------



## TBoneit

OK I'll go along with that.
When i say BTN & free I'm just using the sports from the sources that were free and now will be on BTN only.


----------



## msmith198025

TBoneit said:


> OK I'll go along with that.
> When i say BTN & free I'm just using the sports from the sources that were free and now eill be on BTN only.


Ok got ya.


----------



## rahchgo

TBoneit said:


> OK I'll go along with that.
> When i say BTN & free I'm just using the sports from the sources that were free and now will be on BTN only.


Which games are those? ABC and ESPN will still have first choice to show many Big Ten games for "free". What other "free" sources were there that will be BTN only now? My impression is the rest of the games were on subscriber based ESPN Game Plan.


----------



## chopperjc

rahchgo said:


> Which games are those? ABC and ESPN will still have first choice to show many Big Ten games for "free". What other "free" sources were there that will be BTN only now? My impression is the rest of the games were on subscriber based ESPN Game Plan.


Some of the games were. The Big Ten will no longer be on Gameplan.


----------



## heisman

TBoneit said:


> However comparing what has been up to now available free against a subscription service is not a fair comparison.
> 
> In the past BTN has been available for free and available to more viewers.
> 
> A good comparison, IMHO is what percentage of possible viewers not total numbers. Just going by numbers of viewers skews results.
> 
> You may have been generalizing, however a better way to say it would have been very few watch those channels and not saying no one watches.


On BTN's site, they mentioned that during a Buckeye game, 40% of the sets in Columbus are tuned to the game. It's probably not that high anywhere else, but nothing exceeds that kind of demand, let alone the lowly Voom channels (a shot at the channels, not the people watching them!  )


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> On BTN's site, they mentioned that during a Buckeye game, 40% of the sets in Columbus are tuned to the game. It's probably not that high anywhere else, but nothing exceeds that kind of demand, let alone the lowly Voom channels (a shot at the channels, not the people watching them!  )


What percentage of the 13 million E* subs watched a Buckeye game last year? How many games would said Buckeye fan still be able to see this year without BTN (on ABC, ESPN or other networks that get choice ahead of BTN)? How many games will be only on BTN? How many games would have been on ESPN Gameplan or other sources if it were not for BTN?

Please provide the answers so we can see the impact of BTN on Buckeye fans.

Thanks!


----------



## Earl Bonovich

TBoneit said:


> OK I'll go along with that.
> When i say BTN & free I'm just using the sports from the sources that were free and now will be on BTN only.


Yes and no...

Part of the BTN is that all the EVENTS are going to be there... and far more coverage.

I have only been able to see 1 or 2 Illinois games a year, for the last few seasons... as they are the Cellar Dwellers right now...

Even here in Chicago area, which has a massive Allumni base... they still haven't carried it.... and in a lot of the cases... it is not even televised... including OTA (totally free).

So at least with that regards... there is MORE content that will be available... even to the home cities of those schools., let alone everyone else.

As for "free"... that is why BTN is pushing and pretty much demanding, that the channel be included in base packages... so there is no extra cost to the customers.


----------



## skizer

rahchgo said:


> Which games are those? ABC and ESPN will still have first choice to show many Big Ten games for "free". What other "free" sources were there that will be BTN only now? My impression is the rest of the games were on subscriber based ESPN Game Plan.


Virtually every IU / PU game that wasn't on ESPN/ABC etc was still shown locally here in Indy on Channel 4 (a WB Station). With the BTN, that won't be the case and now 3/4ths of the games won't be available locally if BTN doesn't show up on Dish/Comcast/Insight....


----------



## James Long

Earl Bonovich said:


> As for "free"... that is why BTN is pushing and pretty much demanding, that the channel be included in base packages... so there is no extra cost to the customers.


Yet BTN still wants $1.10 in state and 10c nationwide for their channel.

I hope they make a deal with E* that places it in AT200 with CSTV ... and not worry about the viewers that have chosen E*'s lowest tier. Perhaps work out an a la carte deal like RFD TV has ($1.50 per month). But not force E* to pay them for every customer in the country.

"No extra cost to the customer" is a fleeting thing. Every dime they cost the provider (E* and D*) goes against the bottom line and eventually leads to additional cost for the customer.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

James Long said:


> Yet BTN still wants $1.10 in state and 10c nationwide for their channel.
> 
> I hope they make a deal with E* that places it in AT200 with CSTV ... and not worry about the viewers that have chosen E*'s lowest tier. Perhaps work out an a la carte deal like RFD TV has ($1.50 per month). But not force E* to pay them for every customer in the country.
> 
> "No extra cost to the customer" is a fleeting thing. Every dime they cost the provider (E* and D*) goes against the bottom line and eventually leads to additional cost for the customer.


Well yes... there is a cost to the carrier to carry it... as with any channel.
And yes, it could ultimately cost in higher subscription costs...

But I guess you could say the same thing why the "other" games are televised for "free"... as it costs something to film and broadcast them...

None of it is "free", it all has a cost... even PBS has a cost.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

skizer said:


> Virtually every IU / PU game that wasn't on ESPN/ABC etc was still shown locally here in Indy on Channel 4 (a WB Station). With the BTN, that won't be the case and now 3/4ths of the games won't be available locally if BTN doesn't show up on Dish/Comcast/Insight....


Football or Basketball?

I know here in Chicago... if it wasn't on the national networks... Football games for Illinois and Northwestern, were rarely ever televised... anywhere.

Basketball, different story... just about every game was available on FSN/Comcast/or other outlet (for both teams)..

IF... your Indy local station still wants to carry the game.. .they can.
I don't think the BTN is excluding that option to those networks.


----------



## skizer

Hoops....for the most part. Although WB4 did also carry 1 or 2 B10 football games every Saturday that would sometimes be IU or PU but not necessarily.

From what has been reported locally in the press, they can't carry those anymore since the BTN is going to be showing them on that channel...for the few people that have it.


----------



## Codeman00

Interesting stuff. I frequent a rivals.com message board and one of the members noted yesterday that if you lived in Indiana, Dish was ready to sign you up with the BTN and it was showing up in their system as a "regional offering". He apparently called them back today and this is what he said:



> Called again today and sales associate spoke with manager who got an email today that said their recent offer has been rejected. Apparently a verbal offer had been accepted and the BTN was put in their system three days ago, but now it is off and they are back in negotiations. He said this is a regional offering for "Big Ten States", so if you live outside the "Big Ten States" then direct TV is your only option. If you have DISH I guess we should wait. I am on a list to get a call when they know more. I am a new customer and I told them I am deciding between direct TV and DISH based on the BTN.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> What percentage of the 13 million E* subs watched a Buckeye game last year? How many games would said Buckeye fan still be able to see this year without BTN (on ABC, ESPN or other networks that get choice ahead of BTN)? How many games will be only on BTN? How many games would have been on ESPN Gameplan or other sources if it were not for BTN?
> 
> Please provide the answers so we can see the impact of BTN on Buckeye fans.
> 
> Thanks!


It does not matter what percentage of E* subs watch. What matters is how many more subscribers they could attain if they contract BTN. It looks like 4 Buckeye football games will be on BTN. Gameplan is only a benefit to those outside the market. In other words, last year, they showed the Bucks on ESPN+, which is regionally picked up here in Chicago. The only game not available on all systems was vs. BGSU on ESPNU. I think the biggest impact of this channel will be during hoops season. It's not difficult for me to spend 2 or 3 Saturdays a year at a D* friends house watching the football game. It's another story if I want to watch Buckeye hoops and BTN is televising half their games and most of those are on a weeknight.


----------



## nmetro

If indeed Dish sets up BTN as an RSN, then one could order all the RSNs for $5.99/month. The only question: Would Dish blackout the games outside the Big 10 area under an RSN arrangement? As the Big 10 is not a professional league, Dish would have a difficult time justifying blacking out the games to other areas of the country. I really doubt that the other conferences would demand blackouts of Big 10 games.. 

I will say this again, unless the Big 10 can get this mess cleared up it is going to be a public relations nightmare. As of today, unless you have DirecTV or on some tiny cable system, most of the Big 10 region and Dish subscribers are going to have a disappointing football season. September 1st is only 10 days from now.

Nick


----------



## heisman

Some interesting numbers from BTN.

http://www.bigtennetwork.com/managex/index.asp?ArticleSource=443


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> It does not matter what percentage of E* subs watch.


Sure it does. BTN is marketing itself as a "must have" channel for all E* subs. If they cannot back that up with real numbers (not just alleged popularity) then they have not made their case.

E* is making a deal for their subs ... not for 40% of Columbus but for their subscribers across the entire US.



> What matters is how many more subscribers they could attain if they contract BTN.


Oh, you subscribe to the thought that this one channel will magically create new subscribers! "Add our channel and people will pay." Empty promises.



> It's not difficult for me to spend 2 or 3 Saturdays a year at a D* friends house watching the football game. It's another story if I want to watch Buckeye hoops and BTN is televising half their games and most of those are on a weeknight.


It sounds like you subscribe to the wrong satellite service. Why?


----------



## James Long

nmetro said:


> If indeed Dish sets up BTN as an RSN, then one could order all the RSNs for $5.99/month. The only question: Would Dish blackout the games outside the Big 10 area under an RSN arrangement?


My guess is that if E* adds BTN as an RSN (automatic inclusion in AT100+ and above) in the eight state market, they will offer it to all other states as part of MultiSport without blackout.

It is an interesting thought ... but if BTN agrees to it they will lose their negotiating strength against other providers. Accepting AT200 placement would be a better deal for BTN.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> It sounds like you subscribe to the wrong satellite service. Why?


I subscribed to E* before I knew anything about BTN. I had a problem with my install (they broke something) and I am getting free service with HBO and HD through the end of the year. I certainly can't give that up for 1 or 2 football games (I'm attending the other 2) that I can watch at a friend's house. Also, I certainly want nothing to do with a 2 year contract or $200 for an HD DVR that everyone else gives away for free with service and requires no contract. Even D*'s promo surrounding NFLST does not appeal to me whatsoever, as I can see every Bears game with a lousy antenna. When U-Verse enters my market in March, I may re-evaluate my situation if E* hasn't picked up BTN by then. But, I do feel I owe them a little loyalty for the way they handled my install problem. I didn't even have to pay for what they broke as my condo association paid for it. Why are you trying so hard to get rid of me???


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> It is an interesting thought ... but if BTN agrees to it they will lose their negotiating strength against other providers. Accepting AT200 placement would be a better deal for BTN.


Is it possible to put BTN on AT100+ in market, and AT200 out of market?


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> Is it possible to put BTN on AT100+ in market, and AT200 out of market?


I doubt if the number of subscribers to AT100+ would make that acceptable to BTN. Anything is possible, but it would be easier just to make it an AT200 channel nationwide.


----------



## HobbyTalk

Let's look at some "real" national numbers for OSU football. While a couple of years old, I doubt this has changed much.

Big Ten ratings on ESPN2 were 42 percent higher in 2004 compared to 2003. Northwestern's Oct. 2 overtime win over Ohio State was the highest rated regular-season college football game on ESPN2 (2.30 rating, 2.03 million TV households). Big Ten ratings on ESPN were the same (1.69) in 2004 compared with 2003. The highest rated Big Ten football game on ESPN was the Nov. 20 Iowa at Wisconsin game (2.76, 2.47 million), the eighth highest rated ESPN college football game of the year.

2 mil. households is about 2% of all households in the US. If we want, we can then take this and say that 260,000 Dish households (2% of 13 mil) would watch OSU most popular game. I wonder how many would watch OSU vs Podunk?

Now lets compare this with another college powerhouse:

Updated: 8:52 p.m. ET Dec 2, 2005
NEW YORK - Notre Dame football on NBC earned a 3.6 average rating this season, the highest in more than a decade.

So, ND's AVERAGE rating was higher the OSU's highest rated game. Consider that some of these games were "big" games and others were ND vs Podunk. While not exactly comparable (NBC vs ESPN) it does shed some light into national numbers.


----------



## heisman

Most popular sport:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_most_popular_sport_in_the_US


----------



## heisman

HobbyTalk said:


> Updated: 8:52 p.m. ET Dec 2, 2005
> NEW YORK - Notre Dame football on NBC earned a 3.6 average rating this season, the highest in more than a decade.
> 
> So, ND's AVERAGE rating was higher the OSU's highest rated game. Consider that some of these games were "big" games and others were ND vs Podunk. While not exactly comparable (NBC vs ESPN) it does shed some light into national numbers.


The highest rated Buckeye games last year were 14.4(UF), 13.4(scUM), and 8.8(UT). In comparison, the highest rated World Series game was 10.4, and highest rated Nacar race was 4.8. The 2003 Fiesta Bowl (Buckeyes vs. Miami) had an 18.6 rating!!!


----------



## James Long

> The highest rated Buckeye games last year were 14.4(UF), 13.4(scUM), and 8.8(UT).


Ratings in which market? Nationwide or Columbus? Use real numbers!



> The highest rated Big Ten football game on ESPN was the Nov. 20 Iowa at Wisconsin game (2.76, 2.47 million), the eighth highest rated ESPN college football game of the year.


National ratings appreciated. I can't help but note that most of the games that end up on BTN are leftovers after ABC/ESPN have their first choices. Not the highest rated BTN games.


----------



## HobbyTalk

That is why you can not use the numbers from the national network games.... those types of games will not be on BTN, BTN will only be showing 3rd and lower tier games. Basically, games no one else wanted to show. That is why the ESPN2 numbers should be fairly comparable (not free OTA and on a "pay" service)... but now even the ESPN2 games would be better games then what is shown on BTN.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> Ratings in which market? Nationwide or Columbus? Use real numbers!


Nationwide numbers JL. Like I said, they blew away the World Series numbers by quite a bit. Columbus numbers were like 52.1!!!


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> Nationwide numbers JL. Like I said, they blew away the World Series numbers by quite a bit. Columbus numbers were like 52.1!!!


Perhaps you would like to rephrase that since BTN's own website claims that only 40% of Columbus homes watched a Buckeye game.

The best games are still going to be on ABC/ESPN anyways.


----------



## nmetro

OSU fans race clock to score TV dish
Satellite installers say those who don't order soon may miss opener
Wednesday, August 22, 2007 3:38 AM
By Mike Pramik
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Satellite-dish installers in central Ohio are preparing for a crush of orders from Buckeye fans as the Big Ten Network continues its stalemate with Time Warner and other video-service providers.

With a week and a half remaining before the network broadcasts Ohio State University's football opener Sept. 1 against Youngstown State, time could be running out to install the systems before the game, the installers say.

DirecTV spokesman Robert Mercer said it will take an average of seven days to fill orders placed through the company. Third-party satellite installers also sell the service, however, and say they can get it done sooner.

"Right now, we're running from 6 in the morning until 10 at night," said Jeff Shifferly, president of Clear Sky Communications, a satellite installer. "We're usually always busy this time of year, but certainly this year we have more of a bump from the Big Ten Network."

DirecTV is the only signal provider in central Ohio that offers the network's content. DirecTV's partial owner, News Corp., is the parent company of Fox Cable Networks, which owns a 49 percent stake in the Big Ten Network.

The network makes its debut Aug. 30. It also plans to broadcast Ohio State's games against Akron on Sept. 8, Kent State on Oct. 13 and one conference game.

Although the network has agreed to terms with 75 cable companies serving local communities, it has yet to sign a contract with a major provider.

Big Ten Network President Mark Silverman said Friday that talks with Time Warner, which has 600,000 customers in its mid-Ohio region, are ongoing but that no agreement is imminent. Silverman said the network is having constructive talks with Charter Communications, Mediacom and Dish Network but not with Comcast, the largest cable provider in the country.

That puts many sports fans in a bind, and some are turning to DirecTV, including fans outside the Big Ten states.

Ken Pryor, an Ohio State fan living in Maryland, said he would be "furious with Comcast," his cable provider, if it weren't for DirecTV. He said he's having it installed this week.

"It seemed Comcast and the Big Ten were taking too long to reach an agreement, so I pulled the trigger with DirecTV," he said.

The rift between the network and providers of cable- and satellite-TV service is attracting supporters on both sides.

Time Warner Cable spokeswoman Judy Barbao said the company has received numerous letters of support and has not seen a significant exodus of customers to DirecTV.

"These customers are angry that the games have been taken away from them," Barbao said. "The Big Ten Network came in and removed these games off of free TV, and people are upset."

Talks between the network and service providers are stuck on two points: The network wants to charge cable and satellite companies $1.10 per customer per month in the Big Ten states, and it is demanding that the network be shown on a standard tier of channels.

Cable companies have said they want to pay a lower price and offer the network on a sports tier, which they offer at a premium price.

Not everyone is upset by the stalemate.

"It's very good business for me," said Greg May, a Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar franchisee who has both cable and satellite television at his bars. "We're not too bummed out about it."

Carl Sagraves, owner of Hebron TV, said his business has picked up this summer because of orders for DirecTV.

"It's going to be swamped next week," he said. "We've already hired another man."

Satellite installers typically hire independent contractors to install the systems. Brian Reynolds of Hebron TV said he's confident his company can hire enough contractors to take orders next week and have systems in place for Sept. 1.

"We're aware of the rush, and we're prepared to handle it when it gets here," he said.

Whether promises meet expectations, though, is unclear. A Dispatch reporter who placed an order on Sunday through DirecTV was promised an installation date 10 days later on Aug. 29, two days before OSU's opener.

"We've put more installers into the market to help us clean up the backlog as quickly as possible," Mercer said.

Shifferly said he's hiring all the installers he can to fill new orders within four days. He did not provide exact figures but said his business is up 20 percent this year over last year.

Meanwhile, Big Ten universities, including OSU, are asking their alumni associations to encourage members to lobby their cable operators to carry the network.

[email protected]


----------



## heisman

According to super instigator, oops scratch that, moderator James Long, this article just can't be true. Adding subs by adding BTN = empty promises. :lol: :lol: 
(j/k buddy!)


----------



## TBoneit

Earl Bonovich said:


> Snip....
> 
> As for "free"... that is why BTN is pushing and pretty much demanding, that the channel be included in base packages... so there is no extra cost to the customers.


We can be pretty much guaranteed that the cost will be passed on at the next rate increase. And the cost will not be limited to the $1.10 or $0.10 depending on where the subscriber lives. And the extra cost if they are added in the basic tier will be for all subs. So with the BTN push for everybody to have it available everyones rates will increase instead of only those that want it. They get inflated sub figures and everybody ends up paying more in the long run. Anybody think the last ESPN rate increase wasn't passed on?

The real cost includes whatever it costs to backhaul all the feeds to the uplink center. Uplink costs. Whatever a transponder costs I thought I saw >$100,000 a month. I'm sure I haven't thought of all the ongoing costs.
Maybe the providers should require BTN to supply the signal to their uplink and pay that cost? Only fair.

I understand that for sports fanatics it becomes a spare no expense. I made the mistake of walking between a Yankee fanatic and the TV. You would have thought I was kicking the dog from the noise I received.
However I'm more interested in keeping my costs contained.

Note: When the Yankees started YES I stopped watching for two reasons. E* didn't carry them and I'm not switching over that. And they weren't available OTA. IMHO E* took the right stand and their sub numbers increased. For NYC dwellers if Cablevision didn't carry them now they'd still be down in viewership much of Manhattan = No LOS for E* or D*.

How many people won't be able to watch the BTN if their cable co. doesn't carry them? Lots, Everyone with no LOS for D* Satellites. They are the real losers in this deal. It won't affect people here as the majority here already have satellite

I think I better stop this reply now as I almost said some very rude words in connection with BTN. Words that I'm sure are against the boards rules.


----------



## heisman

U-Verse will be available to most in the Big Ten states by the end of next year for those who don't have LOS for sat's.


----------



## DCSholtis

BTN reaches agreement with........Mediacom
http://www.gazetteonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070822/SPORTS/70822054/1001/NEWS



> Big Ten Network, Mediacom reach deal
> By Scott Dochterman
> The Gazette
> [email protected]
> IOWA CITY - Mediacom and the Big Ten Network have reached a deal, University of Iowa department sources confirmed Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> After a contentious battle, the sides reached an agreement Wednesday morning. The Big Ten Network will have a position on Mediacom's expanded basic tier as well as channel 220 on its digital basic package.


----------



## gopherscot

DCSholtis said:


> BTN reaches agreement with........Mediacom
> http://www.gazetteonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070822/SPORTS/708
> 22054/1001/NEWS


Well that means Mediacom and Direct TV are carrying in my area. Gives me another option if Dish fails to follow the lead. Come on Charlie .... give me my BTN!


----------



## James Long

DCSholtis said:


> BTN reaches agreement with........Mediacom
> http://www.gazetteonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070822/SPORTS/70822054/1001/NEWS


"There might be a deal. I can't confirm it," Klatt said. "As of 2:15 (p.m.) during our weekly conference call . . . the discussion was characterized as positive, ongoing negotiations.

"We're still in active negotiations."

Elizabeth Conlisk, the Big Ten Network's vice president of communications also denied the deal was completed.

"I can't characterize the discussions in any way,'' she said.​Deal, or No Deal? 

Is "expanded basic" Mediacom's lowest package?


----------



## HobbyTalk

Guess the "basic or nothing" stance isn't holding up. The big question may be is what game will be on the digital tier? If you live in Ohio, will the OSU games be on the digital tier requiring the customer to upgrade to get it? Also, that would be the only game that could be in HD. 

Expanded Basic is the 2nd tier, Basic (sometimes called Lifeline Basic) is the lowest with about 15 channels. Expanded Basic is normally analog channels 2 through 99 so no HD BTL there. OK, so tech. they could broadcast the analog channels in HD also but I doubt that Mediacom would use up an analog and a QAM channel to provide both SD and HD versions. Guess we'll have to see if it goes through and what the agreement is.


----------



## James Long

I wouldn't count lifeline against them. BTN will not be on D*'s "Family Pack" either.

I was hoping that this was a 2nd tier above basic. Perhaps Mediacom is more of a D* priced system, where there is no cheap option except "lifeline" (or "family").


----------



## heisman

BTN has always been asking for expanded basic. They have never asked to be on basic analog cable. Should fit nicely into AT200. 

http://www.bigtennetwork.com/managex/index.asp?ArticleSource=442


----------



## gopherscot

James Long said:


> I wouldn't count lifeline against them. BTN will not be on D*'s "Family Pack" either.
> 
> I was hoping that this was a 2nd tier above basic. Perhaps Mediacom is more of a D* priced system, where there is no cheap option except "lifeline" (or "family").


Mediacom basic is 2-22
Expanded Basic is 2-78

I heard rumors it was to be in the 200's ... which would put it in the digital tier. That gives me hope if this is correct.


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> BTN has always been asking for expanded basic. They have never asked to be on basic analog cable. Should fit nicely into AT200.


I agree. AT200 with CSTV is where BTN belongs. Now if only BTN would accept a reasonable price instead of $1.10 "in market" and 10c elsewhere.


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> I agree. AT200 with CSTV is where BTN belongs. Now if only BTN would accept a reasonable price instead of $1.10 "in market" and 10c elsewhere.


Any idea what that would equate to in terms of per sub avg. overall?


----------



## James Long

Somewhere between $1.10 and 10c ... I'm not sure how many subs are in the eight states that BTN wants the extra $1 for. If I recall correctly there are around 10 million subs at AT200 or higher.


----------



## Albie

heisman said:


> Any idea what that would equate to in terms of per sub avg. overall?


Making the basic assumptions (I don't know the actual breakdowns for E* total subs or subs in the 8 states) that there are 15 million total subs and 20% are in the 8 state region the average cost per sub would be 30 cents per month. Adjust accordingly

3 Mil X 1.10 = 3.30 Mil
12 Mil X .10 = 1.20 Mil

4.50 Mil/15 mil = .30


----------



## heisman

If x living in Florida (tons of Buckeye fans there) upgrades from AT100 to AT200 that's an extra $156 in E*'s coffer. That covers the price of 130 subs. In market, the same upgrade only covers 11 subs. I thought I could come up with a formula as to what percentage would have to upgrade (not even taking into account new subs) to cover the cost without having to raise rates to cover it.


----------



## Albie

Along the same lines, if you assume E*'s average revenue per customer is $65 (can't remember the actual figures) if they sign up approx 70,000 new customers that would also cover it.


----------



## heisman

Albie said:


> Along the same lines, if you assume E*'s average revenue per customer is $65 (can't remember the actual figures) if they sign up approx 70,000 new customers that would also cover it.


This really seems like a no brainer. C'mon Charlie, step it up buddy!


----------



## James Long

The trouble with the math is that if a customer upgrades from AT100 to AT200 E* has to pay for the 33 video channels that already come with that tier step. (One also gets Sirius music channels when upgrading from AT100 to AT200 and their local RSNs.)

Upgrading from AT100 to AT100+ is a $5 step just to add the local RSN(s). I can't believe that E* only pays $7 more for the 33 other channels one gets with the AT200 upgrade. (Especially when last year it was a $5 between AT100+ and AT200.)

While it is nice to imagine costs being directly recouped by the price differences that is not exactly how it works. E* DOES have to pay networks that charge based on the number of subscribers that get their channel. E* saves money by placing channels in AT200 instead of AT100 where a few million less subscribers see them. They can also save money by placing channels in AT250 where less subscribers see them. Do you believe that E* is paying $10 for the 40 more video channels (and 19 mono Muzak channels) one gets in AT250 over AT200? D* does the same thing, charging $5 more for 31 video channels and a few more XMs in Choice Xtra.

Tier prices are set based on what the market will bear ... not necessarily the channels IN each package. So regardless of where the channel ends up, everyone is going to pay for it as the cost of that channel will affect E*'s bottom line.

If E* can control that cost by placing BTN in AT200 or making it an 8 state RSN it helps them keep their rates down for everyone.

E* is going to add net customers anyways ... they have been adding more customers per quarter than D* for a while. Even with all the negative people claiming E* would go belly up after making decisions they didn't agree with. Like it or not, the way E* is running their business is working.

Which is why the onus is back on BTN to give E* a good deal for the actual content that will be delivered. They need to prove that they are as valuable as ESPN before pretending to be ESPN at the negotiating table.


----------



## Slamminc11

Albie said:


> Along the same lines, if you assume E*'s average revenue per customer is $65 (can't remember the actual figures) if they sign up approx 70,000 new customers that would also cover it.


I doubt 70,000 people would sign up for Dish just because of this channel, just as I doubt 70,000 would drop Dish if they didn't carry this channel. Maybe more like 7,000 people one way or the other


----------



## iahawks550

Slamminc11 said:


> just as I doubt 70,000 would drop Dish if they didn't carry this channel. Maybe more like 7,000 people one way or the other


You might be surprised at how many people are waiting this out. Much more than 7,000, IMO. Considering the Big Ten averages 70,000 plus for home games, that's a very low estimate of 770,000 paying fans. Throw in the millions of alumni and hometown fans that don't go to the games, and you have an extremely large amount of people interested in how this plays out.

I for one, am also playing the waiting game. I can get the U for the first game, travel to the second, watch the third on Vs. Then, it's switch time if need be.


----------



## scooper

Slamminc11 said:


> I doubt 70,000 people would sign up for Dish just because of this channel, just as I doubt 70,000 would drop Dish if they didn't carry this channel. Maybe more like 7,000 people one way or the other


I'd venture to say more like 700....


----------



## migoblu

I talked to my Dish Network retailer last night and they said they received an email from Dish Network at 9AM (yesterday). The retailer stated that Dish Network said they are broadcasting the BTN and the BTN would be on the Dish Network's lowest package (America's Top 100, I think). The retailer said that they are negotiating the price. 

The retailer stated Dish Network said they may not be able to broadcast the first two games because of time restraints because of signing the contracts and setting the channel up. 

I hope they get it done fast.


----------



## tsmacro

migoblu said:


> I talked to my Dish Network retailer last night and they said they received an email from Dish Network at 9AM (yesterday). The retailer stated that Dish Network said they are broadcasting the BTN and the BTN would be on the Dish Network's lowest package (America's Top 100, I think). The retailer said that they are negotiating the price.
> 
> The retailer stated Dish Network said they may not be able to broadcast the first two games because of time restraints because of signing the contracts and setting the channel up.
> 
> I hope they get it done fast.


Funny because I work for a phone company that sells Dish network and we just got an e-mail from Dish offering rebuttles to customers who ask why Dish isn't carrying BTN. I'd say it's all about as clear as mud so far.


----------



## TBoneit

heisman said:


> BTN has always been asking for expanded basic. They have never asked to be on basic analog cable. Should fit nicely into AT200.
> 
> http://www.bigtennetwork.com/managex/index.asp?ArticleSource=442


From that page " but the cable industry has decided that "bundling" channels is the best way to offer consumers the widest possible variety at the best price. In Big Ten Country, Big Ten Network should be one of those channels."

No, AFAIK the cable industry hasn't decided the programming providers are the ones not allowing Ala carte. The Tier they go into is a part of the negotiation process between progamers and the cable/satellite industry.

If the rest of the BTN site is just as accurate.................. well.


----------



## James Long

iahawks550 said:


> You might be surprised at how many people are waiting this out. Much more than 7,000, IMO. Considering the Big Ten averages 70,000 plus for home games, that's a very low estimate of 770,000 paying fans. Throw in the millions of alumni and hometown fans that don't go to the games, and you have an extremely large amount of people interested in how this plays out.


Interested, but motivated to do something about it? Especially when the best games will still be on another network?

I doubt the alumni are very interested in when their team plays podunk or the Olympic and other sports/school coverage that BTN plans to offer. Curious, perhaps ... but not motivated to switch just so they can see the underwater basket weaving team win another match. 70,000 people is not an all sport average of attendance.

Overestimating the value of the network is arrogant.


----------



## BNUMM

Part of the reason people want the BTN is the name. They see Big Ten Network and think they have to have it. I live in Michigan and everyone I know who went to the University of Michigan is trying to get this channel. I havent talked to any Michigan Sate graduates yet.


----------



## yoyo1010

I'm a BIG Indiana football and basketball fan, and watch every game that's on TV. Let me tell ya, I don't give a RIP about the Big Ten Network. The only reason they started this thing up is to control the $$$. I think most people realize that. Big fat corporate greed. The locals (usually small independent stations) will loose out big (WTTV in Indy via ESPN+).

Sports, period (including sports TV) is probably one of the biggest money pits there is. Second only to bottled water. I hope E sticks to their guns, especially since it's not even a HD network.

GO HOOSIERS


----------



## gopherscot

yoyo1010 said:


> I'm a BIG Indiana football and basketball fan, and watch every game that's on TV. Let me tell ya, I don't give a RIP about the Big Ten Network. The only reason they started this thing up is to control the $$$. I think most people realize that. Big fat corporate greed. The locals (usually small independent stations) will loose out big (WTTV in Indy via ESPN+).
> 
> Sports, period (including sports TV) is probably one of the biggest money pits there is. Second only to bottled water. I hope E sticks to their guns, especially since it's not even a HD network.
> 
> GO HOOSIERS


Ummmmm ... it is an HD channel!


----------



## James Long

gopherscot said:


> Ummmmm ... it is an HD channel!


It can be!


----------



## msmith198025

gopherscot said:


> Ummmmm ... it is an HD channel!


+1
Im not sure about if E* gets it that it will be but it is said to be HD on D*


----------



## Albie

Found this on another site, but I found it quite interesting. This is a quote from the article.

"Thompson added that the $1.10 per subscriber figure floated in the media is not the price that is on the table for Big Ten territory. He said it is a lower figure but did not give a specific amount."

So they are flexible on the pricing. Here is the link to the complete article which talks about Comcast being out of the running at his point.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070823/SPORTS06/70823050/1056/SPORTS


----------



## blackwhole

I understand all the issues etc... But having made the leap to pay TV end of 2006 after 30 years of free TV with my antenna, it's frustrating that I will now spend $84 a month and not see some of the football I had last season with the locals & ESPN+.

Dish, please get this done.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Albie said:


> Found this on another site, but I found it quite interesting. This is a quote from the article.
> 
> "Thompson added that the $1.10 per subscriber figure floated in the media is not the price that is on the table for Big Ten territory. He said it is a lower figure but did not give a specific amount."
> 
> So they are flexible on the pricing. Here is the link to the complete article which talks about Comcast being out of the running at his point.
> 
> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070823/SPORTS06/70823050/1056/SPORTS


In the Sports sub-forum, I posted an article with a link to a podcast from yesterday... with the Big Ten Commish....

It doesn't sound very promissing for Comcast....
They didn't specifically mention DishNetwork though

I did send an email to radio hosts, which they acknowledged receiving on air... but said, that the interview was going to be what it was, and they wouldn't be able to ask specifics... one of my questions was to have them elaborate on DishNetwork... but it didn't make it in.


----------



## Paul Secic

James Long said:


> The trouble with the math is that if a customer upgrades from AT100 to AT200 E* has to pay for the 33 video channels that already come with that tier step. (One also gets Sirius music channels when upgrading from AT100 to AT200 and their local RSNs.)
> 
> Upgrading from AT100 to AT100+ is a $5 step just to add the local RSN(s). I can't believe that E* only pays $7 more for the 33 other channels one gets with the AT200 upgrade. (Especially when last year it was a $5 between AT100+ and AT200.)
> 
> While it is nice to imagine costs being directly recouped by the price differences that is not exactly how it works. E* DOES have to pay networks that charge based on the number of subscribers that get their channel. E* saves money by placing channels in AT200 instead of AT100 where a few million less subscribers see them. They can also save money by placing channels in AT250 where less subscribers see them. Do you believe that E* is paying $10 for the 40 more video channels (and 19 mono Muzak channels) one gets in AT250 over AT200? D* does the same thing, charging $5 more for 31 video channels and a few more XMs in Choice Xtra.
> 
> Tier prices are set based on what the market will bear ... not necessarily the channels IN each package. So regardless of where the channel ends up, everyone is going to pay for it as the cost of that channel will affect E*'s bottom line.
> 
> If E* can control that cost by placing BTN in AT200 or making it an 8 state RSN it helps them keep their rates down for everyone.
> 
> E* is going to add net customers anyways ... they have been adding more customers per quarter than D* for a while. Even with all the negative people claiming E* would go belly up after making decisions they didn't agree with. Like it or not, the way E* is running their business is working.
> 
> Which is why the onus is back on BTN to give E* a good deal for the actual content that will be delivered. They need to prove that they are as valuable as ESPN before pretending to be ESPN at the negotiating table.


I can live with those AUD Mono music channels...


----------



## terfmop

yoyo1010 said:


> I'm a BIG Indiana football and basketball fan, and watch every game that's on TV. Let me tell ya, I don't give a RIP about the Big Ten Network. The only reason they started this thing up is to control the $$$. I think most people realize that. Big fat corporate greed. The locals (usually small independent stations) will loose out big (WTTV in Indy via ESPN+).
> 
> Sports, period (including sports TV) is probably one of the biggest money pits there is. Second only to bottled water. I hope E sticks to their guns, especially since it's not even a HD network.
> 
> GO HOOSIERS


Greed or not, I want to be able to watch more Big 10 than I was able to last year. Being a E* customer in west central Indiana, I wasn't even able to get the 'free' broadcasts of the games, as my locals didn't include the station(WTTV) that broadcast the ESPN+ games, nor was I close enough to pick it up via OTA. My only means of watching Big Ten games were on the ESPN stations and an occasional CBS basketball game. $1.10 would be a bargain. I'm optimistic I'll be able to finally watch a broadcast of the Boilers crushing the Loosiers in the bucket game


----------



## Codeman00

Greed or not exactly. I watch every Boiler football and basketball game every year that's on TV. If the game isn't televised, I listen to it on the internet. I'm tired of ESPN360 and I'm tired of non-televised games and I'm tired of spending $220 a year on GamePlan and FullCourt to get my games. The BTN is a great thing....all I want is the option to get it. Put it on my regular Dish package, on a sports tier, or charge me $10 a month, I really don't care. Just give me the opportunity to get the channel!!

As far as the alumni not caring about the lesser games...that's totally untrue for me. At least the Indiana Hoosier fans on Dish don't have to worry about missing their football games....since they play on NBC about every Saturday!


----------



## FTA Michael

Here's the latest press release: http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=125560

"Get Big Ten Football With DISH Network

ENGLEWOOD, Colo., Aug. 24, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH) and its DISH Network(r) satellite TV service today announced the latest Big Ten college football broadcast schedules are now available at www.dishnetwork.com/big10, which will be updated regularly. DISH Network will carry almost all of the Big Ten and other NCAA conference football and basketball games currently scheduled on CSTV, CBS and NBC, as well as ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU.

There are a few Big Ten non-conference games (e.g. Citadel vs. Wisconsin) that air on the Big Ten Network (BTN). For several months, DISH Network has been diligently negotiating with BTN to obtain a carriage agreement consistent with other regional sports networks, but BTN wants unreasonable and inconsistent payments from all of our customers regardless of whether or not they are Big Ten fans. The good news is that DISH Network customers who are Big Ten fans will get most of their games with the current channels available on DISH Network.

DISH Network realizes how important these games are to our customers (we're fans too!), and will continue to work to provide the best in college and all sports, at the best value anywhere. In the meantime, we are keeping the door open in the hopes we can conclude a reasonable deal with BTN.

About EchoStar Communications Corporation ... "


----------



## James Long

They had me thinking when I got the press release! 

Perspective.


----------



## NKy.Yall

FTA Michael said:


> Here's the latest press release: http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=125560
> 
> "Get Big Ten Football With DISH Network
> 
> ENGLEWOOD, Colo., Aug. 24, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH) and its DISH Network(r) satellite TV service today announced the latest Big Ten college football broadcast schedules are now available at www.dishnetwork.com/big10, which will be updated regularly. DISH Network will carry almost all of the Big Ten and other NCAA conference football and basketball games currently scheduled on CSTV, CBS and NBC, as well as ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU.
> 
> There are a few Big Ten non-conference games (e.g. Citadel vs. Wisconsin) that air on the Big Ten Network (BTN). For several months, DISH Network has been diligently negotiating with BTN to obtain a carriage agreement consistent with other regional sports networks, but BTN wants unreasonable and inconsistent payments from all of our customers regardless of whether or not they are Big Ten fans. The good news is that DISH Network customers who are Big Ten fans will get most of their games with the current channels available on DISH Network.
> 
> DISH Network realizes how important these games are to our customers (we're fans too!), and will continue to work to provide the best in college and all sports, at the best value anywhere. In the meantime, we are keeping the door open in the hopes we can conclude a reasonable deal with BTN.
> 
> About EchoStar Communications Corporation ... "


Sounds a lot like the spin E* puts on about having all of this NFL coverage with the NFL Network HD etc.just to throw a salvo at D* and there ST package.IMO this looks like the white flag being sent up by E* on the BTN not going to be carried by them.


----------



## angiecopus

Shucks, I know someone with direct tv but they are not going to be home that weekend. i want to be Able to Watch The Ohio State-Youngstown State game without having to find the radio station its on.


----------



## norton54

Like always, corporate greed and who loses ......the fans.


----------



## skizer

terfmop said:


> I'm optimistic I'll be able to finally watch a broadcast of the Boilers crushing the Loosiers in the bucket game


I guess since the hope of playing in a national title game in Hoops (men's anyway) is nothing but a dream for PU fans winning the bucket game over a usually bad IU football team is about as good as things get for your sports teams!! :lol:


----------



## Grandpa Train

norton54 said:


> Like always, corporate greed and who loses ......the fans.


As usual DISH spins not getting BTN....and falls farther behind on SPORTS.


----------



## iahawks550

I guess they are forcing the hand with subscribers.


----------



## TBoneit

Grandpa Train said:


> As usual DISH spins not getting BTN....and falls farther behind on SPORTS.


Not spin IMHO, more like a counter to the BTNs website as a Negotiating tactic.


----------



## NKy.Yall

_[Press release]_

Sounds a lot like the BTN promo ????


----------



## Jim5506

All that red ritin' is reel hard ta reed.

BTY Most if not all the BTN schools are government institutions, so this looks like government greed to me.

So called 'corporate greed' puts paychecks in the pocket of 95% of Americans and keeps the wheels of free commerce rolling.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

TBoneit said:


> Not spin IMHO, more like a counter to the BTNs website as a Negotiating tactic.


You guys know how much I read announcements, and other things like that...

When "I" read this the first time, in my normal fashion...
I thought... "wow... Dish Network got the BTN"...

Now if I got that from my initial reading, what do you think the casual Dish Network subscriber (or someone considering Dish Network)... is going to think.


----------



## Jim5506

What Dish is saying is all the good games will be on Dish, the rest will be on BTN.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Jim5506 said:


> What Dish is saying is all the good games will be on Dish, the rest will be on BTN.


"Good" from a national perspecive, because those other networks have deemed them worthy of basically national coverage.
(Kinda like NFL Flex Monday Night)

But that leaves a LOT of other games and content, that won't be able to be seen... (including most of the Illini football season)..


----------



## James Long

It is a good counter to BTN's statements that make it _sound_ like no Big Ten games will be available anywhere else.

Both parties are spinning.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

I am curious... has there been an article, that has detailed how many Dish Network subscribers are in the 8 Big Ten states?

I just did some math on the COMCAST numbers (22mil total, 5mil in the 8 states)... comes up between $0.35 per subscriber/per month (at $1.10,$0.10) and $0.23 per subscrber / per month (at $.70, $.10).

(the 1.10 vs .70 are the two numbers that have been recently thrown around... 1.10 being the most popular, and .70 coming out this week, as the more "correct").

------------
As for your post James, yes... it is a good counter, to let people know that not ALL Big Ten football games are going to be on BTN...

But the numbers are not as "good" for the basketball season.


----------



## richiephx

It seems like a simple decision to me. If you want BTN and E* doesn't provide what you want, go elsewhere. Complaining about here won't get you the programming you want to see. If D* has what you want, switch providers.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

richiephx said:


> It seems like a simple decision to me. If you want BTN and E* doesn't provide what you want, go elsewhere. Complaining about here won't get you the programming you want to see. If D* has what you want, switch providers.


But there is more to a carrier, then just 1 channel, or 1 feature, or 1.... anything...

It is just another "piece" on the balance wheel between choosing to change or not.


----------



## James Long

I expect there will be a deal with Dish. This press release makes it appear less likely in the short term but perhaps by basketball season something will work out.

If E* adds it as an RSN in the eight state market it will provide enough coverage to make most interested people happy and likely more coverage than when Big Ten's "lesser games" were on local TV. We don't know E*'s offer or what BTN is holding out for, but being an RSN or being in AT200 at a reasonable price would be better than being D* only for BTN.


----------



## DanoP

Earl Bonovich said:


> But there is more to a carrier, then just 1 channel, or 1 feature, or 1.... anything...
> 
> It is just another "piece" on the balance wheel between choosing to change or not.


Exactly. For example, MLB EI is no longer seen on Dish. Now another sports network is going down the tubes perhaps. On the other hand they offer all these HD RSNs.....which just happen to be blacked out or have no programming, 99% of the time. If the sports fan is not going to be welcomed on Dish then I'll look elsewhere. The only thing that's keeping me at this point is the 622 DVR which is outstanding IMO.


----------



## James Long

DanoP said:


> On the other hand they offer all these HD RSNs.....which just happen to be blacked out or have no programming, 99% of the time.


That is an issue that hits D* as well.

Blackouts should be the same on SD an HD. The limited programming comes from the simple lack of HD to show. Much of that being pro sports that are subject to blackout.


----------



## NKy.Yall

richiephx said:


> It seems like a simple decision to me. If you want BTN and E* doesn't provide what you want, go elsewhere. Complaining about here won't get you the programming you want to see. If D* has what you want, switch providers.


Thats the best damn quote I have heard since this whole thing started with E* and the BTN debate.


----------



## gopherscot

NKy.Yall said:


> Thats the best damn quote I have heard since this whole thing started with E* and the BTN debate.


Switching is not always the answer. Some people have commitments and others just like a lot of things about Dish Network. Wanting a channel for Big Ten buffs in the Midwest doesn't seem out of line.


----------



## HobbyTalk

Get D* in addition to E*. I would guess REAL fans would be more then willing to pony up the extra $$$$$ to get D* so they can have their BTN


----------



## NKy.Yall

gopherscot said:


> Switching is not always the answer. Some people have commitments and others just like a lot of things about Dish Network. Wanting a channel for Big Ten buffs in the Midwest doesn't seem out of line.


Yes your right I forgot about that. When I jumped ship there was no such thing as a 2 year/18 month what ever it is commitment period is,but the contract aside I take D* over E* just for these type of issues {and others} my preference of course and to each thier own on what ever service they choose.


----------



## gopherscot

HobbyTalk said:


> Get D* in addition to E*. I would guess REAL fans would be more then willing to pony up the extra $$$$$ to get D* so they can have their BTN


No way .... just bring on the 1.10 and charge you double! :lol: :lol:


----------



## nmetro

As it stands today, many cable subscribers in the Big 10 region do not have access to BTN. Also, many rural subscribers who depend on Dish will not have BTN either. Yes, one can switch to DirecTV, but the costs involved could be pricey especially if one is in the middle of an 12 month, 18 month, or 24 month commitment. 

If things do not change by next Saturday, the Big 10 and its' member schools are going to get one large black eye. Some say this is greed, it more like blatant stupidity. The end result will be a net revenue loss for the conference and the schools. What advertiser will support a network that has a potential audience of less than 18 million in a country with over 300 million people? The real greed here is over confidence and BTN is pretty much doomed before it ever gets on the air. FOX will not support a money losing venture for long and they may distance themselves from this experiment.

If BTN does succeed, then every conference will start up their own BTN and you can say goodbye to seeing college sports on ESPN, GamePlan, FSN and ABC. Nice Catch-22 isn't it?

Well, now I have to figure out on how I can get the four OSU games in Colorado. Maybe with some luck 1460 The Fan (Columbus) may stream the games for free, because no one in Columbus will get to see the games unless they are in Ohio Stadium. Boy, we've gone back to the 1970s when you were lucky to get one or two 
OSU games in any given season. Who would ever thought that with 100s of channels available, that Buckeye fans will have to resort to radio. At least we have the Internet now, so there is a glimmer of hope.

Go Bucks! 

Nick


----------



## caseymeeps

HobbyTalk said:


> Get D* in addition to E*. I would guess REAL fans would be more then willing to pony up the extra $$$$$ to get D* so they can have their BTN


Yup, that's exactly what I did. I have one tv which now has both D* and E*. Bring on my Wolverines!


----------



## angiecopus

nmetro said:


> As it stands today, many cable subscribers in the Big 10 region do not have access to BTN. Also, many rural subscribers who depend on Dish will not have BTN either. Yes, one can switch to DirecTV, but the costs involved could be pricey especially if one is in the middle of an 12 month, 18 month, or 24 month commitment.
> 
> If things do not change by next Saturday, the Big 10 and its' member schools are going to get one large black eye. Some say this is greed, it more like blatant stupidity. The end result will be a net revenue loss for the conference and the schools. What advertiser will support a network that has a potential audience of less than 18 million in a country with over 300 million people? The real greed here is over confidence and BTN is pretty much doomed before it ever gets on the air. FOX will not support a money losing venture for long and they may distance themselves from this experiment.
> 
> If BTN does succeed, then every conference will start up their own BTN and you can say goodbye to seeing college sports on ESPN, GamePlan, FSN and ABC. Nice Catch-22 isn't it?
> 
> Well, now I have to figure out on how I can get the four OSU games in Colorado. Maybe with some luck 1460 The Fan (Columbus) may stream the games for free, because no one in Columbus will get to see the games unless they are in Ohio Stadium. Boy, we've gone back to the 1970s when you were lucky to get one or two
> OSU games in any given season. Who would ever thought that with 100s of channels available, that Buckeye fans will have to resort to radio. At least we have the Internet now, so there is a glimmer of hope.
> 
> Go Bucks!
> 
> Nick


I live in a Rural area with dish network, luckily for my dad who does get the home tickets to all the home osu football games. At least i get to go to the Akron game. Yep, i do get a radio station that i pick up to listen to the osu football games.


----------



## GeorgeLV

nmetro said:


> What advertiser will support a network that has a potential audience of less than 18 million in a country with over 300 million people?


You're mixing units. 18 million is households, not persons. There are around 95 million tv households.


----------



## Albie

nmetro said:


> If things do not change by next Saturday, the Big 10 and its' member schools are going to get one large black eye. Some say this is greed, it more like blatant stupidity. The end result will be a net revenue loss for the conference and the schools. What advertiser will support a network that has a potential audience of less than 18 million in a country with over 300 million people? The real greed here is over confidence and BTN is pretty much doomed before it ever gets on the air. FOX will not support a money losing venture for long and they may distance themselves from this experiment.


Do you really believe they are ending up with a revenue loss? The only revenue they are losing on this deal is the chump change they got from their share of Gameplan and even smaller bits from syndication on local broadcasts. Even after they pay their share of the overhead to the Network, I'll bet the Big Ten still ends up with more in their coffers this year than previous years just from what they are getting from D*, AT&T (Which will continue to increase as they continue the rollout of U-Verse), and the small cable systems they have signed. If they do manage to get Time-Warner and/or E* it just gets better for them.

As for the black eye, their business plan was made with the idea that they would have this fight and not sign any of the major cable providers in year one.


----------



## norton54

richiephx said:


> It seems like a simple decision to me. If you want BTN and E* doesn't provide what you want, go elsewhere. Complaining about here won't get you the programming you want to see. If D* has what you want, switch providers.


Yes, that's what some us might do. But this is a public forum that most people write to praise or complain about issues that effect us good or bad. 
I'm personally sick of suffering (yes I want to see some games that I won't see because I don't have BTN) because corporate decisions won't allow me to. And I understand that a lot of people outside our conference couldn't care less about just it as I wouldn't want to pay more for the Pacten network. 
But there has to be a solution to this, but in the mean time we miss out on games, as, the network isn't going away.


----------



## James Long

There are solutions to this:

The first is to subscribe to a company that is carrying the network.
If the extra games that will be on BTN are important enough to you no cost is too high.

The second is to encourage BTN to accept more offers. BTN is the problem here. They present themselves as a solution, but they really are a problem when they take games away from channels viewers received without granting the carriage agreements needed to reach viewers. BTN needs carriage ... E* just needs a reasonable deal.


----------



## TBoneit

The long term loss will be future fans. IMHO, Short term no impact, long term though.......

I'm sure that in the log term the Yankees will end up with fewer fans due to the YES network. How many people became fans from watching the Yankees on local NYC (Free) TV?

I haven't watched a Yankee game on TV and skip past any coverage of the Yankees in the Newsbroadcasts since they started YES.


----------



## JohnH

So far, everything the Big Ten Network has produced is in High Definition. A couple of Women's Field Hockey and a couple of Women's Volleyball have been seen going by here. 

720p


----------



## James Long

Probably been said before, but I like the summary answers:
Source: http://pennstate.scout.com/2/671599.html
(Mark Silverman is the President of BTN)


> *Mark Silverman Answers:*
> At this point it doesn't look good with Comcast and the main reason is they refuse to engage to negotiate to play the network on expanded basic. It's not a matter of price, it's a matter of service. &#8230; You've heard me say it a million times. We want to negotiate, we want to negotiate, it's just gotta be on expanded basic. And all they have said for the last six months is sports tier, sports tier, sports tier. And they threw out the $1.10 number, which is, by the way, more than any number that we've ever offered to them. But that's another story.
> 
> . . .
> 
> *PrideoftheLion31 Asks:*
> What in the world makes you think the BTN will be successful where the NFL Network was not? If cable companies refuse to carry the NFL Network at an average cost of 80 cents per household, why do you believe they will give in to the Big Ten Network at $1.10?
> 
> *Mark Silverman Answers:*
> . . . The NFL Network asked for 75 cents a home for 90 million homes. We're asking about a buck for 18 million homes (in the Big Ten's eight states) and about a dime in 72 million homes (outside of those states). Our price is about 30 cents compared to the NFL Network's 75 cents on a 90-million home basis. . . .


Pulling the numbers ... BTN is not asking for $1.10 in the eight states, they are asking for "about a buck", and BTN is asking for about a dime elsewhere.

There are 72 million homes outside the eight states and 18 million homes in those states (obviously not all E* customers and without E* providing numbers there would be no way of telling where E*'s customers are distributed in that). 20% of the 90 million BTN would like to reach are in the eight states.

_IF_ E* customers were evenly distributed that would be 2.6 million customers in region and 10.4 million out of region. About $3.64 million to carry BTN in AT100 or $2.52 million to carry BTN in AT200. Roughly $1.8 million to carry BTN as an RSN within the eight state region. I assume that E* is going for the lowest price ... unless BTN is willing to lower their price where E* can pay $1.8 million and place it in AT100 or less and place it in AT200 (where it belongs) I expect all we will hear about is how much Big Ten sports is available on other channels.

One final quote:


> *PennStateMtnMan Asks:*
> What is the status of negotiations with Dish Network pertaining to carrying the Big Ten Network?
> 
> *Mark Silverman Answers:*
> We are in active negotiations with Dish Network right now.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

James Long said:


> _IF_ E* customers were evenly distributed that would be 2.6 million customers in region and 10.4 million out of region. About $3.64 million to carry BTN in AT100 or $2.52 million to carry BTN in AT200. Roughly $1.8 million to carry BTN as an RSN within the eight state region. I assume that E* is going for the lowest price ... unless BTN is willing to lower their price where E* can pay $1.8 million and place it in AT100 or less and place it in AT200 (where it belongs) I expect all we will hear about is how much Big Ten sports is available on other channels.


So basically: 
$0.28 per month/per subscriber for AT100
$0.19 per month/per subscriber for AT200
or $0.13 if they get it down to $1.8 mil.


----------



## HobbyTalk

Not really since there are fewer AT200 or RSN subscribers. The cost per subscriber is the same... fewer subscribers, less money paid (unless E can get it down to 1.8 mil in the AT100 tier).


----------



## James Long

The cost to E* is based on the deal they get and the placement of the channel. Per Subscriber if you are counting all 13 million. BTN wouldn't get 13 million subscribers along with their millions of dollars unless E* placed the network in AT100. But the cost per E* subscriber would be what was stated.

I found it interesting thar Mr. Silverman made a distinction between the media quoted $1.10 and his "about a buck".


----------



## Michael P

E* has resorted to the following tactic re: BTN:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid={9C51EBF5-AA8E-4C6C-997D-C10763F8B569}&siteid=nbs&symb=

The headline caught my attention, but the news is not good for those of us who actually wanted the network.


----------



## mhowie

Michael P said:


> E* has resorted to the following tactic re: BTN:
> http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid={9C51EBF5-AA8E-4C6C-997D-C10763F8B569}&siteid=nbs&symb=
> 
> The headline caught my attention, but the news is not good for those of us who actually wanted the network.


Unless subscribers jump to DirecTV, Charlie won't add it. Even then, if it doesn't equate to more dollars for Charlie, forget about it. I've learned in my 12 years as a Dish customer that Charlie's customers' needs are secondary to increasing his nest egg. Good business model if you can retain customers. As soon as DirecTV can get closer in the hardware department, and especially if they become the HD leader as they are touting will be the case, I expect to defect.


----------



## James Long

Michael P said:


> E* has resorted to the following tactic re: BTN:
> http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid={9C51EBF5-AA8E-4C6C-997D-C10763F8B569}&siteid=nbs&symb=
> 
> The headline caught my attention, but the news is not good for those of us who actually wanted the network.


Posted Friday earlier in the thread. 
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=1063965&postcount=308


----------



## Badger

James Long said:


> I expect there will be a deal with Dish. This press release makes it appear less likely in the short term but perhaps by basketball season something will work out.
> 
> If E* adds it as an RSN in the eight state market it will provide enough coverage to make most interested people happy and likely more coverage than when Big Ten's "lesser games" were on local TV. We don't know E*'s offer or what BTN is holding out for, but being an RSN or being in AT200 at a reasonable price would be better than being D* only for BTN.


There will be more basketball than football on BTN at least for us Wisconsin fans. The madison newspaper had an article which said either 11 or 12 of Wisconsins 18 conference games are exclusive to the BTN. It also reported that as of the time the article was written that only Directv was carrying the BTN in Wisconsin. I'm a D* sub and I hope E* gets the BTN up as I know many of their subs really want it.

Good Luck!


----------



## angiecopus

i had an argument with my dad about switching to direct tv, but he said that dish network was the only provider in our area. i am sorta jealous that my mom is going to the first ohio state game, and now i find out that someone has given my brother tickets to the same game. I know someone with Direct tv but they wont be home this weekend.


----------



## nmetro

Big Ten Network, cable in standoff
This is from today's Columbus Dispatch.

Tuesday, August 28, 2007 3:39 AM
By Bob Baptist
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Will your child live in an Ohio State dormitory this fall?

If all else fails, you can watch Buckeyes games on the Big Ten Network in his or her room. Just not soon enough.

The dorms won't open until after the Buckeyes' games against Youngstown State and Akron, which will be televised exclusively by the Big Ten Network.

Ohio State kicks off the 2007 football season Saturday afternoon. The Big Ten Network kicks off its first season Thursday at 8 p.m., with a replay of the 2006 OSU-Michigan game airing at 9.

But unless there is a change in field position, neither will be seen in households served by central Ohio's three major cable TV providers.

The standoff between the nascent Big Ten Network and Big Cable continued yesterday, not only in central Ohio but throughout the conference's eight-state region. The network is scheduled to air six conference games Saturday.

"No agreement has been finalized at this stage, and I can't really predict whether one will get done. I have not been given any indication that we are close," said Judy Barbao, spokeswoman for Time Warner, central Ohio's largest cable provider.

Officials from Insight and WOW, the two other cable providers in central Ohio, likewise said negotiations continue. "But (we) don't see any change in progress," said Scott Neesley, senior vice president of WOW Ohio.

As matters stand, the network will be available in central Ohio only via satellite provider DirecTV and Ohio State's campus cable network. The university and eight other Big Ten schools contracted with the network earlier this month.

"It was a high priority for us that our students got the games," said Steve Snapp, OSU associate athletic director for broadcast services.

At issue in negotiations are the Big Ten Network's asking price of $1.10 per subscriber per month and its insistence that it be put on cable providers' "expanded basic" tier, which includes ESPN.

Cable providers say that, at that price, the channel belongs on a pricier tier of niche sports channels. The network has said it is flexible on price, but Barbao said Time Warner and the network are "worlds apart."

The Big Ten Network has reached agreement with five cable systems in Ohio, the largest being Buckeye, which serves approximately 150,000 subscribers in the Toledo area. The other systems are Horizon (Chillicothe), New Knoxville (near Lima), and Wadsworth and AT&T U-verse, both near Akron.

Meanwhile, some central Ohio fans are only now realizing that WBNS-TV (Channel 10) will not carry OSU football games not shown on ABC or one of the ESPN networks. Viewers continue to contact Channel 10 to ask why the games will not be aired, said Tom Griesdorn, president and general manager.

"There will be many, many people Saturday at a quarter 'til 12 who will tune in to Channel 10 and the 'Oh, (bleep)' factor will kick in," he said.

[email protected]


----------



## cb7214

here is my question, why is E* now so worried about making subscribers pay for a channel they don't want when if you take every channel offered by either D* or E* and i bet you could find just as many people that don't want this or that channel but still end up having to pay for it anyways


----------



## Jim5506

First of all it would set a precedent. A RSN being on the basic tier.

Secondly the price is about double what it should be, maybe more and for mostly sports re-runs - NO!


----------



## wolfjc

angiecopus said:


> i had an argument with my dad about switching to direct tv, but he said that dish network was the only provider in our area. i am sorta jealous that my mom is going to the first ohio state game, and now i find out that someone has given my brother tickets to the same game. I know someone with Direct tv but they wont be home this weekend.


Thats just wrong if you can get Dish you can also get direct.


----------



## terfmop

wolfjc said:


> Thats just wrong if you can get Dish you can also get direct.


Perhaps he might be in a similar situation that we in Terre Haute are in. Yes, we can get D*, but only E* carries our locals. D* does not carry our local channels.


----------



## iahawks550

Jim5506 said:


> First of all it would set a precedent. A RSN being on the basic tier.
> 
> Secondly the price is about double what it should be, maybe more and for mostly sports re-runs - NO!


Is it like 0.10 per subscriber in all but 8 states?


----------



## James Long

"About a buck" to 20% of the homes in the US. 

Can't have it "out of state" and not in. People would really freak!


----------



## Ira Lacher

cb7214 said:


> here is my question, why is E* now so worried about making subscribers pay for a channel they don't want when if you take every channel offered by either D* or E* and i bet you could find just as many people that don't want this or that channel but still end up having to pay for it anyways


Charlie's just cheap. And he wants everything on his terms. I finally got tired of his gamesmanship and am switching to D* this week.


----------



## Michael P

angiecopus said:


> i had an argument with my dad about switching to direct tv, but he said that dish network was the only provider in our area. i am sorta jealous that my mom is going to the first ohio state game, and now i find out that someone has given my brother tickets to the same game. I know someone with Direct tv but they wont be home this weekend.


   How can Preble County Ohio stop Direct TV from doing business in the county? Your Dad may be confused with the old Pegasus/NRTC arrangement, where to get D* in many rural areas you had to go through a middleman. I believe that arrangement went the ways of the dinosaurs a long time ago. E* never had "exclusive" contracts. If you can get the signal from the satellite (and was in the continental USA i.e. not Canada) you can legally subscribe to either DBS service!


----------



## NKy.Yall

Ira Lacher said:


> Charlie's just cheap. And he wants everything on his terms. I finally got tired of his gamesmanship and am switching to D* this week.


Sounds all too familar, I did the same almost 2 years.Been nothing but  `s ever since.


----------



## Jim5506

iahawks550 said:


> Is it like 0.10 per subscriber in all but 8 states?


And it should be about a nickle.


----------



## scooper

If you all REALLY REALLY want BTN - I'd suggest switching to D*, or getting a one receiver system for BTN programming until the end of your E* contract.


----------



## Aransay

we rellyened btn


----------



## Darkman

OK .. if EVEN Aransay said so, then we really DO!


----------



## KCCardsfan

M. Campbell said:


> So does the agreement with AT&T involve Dish or does it only involve their affiliation with D*?


AT&T's agreement is for their U-Verse IPTV, it goes live thursday and will be available in all of their packages in all of the markets where U-Verse is available. U-Verse customers will not have to pay extra for the Big Ten Network unless you want Big Ten-HD, it will be included in the $10 HD package with all the other HD channels, the regular Big Ten channel (SD) is free. The same is true for the NFL network, no extra charge & NFL-HD is included in the HD package.


----------



## iahawks550

Running out of time........


----------



## terfmop

I turned on CSTV tonight and saw that Texas A&M Commerce is playing Pittsburgh State. It's college football and I'll watch it, I'm sure there are other college sports fans out there like me that will do the same. But I bet any other college football fan around the nation would watch a Big Ten matchup, even if it is a '3rd tier' game, over a D2 matchup on CSTV anyday. I also expect a woman's softball game at the level of the B10 would garner higher ratings than a similar D2/D3 showing on CSTV.

Although I enjoy CSTV, I expect the BTN would have a better product all around. Does anyone know the financials of CSTV on E*? Is the BTN asking for a deal that is a significant excess from CSTV?


----------



## James Long

I believe people would watch BTN if they had it. People watch the infomercial channels but probably wouldn't request one sight unseen.

In my mind the "need" to add a channel comes from when people want to watch something that they can't find. Not the random surfer who says they might as well watch it since it is there, but the ones who actually miss the channel.

Some of that "need" has been created by BTN removing content from other media ... perhaps your BT school was televised and those games are now BTN only. Some of that "need" has been created by "marketing" telling people they will be missing something (even if many or most people wouldn't miss BTN at all).

The "marketing" is extra heavy right now ... a lot in the press including on TV about where BTN won't be available. Not so much for the areas where people will get it. Perhaps this station will be missed more by non-viewers than viewed by those who can.


----------



## heisman

James has finally gotten rid of me. I signed up for D* tonight. I called the referral number and they gave me more than the website offer. $10 off for 10 months, $10 off for 5 months, free HD access for one year, free superfan, the free portable dvd/tv, 2 HD DVR's for $199 a piece (that was a tough one), and of course the NFLST/Premiere package deal. The best part is that they are installing me on Saturday morning from 6am to 8am, so I didn't have to miss work, and just in time for the Buckeye game!!!


----------



## James Long

Congrats on your new service. Hopefully the D* installers are not overbooked and don't mess up the appointment (perhaps by oversleeping?).

How many years is the commitment?


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> Congrats on your new service. Hopefully the D* installers are not overbooked and don't mess up the appointment (perhaps by oversleeping?).
> 
> How many years is the commitment?


24 months is the commitment period. I don't mind them oversleeping as long as they have me up and running by 11am. 

GO BUCKS!


----------



## mhowie

heisman said:


> 24 months is the commitment period. I don't mind them oversleeping as long as they have me up and running by 11am.
> 
> GO BUCKS!


I would be very interested to learn how the installation goes and your opinion of the D* service offerings, receiver features and quality, etc., etc.

I may be right behind you as my tolerance for Dish's posturing with every new meaningful channel offering, not to mention refusing to broadcast the Indy locals in HD, has reached a point where I am considering an alternative provider after 11+ years.


----------



## cummingsje

heisman said:


> 24 months is the commitment period. I don't mind them oversleeping as long as they have me up and running by 11am.
> 
> GO BUCKS!


I would also be interested to see how it goes. I may follow suit.


----------



## heisman

mhowie said:


> I would be very interested to learn how the installation goes and your opinion of the D* service offerings, receiver features and quality, etc., etc.
> 
> I may be right behind you as my tolerance for Dish's posturing with every new meaningful channel offering, not to mention refusing to broadcast the Indy locals in HD, has reached a point where I am considering an alternative provider after 11+ years.





cummingsje said:


> I would also be interested to see how it goes. I may follow suit.


I will follow up right after install to let you guys know what I think. But, only if the guy from Flint is rooting for Sparty and not.....


----------



## cummingsje

heisman said:


> I will follow up right after install to let you guys know what I think. But, only if the guy from Flint is rooting for Sparty and not.....


I could lie and tell you GO SPARTY!. . . but I've been a WOLVERINE fan all my life! I will root for MSU though unless they're playing UofM. Hope this does not deter your follow-up posts!!


----------



## heisman

cummingsje said:


> I could lie and tell you GO SPARTY!. . . but I've been a WOLVERINE fan all my life! I will root for MSU though unless they're playing UofM. Hope this does not deter your follow-up posts!!


I had hope since so many Flint guys played for Izzo. I suppose since this century we have owned UM on the gridiron and the hardwood, I will let it slide.


----------



## nmetro

This was just released by The Columbus Dispatch. I also included a little survey result, as well.

As for us DISH subscribers, one can only hope for some last minute miracle. 

Go Bucks!

Nick


Big Ten Network, Insight reach deal
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 4:20 PM
By Bob Baptist
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

The Bucks stop here?
Who's to blame in the battle between the Big Ten Network and cable companies?
49% Big Ten Conference and its new network
13% Cable companies
38% I blame them both.
Thanks for your vote. Be sure to read Bob Baptist's story on the Big Ten Network in Thursday's Dispatch.

The Big Ten Network and Insight Communications reached agreement on a contract today, clearing the way for Insight cable subscribers in central Ohio to watch Ohio State's season-opening football game Saturday in the comfort of their homes.

Ohio State will open the 2007 season against Youngstown State at noon in Ohio Stadium. The game is one of an anticipated three or four Buckeyes games, including Sept. 8 against Akron, that will be carried on the new network.

Insight will carry the Big Ten Network as part of its "classic" service package when the network launches programming at 8 p.m. Thursday. In central Ohio, the network will be available on Channel 24 to subscribers without set-top converters and on Channel 26 to those with converters, Insight spokesman Bob Lau said.

Prior to the agreement, central Ohio fans' only option for watching the game Saturday was via satellite provider DirecTV.

"We are pleased that we have reached a reasonable agreement with the Big Ten Network," Michael Willner, Insight chief executive officer, said in a statement. "We know that our customers who are college sports fans will be very excited to watch their favorite teams."

Insight is the second-largest of three cable providers in central Ohio. The other two, Time Warner and WOW, have not agreed to terms with the Big Ten Network.

In its first year, the network plans to televise 39 Big Ten football games, 140 men's basketball games, 55 women's basketball games and 170 other sports events. At least seven and possibly a dozen or more Ohio State men's basketball games will be shown exclusively on the network.


----------



## DCSholtis

http://www.bigtennetwork.com/news/index.asp?ArticleSource=34



> *Insight Communications today announced it has reached an agreement with the Big Ten Network to carry the channel on its Classic service in Columbus, Ohio and Evansville, Ind. and on its Insight Digital 2.0 service in all of its Kentucky systems, including Louisville, Northern Kentucky, Lexington and Bowling Green.* The network will be launched throughout Kentucky with a two-week promotion on Classic service. The service will be available to approximately 640,000 customers.


----------



## James Long

> *Insight Communications today announced it has reached an agreement with the Big Ten Network to carry the channel on its Classic service in Columbus, Ohio and Evansville, Ind. and on its Insight Digital 2.0 service in all of its Kentucky systems, including Louisville, Northern Kentucky, Lexington and Bowling Green.* The network will be launched throughout Kentucky with a two-week promotion on Classic service. The service will be available to approximately 640,000 customers.


It sounds like it is NOT on the most basic level of service in Kentucky.
Perhaps a crack in the door of the negotiations to allow for non-basic carriage?


----------



## mhowie

James Long said:


> It sounds like it is NOT on the most basic level of service in Kentucky.
> Perhaps a crack in the door of the negotiations to allow for non-basic carriage?


Let's hope!


----------



## WebTraveler

The more and more I think about this, I am glad Dish is sticking to its guns. Once the onsluaght of every conference wanting to be placed nationally takes hold this whole thing will be out of control.


----------



## angiecopus

Well i guess me and mom have made a deal that she walks around ohio states campus while i watch the game saturday in Person. I want BTN to keep fighting to get on Dish Network, Because i see on Sept 8th Miami Of Ohio(which i live 12 miles from) is playing at a Big Ten School. Will some of the Miami of ohio fans get to watch that game no. because Charle Ergin does not have a heart.


----------



## Slamminc11

WebTraveler said:


> The more and more I think about this, I am glad Dish is sticking to its guns. Once the onsluaght of every conference wanting to be placed nationally takes hold this whole thing will be out of control.


Well, at least someone understands the consequences of providers caving to these guys!


----------



## terfmop

WebTraveler said:


> The more and more I think about this, I am glad Dish is sticking to its guns. Once the onsluaght of every conference wanting to be placed nationally takes hold this whole thing will be out of control.


Sounds like a good deal to me. Although I know the Big Ten is the best conference(  )I wouldn't mind seeing some SEC conference games or some PAC 10 teams I rarely get to see.


----------



## msmith198025

terfmop said:


> Sounds like a good deal to me. Although I know the Big Ten is the best conference(  )I wouldn't mind seeing some SEC conference games or some PAC 10 teams I rarely get to see.


HAHAHAHAHA....SEC BABY!

All the talk of every conference getting a network is a little premature. There are only a few that COULD pull it off. The BCS conferences at best.
I seriously doubt a conference usa channel or sun belt is in the works. 
I know the SEC is looking hard at it after the current contracts run out with CBS and ESPN. Most likely what will happen is CBS and ESPN keep contracts with these schools, and overflow games and games that were on LF would be on the network. I think thats the idea with BTN also, just sub in the tv channels that they normally play on


----------



## angiecopus

i see on the ohio state Basketball schedule that most of their home games is on BTN,
and some of the big ten tournement. The Basketball fans will miss out on those games also. Such a shame.


----------



## mhowie

angiecopus said:


> i see on the ohio state Basketball schedule that most of their home games is on BTN,
> and some of the big ten tournement. The Basketball fans will miss out on those games also. Such a shame.


The residents of Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin (sports fans, Dish Network customers) might defect this fall for DirecTV, but Hoosier and Boiler fans will wait until basketball season to see if the BTN has been added to the Dish lineup.


----------



## TBoneit

cb7214 said:


> here is my question, why is E* now so worried about making subscribers pay for a channel they don't want when if you take every channel offered by either D* or E* and i bet you could find just as many people that don't want this or that channel but still end up having to pay for it anyways


Because of the cost of this one channel. Because it is precedent setting. Being afraid of becoming to high priced to compete.

Since D* and E* have national pricing due to national delivery something like BTN is worse for them then for a cable company that only has to pay for it in a limited area. Now if BTN said to carry us you have to put us on all the cable systems you own that would be different.

The difference between DirecTV and Dishnetwork as I see it, and it is an opinion based on my observations. The big difference seems to be a provider comes to D* and says we want this and D* says , What the heck we'll just pass it on. Oh Dear Subscriber by the way "BOHICA".

When Charlie innovated. The Dishplayer 7100 as the first integrated Satellite Box with built-in DVR, D* followed. Charlie first dual tuner dual individual feeds to two TV sets. As I remember it, charlie was easier for Distant locals. When D* finally started offering locals the compression got so bad some channles were not watchable. D* has never been afraid to blow their own horn. Locals causing overcompression is not the only time D* has added content where they really didn't have enough bandwidth. Last years fiasco of removing a channel that more subs had to make room for NFL.


----------



## heisman

mhowie said:


> The residents of Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin (sports fans, Dish Network customers) might defect this fall for DirecTV, but Hoosier and Boiler fans will wait until basketball season to see if the BTN has been added to the Dish lineup.


Put the Illini in that group also. Illinois is definitely a basketball state.


----------



## Ira Lacher

TBoneit said:


> The difference between DirecTV and Dishnetwork as I see it, and it is an opinion based on my observations. The big difference seems to be a provider comes to D* and says we want this and D* says , What the heck we'll just pass it on. Oh Dear Subscriber by the way "BOHICA".


Having been an E* subscriber for 11 years and on the verge of switching to D* (if they can ever come out to do the install!), I think it's simpler than that:

Charlie runs E* the way he wants to -- that means paying what he thinks he should pay and nothing more. He is making decisions based on his wishes, not the wishes of his subscribers, IMHO.


----------



## FTA Michael

I think a lot of people are looking at this thing emotionally, and if they're Big 10 college football fans, that's easy to understand. But I really think that E* is deciding this issue the way I'd guess they decide most of them - with a spreadsheet.

In the old, glory days, it was more about market share, IMHO. E* grabbed lots of new channels to lure lots of new customers to help recoup its satellite investment while ringing up lots of debt. Now E* is paying off that debt, and my guess is that market share isn't that big a factor any more. Which leaves the following question:

How much will the new channel cost E*? (Total, with subs x fees) How many new subs will it bring in?
- - vs.
How many subs will leave without the new channel? How much profit will E* lose as a result?

When E*'s bottom line is better off with a channel than without it, that's when we'll see it added.


----------



## mhowie

TBoneit said:


> The difference between DirecTV and Dishnetwork as I see it, and it is an opinion based on my observations. The big difference seems to be a provider comes to D* and says we want this and D* says , What the heck we'll just pass it on. Oh Dear Subscriber by the way "BOHICA".


But is D* truly passing this along? If so, I would expect their pricing to be much higher than E*'s. Eleven years ago when I became an E* customer, the value proposition was strongly in E*'s favor. I haven't broken down the numbers lately, but I believe the consensus is the two satellite providers are now very comparably priced? If so, that suggests D* is providing more value to its customer base, at least from a programming perspective, than is E*. That is assuming a reasonably equivalent channel offering between the two, save for the channels Charlie has not (will not?) added.


----------



## Guest

heisman said:


> Put the Illini in that group also. Illinois is definitely a basketball state.


So what's the verdict, Heisman? I seem to recall you were going to switch to DirecTV if Dish didn't pick up BTN. Are you making the switch?


----------



## heisman

rcoleman111 said:


> So what's the verdict, Heisman? I seem to recall you were going to switch to DirecTV if Dish didn't pick up BTN. Are you making the switch?


Hey, what's up RC? The verdict is: http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1071842&postcount=370


----------



## Guest

heisman said:


> Hey, what's up RC? The verdict is: http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1071842&postcount=370


Sounds like you got a great deal. Glad to hear you made the switch.


----------



## HobbyTalk

It is obvious why D has the BTN when you look into who some of the big investors are in the BTN.

"When the Big Ten started a television channel with Fox, the league's athletic departments locked in what is believed to be multimillion-dollar cash guarantees that they said served a good cause: less dependence on schools' general funds.

But the partner providing that guaranteed money is Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox, who once famously described sports programming as a "battering ram" for his business interests."


----------



## colavsfaninnwia

mhowie said:


> The residents of Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin (sports fans, Dish Network customers) might defect this fall for DirecTV, but Hoosier and Boiler fans will wait until basketball season to see if the BTN has been added to the Dish lineup.


Leaving Iowa, Minnesota, and Illinios outta the mix eh?


----------



## JohnH

Comcast is running ads saying they have the Big Ten and then they refer to the coverage on ESPN, ABC, etc.

It aln't the same. No Penn State without The Big Ten Network this week.

One does need to remember that in the past with the syndication deals there would be no Penn State either, some weeks.


----------



## angiecopus

Thats How dish Network is responding that they also have Big ten. I feel for all big ten areas that won't get to watch their games.


----------



## gopherscot

For me it will really hit at basketball times .... 17 games on the BTN for Iowa. Hopefully all will be good by then and I won't have to make a decision that I really don't want to make.


----------



## TBoneit

FTA Michael said:


> I think a lot of people are looking at this thing emotionally, and if they're Big 10 college football fans, that's easy to understand. But I really think that E* is deciding this issue the way I'd guess they decide most of them - with a spreadsheet.
> 
> In the old, glory days, it was more about market share, IMHO. E* grabbed lots of new channels to lure lots of new customers to help recoup its satellite investment while ringing up lots of debt. Now E* is paying off that debt, and my guess is that market share isn't that big a factor any more. Which leaves the following question:
> 
> How much will the new channel cost E*? (Total, with subs x fees) How many new subs will it bring in?
> - - vs.
> How many subs will leave without the new channel? How much profit will E* lose as a result?
> 
> When E*'s bottom line is better off with a channel than without it, that's when we'll see it added.


I believe you left out of the equation, the How much will the cost of a programming package rise with the channel and will the new and retained subs be more than the loss if the price rises?

There are probably even more factors we do not know yet. At this point in time Charlie knows what happens when he doesn't get what will be a popular channel, YES in NYC area.

Moving on, Dish gave me what I wanted at the time. Locals from NYC, I'm in that market if anybody cares + LA locals. DirecTV wouldn't budge so I voted. Dishnetwork gave me what I craved after having a Stand Alone Tivo, A Satellite DVR well before DirecTv had one. Maybe I was lucky but my two 7100 DVRs were reliable and after I upgraded the drives held enough. I'm still using one to this day for overflow. It works better than ever. It runs cool and very quiet since I changed out the old 3.5" hdd for a laptop drive.

So I guess my mental balance sheet says to me E* is better and I have more available to watch that I'd watch if I had the time.

BTW hows the weather up inthe Quad Cities? From Someone with family downriver in Muscatine and thinking of moving back. Costs here in NJ are atrocious. My yougest Brother is now paying less a year for property taxes than he used to pay for a quarter in NJ.


----------



## gopherscot

TBoneit said:


> I believe you left out of the equation, the How much will the cost of a programming package rise with the channel and will the new and retained subs be more than the loss if the price rises?
> 
> There are probably even more factors we do not know yet. At this point in time Charlie knows what happens when he doesn't get what will be a popular channel, YES in NYC area.
> 
> Moving on, Dish gave me what I wanted at the time. Locals from NYC, I'm in that market if anybody cares + LA locals. DirecTV wouldn't budge so I voted. Dishnetwork gave me what I craved after having a Stand Alone Tivo, A Satellite DVR well before DirecTv had one. Maybe I was lucky but my two 7100 DVRs were reliable and after I upgraded the drives held enough. I'm still using one to this day for overflow. It works better than ever. It runs cool and very quiet since I changed out the old 3.5" hdd for a laptop drive.
> 
> So I guess my mental balance sheet says to me E* is better and I have more available to watch that I'd watch if I had the time.
> 
> BTW hows the weather up inthe Quad Cities? From Someone with family downriver in Muscatine and thinking of moving back. Costs here in NJ are atrocious. My yougest Brother is now paying less a year for property taxes than he used to pay for a quarter in NJ.


Things are great here ... 78 degrees today and no humidity. My favorite time of the year. Yes it is hard to beat this area for costs. My $350,00 house would be at least double that in Chicago. Love, being a sports fan, the three RSN's available for me as well. I get Comcast Chicago, Fox North, and Fox Midwest with the multi sports package .... all with no blackouts. All I need now is the BTN to make me never even dream of changing. Glad to hear from another Iowan.


----------



## Paul Secic

James Long said:


> It sounds like it is NOT on the most basic level of service in Kentucky.
> Perhaps a crack in the door of the negotiations to allow for non-basic carriage?


Classic is a cut above basic, at least with Comcast..


----------



## Codeman00

I hate that I have to check this board every day. I'm missing six Big Ten games tomorrow because of Charlie's standoff. Thanks pal. At least my game is on the U tomorrow...but still its a lot of football that I usually get to see that I will have to miss.

Thanks Charlie!


----------



## scooper

Codeman00 said:


> I hate that I have to check this board every day. I'm missing six Big Ten games tomorrow because of Charlie's standoff. Thanks pal. At least my game is on the U tomorrow...but still its a lot of football that I usually get to see that I will have to miss.
> 
> Thanks Charlie!


Why don't you thank BTN for changing it ?


----------



## Codeman00

scooper said:


> Why don't you thank BTN for changing it ?


I think the BTN is a great idea personally so I won't blame them. I used to drop $100 per year on ESPN Game Plan and hope to get my Purdue games televised. Sometimes it worked out but many times the games would be available on ESPN or ABC so I just wasted $$. A couple of football games a year wouldn't get televised at all or would be placed on ESPN360 internet feed.

At least now with the BTN, every Big Ten basketball and football game will be televised and that's a HUGE step as far as I'm concerned. It's out there, Charlie just won't deliver it to us.


----------



## colavsfaninnwia

gopherscot said:


> Things are great here ... 78 degrees today and no humidity. My favorite time of the year. Yes it is hard to beat this area for costs. My $350,00 house would be at least double that in Chicago. Love, being a sports fan, the three RSN's available for me as well. I get Comcast Chicago, Fox North, and Fox Midwest with the multi sports package .... all with no blackouts. All I need now is the BTN to make me never even dream of changing. Glad to hear from another Iowan.


Another Iowan that enjoys the multi-sport package, and the extra games that come with it. I would also enjoy Big Ten Network, but I will probably miss the season opener for my Gophers


----------



## angiecopus

and next weekend the Miami of ohio redhawks play the Gophers in minnesota, i only live 12 miles away from oxford, will i get to see it NO, because of Greedy people Like Charlie Ergen


----------



## skizer

angiecopus said:


> and next weekend the Miami of ohio redhawks play the Gophers in minnesota, i only live 12 miles away from oxford, will i get to see it NO, because of Greedy people Like Charlie Ergen


cause it's not all about the money for the Big 10???


----------



## norton54

If I had to blame anybody in this mess it would the BTN. But I guess it doesn't really matter as the only games I usually get to see anyway are the drubbings the Hoosiers get by the likes of Ohio State or Michigan on network TV. But basketball is a different matter. If Dish doesn't have it by basketball season I'm switching to DirectTV .


----------



## Codeman00

norton54 said:


> But basketball is a different matter. If Dish doesn't have it by basketball season I'm switching to DirectTV .


Exactly what I'm thinking!


----------



## Michael P

Last night WEWS ch 5 in Cleveland announced that BTN is available on Direct TV *and* Dish Network?!?

Someone on their news research staff must have seen the BS news release that E* put out and not got a bunch of subscribers excited for nothing.


----------



## TBoneit

angiecopus said:


> and next weekend the Miami of ohio redhawks play the Gophers in minnesota, i only live 12 miles away from oxford, will i get to see it NO, because of Greedy people Like Charlie Ergen


Despite the Pious posturing BTN about wanting a low tier to be available for all. It is really about the money. If they cared about the fan they would have amuch lower cost. IMHO of course.


----------



## Slamminc11

Michael P said:


> Last night WEWS ch 5 in Cleveland announced that BTN is available on Direct TV *and* Dish Network?!?
> 
> Someone on their news research staff must have seen the BS news release that E* put out and not got a bunch of subscribers excited for nothing.


I guess they missed the news release that Comcast sent out a day or two after Dish saying the same thing. 
What exactly Did Dish that was BS?


----------



## lionsrule

The worst part of not having the BTN right now is that I CAN watch my spartans destroy UAB 42-3 so far, but I can't watch THE BIGGEST UPSET IN MICHIGAN HISTORY!!!!! Go appy state!!! 21-14 in the 2nd


----------



## lionsrule

.....make that 28-14. This will be the greatest college football season ever!! I can't wait to see michigan fans wearing their maize/blue in shame!! Losing to a former DIVISION II team.


----------



## BigBuckeyeFan

heisman said:


> U-Verse will be available to most in the Big Ten states by the end of next year for those who don't have LOS for sat's.


Don't bother. I have U-verse, U-verse carries the Big Ten Network... but blacks out the games in the states where those schools are.

Do not adjust your eyes; you read that right. DirecTV subscribers here are able to see the Ohio State/Youngstown State game that's on right now, but U-verse subscribers are stuck with the Michigan game. Calls have been flooding into the AT&T call center, and the response they are getting, even from management, is that "we aren't permitted to show Ohio State games in Ohio, we have to black those out."

Read about it at uverse users dot com, go to the Ohio discussion area. (Apparently I can't make urls here until I've posted five times, and this is my first post.)


----------



## db2

I agree lionsrule

The multiple feeds is a huge deal. This is another reason I support the BTN's existance. EVERY GAME is on tv. Not just the ones ESPN decides to show you.


----------



## nmetro

Well, as we are now at half time for the first round of BTN games, the pot is beginning to boil. What could be the biggest upset in Michigan history is playing out on a few small cable TV systems, DirectTV and U-verse, unless you live in Michigan.

Meanwhile, Ohio State has dropped Gametracker for another stat package that is not working. 1460 The Fan is charging for their internet stream and Dish has no BTN. While the Buckeyes should be able to ice a victory. Not being able to see what happens to Michigan could trigger a larger fan backlash against Dish, BTN and the Big 10.

Isn't greed great?


----------



## heisman

I got my new D* service installed today. Brutal, and I mean brutal install. I will explain the details later, but a supervisor is on his way over right now. Horrid, and I mean horrid HD DVR. It's incredibly feature lacking and extremely tough to navigate. Picture format modes are just awful as well. I would kill for an advanced machine like the VIP622 right now. Well, at least I got BTN and NFLST going for me! (but M-F is going to be tough!)


----------



## Camman41

Are the BTN games in HD anywhere on *D? The highlights on ESPNHD are in HD on all the BTN games that started at noon. How are they receiving them in Bristol, Conn.? Are we consumers going to get them in HD before D10 lights up?


----------



## James Long

heisman said:


> I got my new D* service installed today. Brutal, and I mean brutal install. I will explain the details later, but a supervisor is on his way over right now. Horrid, and I mean horrid HD DVR. It's incredibly feature lacking and extremely tough to navigate. Picture format modes are just awful as well. I would kill for an advanced machine like the VIP622 right now. Well, at least I got BTN and NFLST going for me! (but M-F is going to be tough!)


:lol: (couldn't resist - I'll try harder next time)



Camman41 said:


> Are the BTN games in HD anywhere on *D? The highlights on ESPNHD are in HD on all the BTN games that started at noon. How are they receiving them in Bristol, Conn.? Are we consumers going to get them in HD before D10 lights up?


There was the thought that BTN in HD would be available this weekend ... check the D* forums.


----------



## Michael P

Slamminc11 said:


> I guess they missed the news release that Comcast sent out a day or two after Dish saying the same thing.
> What exactly Did Dish that was BS?


The headlines on these press releases are misleading. That is what I call BS.
See Post #308:
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=1063965&postcount=308
Basically E* (and now Comcast as well) have released BS Press releases with a headline that suggests that they have "Big 10" and then list the few Big 10 games that are being carried on networks other than BTN.


----------



## James Long

BTN started it by releasing statements that make it sound like there will be NO Big 10 games on TV without BTN. The reality is BTN does not have first choice ... the better games (more popular matches - games most people want to see) WILL NOT be on BTN.

If someone is going to waive the "BS" flag they should look toward BTN.


----------



## Michael P

James Long said:


> BTN started it by releasing statements that make it sound like there will be NO Big 10 games on TV without BTN. The reality is BTN does not have first choice ... the better games (more popular matches - games most people want to see) WILL NOT be on BTN.
> 
> If someone is going to waive the "BS" flag they should look toward BTN.


There is plenty of BS to go around on both sides.

BTN should stop trying to get on a basic tier with the $1.10 price tag.
They can't have it both ways. Either lower the price or accept being put on a "sports tier" (which is where they belong). Those of you that disagree want Grandma to subsidize your college football viewing habit.

Watch out or someone will get the Government involved, then everything will get screwed up. We'll end up with a pure a-la carte system where the equivilent of top-200 will cost $75.00


----------



## heisman

James Long said:


> :lol: (couldn't resist - I'll try harder next time)


I'm a grown man. The reason I posted my experience was to help others and take the abuse I deserve. 

edit: it was all worth it to watch Michigan, well.....SUCK!!!!!


----------



## James Long

Final Michigan score made the game look better 34-32 ...
The fans at Notre Dame stadium love the outcome!


----------



## terfmop

I guess I'll watch a "3rd tier" game anytime. Way to go App. State!


----------



## spdmonkey

Unfortunately it just helps the BTN's argument that these are not second or third tier games. I can just see Gordon Gee going on and on about how App St was the greatest game ever played in Michigan Stadium.....makes me want to barf. I will wait until sell it for $.25 a sub and Charlie bites.

Dave


----------



## angiecopus

and so did the fans at Ohio State, There were several people with BTN shirts on a before the Ohio state game today and alot of fans including myself signed petitions to get Btn on our cable and satillite.


----------



## nmetro

I do not know if Gordan Gee is going to go that far. It is long road to the Ohio State - Michigan game. At least the Bucks took care of YSU 38 -6.

As for App. State defeating Michigan, well the shock is going to be there fo a while. The BTN issue sure limited the audience to seeing history. In the past, this game would have ended up on ESPN Classic, but BTN has exclusive rights. I am surprised that ESPN was allowed to show highlights while the game was going on. 

Let's just hope the BTN situation gets settled soon or things will start to get dicey. As mentioned earlier, they are getting a large black eye over this entire mess. Folks in Ann Arbor were not too thrilled with the Comcast - BTN war of words. Now they have more to scream about.

BTW, the Wisconsin - Washington State game is being aired in ESPNA (channel 145) as part of the BTN/ABC/ESPN agreement. Let's hope this agreement continues.

I think it is time for the CEOs of our media company grow up and do what is right. Putting the fans in the middle show lack of backbone, maturity and professionalism on their part.


----------



## msmith198025

I hate that those with dish couldnt see it, it really was a GREAT game!


----------



## Codeman00

I was sitting on my couch today for the first time in years having only one Big Ten game to watch (MSU vs UAB). It was a blowout by the end of the first quarter and I was so curious to what was happening with the other 4 games. I kept seeing that ASU was not only staying with Michigan, they were beating Michigan. About halfway through the second quarter, I finally took off to Buffalo Wild Wings to watch football by myself. 

BWW was very PROUD lets say of the Big Ten Network. There was a Big Ten game on every TV in the place...and I live in Tennessee. They know that its a big deal to have the BTN. 

Well, I'm glad that I didn't miss the game...now I just wish Charlie would reimburse me for the food and $6 beer at BWW when I should have been watching the BTN at home on Dish.

Thanks again Charlie! Oh yeah...and congrats ASU !


----------



## angiecopus

Thank goodness for my fathers Tickets to ALL the home games, when my brother cannot go to a game or has tickets for a game I get to go. All that i am worried about is the Basketball season, I have been hooked on The Buckeye basketball team, and we don't have tickets for that.


----------



## heisman

For all those interested in switching from E* to D* for BTN, I will give you the lowdown. First of all, the installation was a nightmare. I asked the young urban youth sent to my home to put the dish in a certain spot. He said, it couldn't be done. I showed him how to do it, he refused. Alrighty then! I let him go about his business, and then as soon as he left, I called D* and explained the situation. Within an hour a supervisor (from the reseller) was at my door, and basically said that I was on the money and they would send someone out within the hour to fix it. He also mentioned his worker didn't ground the dish, so they would do that as well. I got a call in about 2 hours and they said they couldn't come out until tomorrow morning. I agreed, but called D* again to explain how I was not happy about the situation. They did give me a $50 bill credit for my troubles, which I think is pretty fair, as long as they fix the problem tomorrow.

As far as the equipment goes, I will only advise those currently using a VIP622, that they had really better *LOVE* their favorite Big Ten team like I do to switch to an HR-20. I can best describe my feelings towards the Buckeyes like this: I'm an OSU alum, I give money to the alumni fund, I attend at least 3 games a year in person, etc., etc. I don't miss Buckeye games! The HR-20 is light years behind the VIP622. The HR-20 does not allow you to change the picture format on an HD channel. The HR-20 does not have PIP. The HR-20 does not have DLB. The HR-20 does not have a live tv button. The remote is archaic (at best). In other words, it's tough to find the dvr buttons and figure out what they do, unlike the VIP622 remote's interface which flows so well and is so easy to figure out, even a caveman could do it.  The one feature the HR-20 has over the VIP is a native setting, which I really like.

As far as picture quality goes, D*'s SD looks much better than E*'s SD. This actually came as quite a shocker to me, but nonetheless, it was a very pleasant surprise. I found the HD quality on both to be very similar, but I would give a slight edge to E*, as I have noticed a few more artifacts on D*'s HD. The difference in HD was not nearly as great in the improvement of my SD channels after the switch.

In summation, if you really love the 622 as I do, it will definitely take some time to get used to D*'s inferior equipment offering. Actually, inferior might be way too kind a word. I'm very happy with the improved SD picture on D*, and I certainly loved watching the Buckeye victory, but not nearly as much as I enjoyed watching Michigan lose to a D2 school. :lol: :lol: :lol: If D*'s future HD offering is as impressive as advertised then I will probably never look back. But if they underdeliver on their HD promises, then I will be pining away for my 622 for a long long time.


----------



## paja

For those of us who could care less about getting BTN. Who would want to watch the games of teams that can't even beat 1-AA teams. Michigan-WHAT A JOKE!!:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## heisman

paja said:


> For those of us who could care less about getting BTN. Who would want to watch the games of teams that can't even beat 1-AA teams. Michigan-WHAT A JOKE!!:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


I can't figure out which I enjoyed more, scUM losing to a D2 team, or Notre Ame getting absolutely slobber-knockered at home by 30 points! It was a great day in college football!


----------



## jhamps10

James Long said:


> Final Michigan score made the game look better 34-32 ...
> The fans at Notre Dame stadium love the outcome!


the fans at the Edward Jones dome gave that score a big time cheer, and a good laugh as well, you could actually hear the fans laughing on ESPN.


----------



## James Long

terfmop said:


> I guess I'll watch a "3rd tier" game anytime. Way to go App. State!


Every once in a while people get surprised. Why did those with first pick not bother with the game? It was an unexpected outcome.



jhamps10 said:


> the fans at the Edward Jones dome gave that score a big time cheer, and a good laugh as well, you could actually hear the fans laughing on ESPN.


Unfortunately ND fans didn't have much more to cheer about. I wonder how many more "second thought" questions Charlie will have to answer this week plus questions about who the QB will be for next week's game (or if he'll try to use all three again).


----------



## angiecopus

paja said:


> For those of us who could care less about getting BTN. Who would want to watch the games of teams that can't even beat 1-AA teams. Michigan-WHAT A JOKE!!:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Please tell that to the Miami of Ohio Fans who will not get to watch their football game against the Golden Gophers which is on BTN. i am sorry that some of you feel like BTN is a waste of time, but to those who are die hard football fans who are not able to make the trips to see their fave Big Ten teams play and who do not like going to sports bars, i really feel for them Not everyone Can go and sit and watch a football game in person.

Well if you don't like a channel Don't watch it, and don't criticize those who want to have a Channel that they could sit and watch if they are not able to go out and see the games in person.


----------



## scooper

You don't seem to realize a couple of points - 

#1 - BTN WOULD affect the rest of us just in terms of bandwidth
#2 - If BTN is successful by getting forced on, how soon do you think it will be before OTHER conferences want to do THEIR own networks, at the same terms / conditions BTN is getting ? BTW - that would ALSO have a negative impact on YOU watching your "beloved" BTN...
#3 - Dish didn't cause you to not be able to watch your games - BTN did. There had been a means before BTN so your local broadcasters could show the games...


----------



## Hound

heisman said:


> For all those interested in switching from E* to D* for BTN, I will give you the lowdown. First of all, the installation was a nightmare. I asked the young urban youth sent to my home to put the dish in a certain spot. He said, it couldn't be done. I showed him how to do it, he refused. Alrighty then! I let him go about his business, and then as soon as he left, I called D* and explained the situation. Within an hour a supervisor (from the reseller) was at my door, and basically said that I was on the money and they would send someone out within the hour to fix it. He also mentioned his worker didn't ground the dish, so they would do that as well. I got a call in about 2 hours and they said they couldn't come out until tomorrow morning. I agreed, but called D* again to explain how I was not happy about the situation. They did give me a $50 bill credit for my troubles, which I think is pretty fair, as long as they fix the problem tomorrow.
> 
> As far as the equipment goes, I will only advise those currently using a VIP622, that they had really better *LOVE* their favorite Big Ten team like I do to switch to an HR-20. I can best describe my feelings towards the Buckeyes like this: I'm an OSU alum, I give money to the alumni fund, I attend at least 3 games a year in person, etc., etc. I don't miss Buckeye games! The HR-20 is light years behind the VIP622. The HR-20 does not allow you to change the picture format on an HD channel. The HR-20 does not have PIP. The HR-20 does not have DLB. The HR-20 does not have a live tv button. The remote is archaic (at best). In other words, it's tough to find the dvr buttons and figure out what they do, unlike the VIP622 remote's interface which flows so well and is so easy to figure out, even a caveman could do it.  The one feature the HR-20 has over the VIP is a native setting, which I really like.
> 
> As far as picture quality goes, D*'s SD looks much better than E*'s SD. This actually came as quite a shocker to me, but nonetheless, it was a very pleasant surprise. I found the HD quality on both to be very similar, but I would give a slight edge to E*, as I have noticed a few more artifacts on D*'s HD. The difference in HD was not nearly as great in the improvement of my SD channels after the switch.
> 
> In summation, if you really love the 622 as I do, it will definitely take some time to get used to D*'s inferior equipment offering. Actually, inferior might be way too kind a word. I'm very happy with the improved SD picture on D*, and I certainly loved watching the Buckeye victory, but not nearly as much as I enjoyed watching Michigan lose to a D2 school. :lol: :lol: :lol: If D*'s future HD offering is as impressive as advertised then I will probably never look back. But if they underdeliver on their HD promises, then I will be pining away for my 622 for a long long time.


That is a good recap of the pros and cons. I saw four new Directv installs within
a one mile radius of my house this week (maybe BTN, Sunday Ticket or all the
new HD in mid September?). I agree with your analysis of HD PQ quality after
looking at D*s HD picture at a friend's house and on the exact same 65" 1080P
TV that I own, at Magnolia's (in Best Buy). In the end, the sub goes with who
has the content that they really want to see. The HD PQ is very close. The content signs the subs. Right now I am sticking with two cable providers (Verizon and Patriot Media soon to be Comcast) because they have some content that neither E* or D* provides. My 18 month E* commitment expired about two weeks ago, and E* has called me with offers to come back and no commitment, if I use my owned 622. I will wait and see who has TBS HD for October 3rd.


----------



## HobbyTalk

For all you B10 fanboys... here is a BTN/Fox low blow for football fans that aren't even part of the B10. Shows you just how little they care about you, the football fan. From http://www.mediacomcc.com/big_ten_story.html

Mediacom Communications Corporation announced today that Fox Cable Networks has denied requests made by Mediacom and Iowa State University to televise this evening's football game between the Iowa State Cyclones and the Kent State Golden Flashes because Mediacom has not agreed to launch the Big Ten Network at prices and on terms demanded by Fox.

Fox is utilizing deplorable anti-competitive tactics by depriving Iowa State students, alumni and fans their football season opener on cable television. Given that Iowa State is not a member of the Big Ten Conference, Cyclone fans should not be used as pawns in the Big Ten Network negotiations. We believe that Mediacom customers, particularly Cyclone supporters, will be outraged once they become aware that they are being held hostage to the unilateral demands of Fox," said Ed Pardini, Senior Vice President of Mediacom's North Central Division.

As a member of the Big Twelve Conference, Iowa State games compete for television viewers with those of the Big Ten Conference and its member schools, including the University of Iowa. Had Fox granted Mediacom the right to televise the Iowa State vs. Kent State game, it would have competed directly with the scheduled launch tonight of the Big Ten Network.


----------



## DCSholtis

Mediacom and ISU should THANK Fox for not allowing them to show that debacle!!


----------



## gopherscot

DCSholtis said:


> Mediacom and ISU should THANK Fox for not allowing them to show that debacle!!


What do you mean? It was one of the best games of the year! The ISU cheerleaders were grazing on the sideline and as bad a game as it was they couldn't udder anything except ... I wish we could be Hawkeyes!! :hurah: :hurah: :hurah:


----------



## Guest

heisman said:


> For all those interested in switching from E* to D* for BTN, I will give you the lowdown. First of all, the installation was a nightmare.


Installations always seem to be a crapshoot. When I had my dish upgraded to 5-LNB to get the HD stuff, the installer didn't want to go to the trouble of re-mounting the dish on the roof to clear the pine trees next door, and I found out after he left that I wasn't getting any of the channels on the 119 satellite. The second installer was much better - he spent about two hours and did the job right.

The HR20 does take some getting used to if you've been using another DVR. And while there are a couple of notable features missing, I think you'll find it will do most of what you can do with other DVRs. And who knows? Maybe DLB or PIP will be added in a future upgrade. The autocorrection feature was only added a few weeks ago. It's true some of the features aren't as intuitive as they should be - e.g., the Exit button takes you to live TV instead of a Live button. You might want to download the "HR20 Tips and Tricks" document that is available in this forum.


----------



## MarkoC

I can't believe I don't have BTN! My god I missed Minnesota lose to Bowling Green in SD! Charlie better hurry up and get this channel or . . .


----------



## scooper

MarkoC said:


> I can't believe I don't have BTN! My god I missed Minnesota lose to Bowling Green in SD! Charlie better hurry up and get this channel or . . .


You'll change to DirectTV which DOES have the channel ?
Please do....


----------



## angiecopus

i saw my father looking at an ad for Direct TV today, but i doubt he will switch, i know a couple in my church who just switched to direct tv, so who knows.


----------



## heisman

rcoleman111 said:


> Installations always seem to be a crapshoot. When I had my dish upgraded to 5-LNB to get the HD stuff, the installer didn't want to go to the trouble of re-mounting the dish on the roof to clear the pine trees next door, and I found out after he left that I wasn't getting any of the channels on the 119 satellite. The second installer was much better - he spent about two hours and did the job right.
> 
> The HR20 does take some getting used to if you've been using another DVR. And while there are a couple of notable features missing, I think you'll find it will do most of what you can do with other DVRs. And who knows? Maybe DLB or PIP will be added in a future upgrade. The autocorrection feature was only added a few weeks ago. It's true some of the features aren't as intuitive as they should be - e.g., the Exit button takes you to live TV instead of a Live button. You might want to download the "HR20 Tips and Tricks" document that is available in this forum.


I totally agree with the installation crapshoot. I wasn't discounting D* because of it, I was just telling my experience. If anything, D* showed me what they were made of during the experience. They originally gave me a $50 credit for arriving late, but then when he didn't show up again this morning, they gave me another $100 credit, and a supervisor showed up and fixed it himself--perfectly placed I might add. So, I'm basically getting my first 2 months of service for free for not too much inconvenience. I couldn't be happier with the way it turned out in the end.

The SD picture quality is leaps and bounds better than E*, and I'm getting BTN, which I just love as an overall channel so far. I'm also getting all the NFL games in HD for free, which is an added bonus. I couldn't be happier with my switch when it comes to picture quality and channel content, not to mention how impressed I am with D*'s customer service. But, I am not going to dummy down, or spin positive about the HD DVR. It is a brutally archaic machine that rivals that awful Motorola product I had with Comcast. It just isn't user friendly and lacks so many of the basic features of the 622, not to mention the advanced ones. In a perfect world, I could have my old equipment with my new service, but if it was a perfect world, it would be called JesusTv.  The bottom line is that I'm very happy I switched, and I'll learn to live with the HR-20 (someday!).


----------



## BigBuckeyeFan

Michael P said:


> There is plenty of BS to go around on both sides.
> 
> BTN should stop trying to get on a basic tier with the $1.10 price tag.
> They can't have it both ways. Either lower the price or accept being put on a "sports tier" (which is where they belong). Those of you that disagree want Grandma to subsidize your college football viewing habit.
> 
> Watch out or someone will get the Government involved, then everything will get screwed up. We'll end up with a pure a-la carte system where the equivilent of top-200 will cost $75.00


At this rate, I'd be ecstatic to have an a la carte system. Right now, I pay through the nose for a boatload of channels I never watch in order to get the 20 or so that I actually do watch, and I _still_ can't watch the games I want half the time.


----------



## MarkoC

scooper said:


> You'll change to DirectTV which DOES have the channel ?
> Please do....


I guess sarcasm is lost on you.

Why would I switch to DirecTv - just so I can see a game like the Minnesota/Bowling Green game in SD?


----------



## BigBuckeyeFan

HobbyTalk said:


> Mediacom Communications Corporation announced today that Fox Cable Networks has denied requests made by Mediacom and Iowa State University to televise this evening's football game between the Iowa State Cyclones and the Kent State Golden Flashes because Mediacom has not agreed to launch the Big Ten Network at prices and on terms demanded by Fox.


I don't get this. From the article:



> _In Iowa, Mediacom routinely utilizes the Mediacom Connections Channel to offer unique sports programming to its customers at no additional cost. In fact, this Saturday Mediacom will televise the football season opener between the University of Iowa Hawkeyes and the Northern Illinois Huskies on the Connections Channel. Unlike 2006, Fox this year has refused to permit Mediacom to televise Iowa State's first football game.
> 
> As a member of the Big Twelve Conference, Iowa State games compete for television viewers with those of the Big Ten Conference and its member schools, including the University of Iowa. Had Fox granted Mediacom the right to televise the Iowa State vs. Kent State game, it would have competed directly with the scheduled launch tonight of the Big Ten Network. _


Okay, so Mediacom hasn't inked a deal to carry BTN, correct? And Mediacom has its own channel that normally would carry the Iowa State game, and - since there is currently no deal with BTN - who cares what it would conflict with? So why does Mediacom *need* Fox's permission to use Mediacom's own conduit to carry the Iowa State game in the first place?

What exactly is missing in this story?


----------



## convem24

heisman said:


> I totally agree with the installation crapshoot. I wasn't discounting D* because of it, I was just telling my experience. If anything, D* showed me what they were made of during the experience. They originally gave me a $50 credit for arriving late, but then when he didn't show up again this morning, they gave me another $100 credit, and a supervisor showed up and fixed it himself--perfectly placed I might add. So, I'm basically getting my first 2 months of service for free for not too much inconvenience. I couldn't be happier with the way it turned out in the end.
> 
> The SD picture quality is leaps and bounds better than E*, and I'm getting BTN, which I just love as an overall channel so far. I'm also getting all the NFL games in HD for free, which is an added bonus. I couldn't be happier with my switch when it comes to picture quality and channel content, not to mention how impressed I am with D*'s customer service. But, I am not going to dummy down, or spin positive about the HD DVR. It is a brutally archaic machine that rivals that awful Motorola product I had with Comcast. It just isn't user friendly and lacks so many of the basic features of the 622, not to mention the advanced ones. In a perfect world, I could have my old equipment with my new service, but if it was a perfect world, it would be called JesusTv.  The bottom line is that I'm very happy I switched, and I'll learn to live with the HR-20 (someday!).


Did you get the newest updates for the HR20? There is an autocorrect fast forward features (for those times you overshoot the show after commercials) and the external sata connection to get additional storage space on the HR20. I have played with the 622 and both have their highs and lows. I have been very happy with my HR20 and more improvement like D* on demand are coming! E* has lacked getting their on demand feature moving yet from what I have read.


----------



## Guest

Michael P said:


> Watch out or someone will get the Government involved, then everything will get screwed up. We'll end up with a pure a-la carte system where the equivilent of top-200 will cost $75.00


Remember why the NFL stopped blacking out sold-out games? It was because the government got involved and told them they couldn't do it any more. Without that legislation, it is likely that all home games would still be blacked out. Regulation isn't always a bad thing.


----------



## scooper

MarkoC said:


> I guess sarcasm is lost on you.
> 
> Why would I switch to DirecTv - just so I can see a game like the Minnesota/Bowling Green game in SD?


No - I guess sarcasm is lost on you .

If you can't get some programming on one source, but it is available on another - switch and quit your *****ing.


----------



## gopherscot

scooper said:


> No - I guess sarcasm is lost on you .
> 
> If you can't get some programming on one source, but it is available on another - switch and quit your *****ing.


You really don't get it Scooper! He was joking about wanting it! I know this is really hard to understand for you! We also know your view ... you don't want the BTN so stop *****ing about it and go to another thread. See yah!


----------



## HobbyTalk

BigBuckeyeFan said:


> What exactly is missing in this story?


Officials said Fox, which has rights to Big 12 Conference telecasts and had granted approval in past seasons, denied the request.


----------



## heisman

HobbyTalk said:


> Officials said Fox, which has rights to Big 12 Conference telecasts and had granted approval in past seasons, denied the request.


My advice to Mediacom is to pick up BTN ASAP!


----------



## nmetro

439 TEMP ADDED TO Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w MPEG2 SD

9853 TST76 MPEG2 SD REMOVED FROM Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w

Let the speculation begin. Is it YES or BTN?


----------



## Codeman00

nmetro said:


> 439 TEMP ADDED TO Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w MPEG2 SD
> 
> 9853 TST76 MPEG2 SD REMOVED FROM Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w
> 
> Let the speculation begin. Is it YES or BTN?


Interesting....


----------



## terfmop

nmetro said:


> 439 TEMP ADDED TO Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w MPEG2 SD
> 
> 9853 TST76 MPEG2 SD REMOVED FROM Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w
> 
> Let the speculation begin. Is it YES or BTN?


I have no idea ....can someone translate or me


----------



## nmetro

Channel 439 is in the range of Regional Sports Networks. Before DISH activates a channel, it is uplinked as a test feed. Once they have completed an agreement with a new provider, the channel is activated for subscribers.

So, in this case, it is possible that DISH is activating a new RSN or BTN.


----------



## Aransay

btn itymsut be 
ofcurse i repfer yes or teh rother regionals but it semto be big ten


----------



## angiecopus

We can only hope.


----------



## JaguarJoJo

nmetro said:


> Channel 439 is in the range of Regional Sports Networks. Before DISH activates a channel, it is uplinked as a test feed. Once they have completed an agreement with a new provider, the channel is activated for subscribers.
> 
> So, in this case, it is possible that DISH is activating a new RSN or BTN.


There are five Big Ten games being carried Saturday at Noon on the BTN--does that sound like the BTN is a single channel? It is at least five SD channels, plus whatever HD ones are included. You can forget about getting the BTN this year. I'll give them this year because I am heavily invested in Dish, but come next year, no BTN means hasta lavista to Dish from this user.

JoJo


----------



## brunnegd

As I understand it, Fox owns part of Direct TV, as well as a financial stake in BTN. As a marketing ploy, Fox may be able to force Dish to pay the full $1.10 to carry BTN, which they are reluctant to do. As it is an additional cost to add to the basic level of stations. And could force a rate increase. All designed by Fox and Direct to pull members from Dish to Direct in the midwest. It would be interesting to know how much the Columbus area cable paid at the last minute to carry the 9/1 OSU game.
I am doubtful that Dish will carry BTN this year.:nono2:


----------



## nmetro

According to The Columbus Dispatch, Insight Communications paid $1.10/subscriber. Warner and Wow! have yet to come to terms, as of today.

Let's hope DISH will activate BTN on 439 before this Saturday's games.


----------



## nmetro

JaguarJoJo said:


> There are five Big Ten games being carried Saturday at Noon on the BTN--does that sound like the BTN is a single channel? It is at least five SD channels, plus whatever HD ones are included. You can forget about getting the BTN this year. I'll give them this year because I am heavily invested in Dish, but come next year, no BTN means hasta lavista to Dish from this user.
> 
> JoJo


It could be possible to test the main channel, but activate addition feeds in the Sports PPV or ALT channels, when BTN is active.


----------



## Lord Vader

brunnegd said:


> As I understand it, Fox owns part of Direct TV...


They used to. Murdoch wanted out so he sold to the folks at Liberty.


----------



## James Long

Last I checked the sale was not yet complete.

Back to the BTN ...


----------



## angiecopus

Well at least espn will carry the ohio state-washington game on the 15th if that makes any ohio state fans feel better.


----------



## Aransay

439 TEMP ADDED TO Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w MPEG2 SD


codfnirmed to eb big ten entork


----------



## M. Campbell

Aransay said:


> 439 TEMP ADDED TO Tp 19 on EchoStar 8 at 110w MPEG2 SD
> 
> codfnirmed to eb big ten entork


Confirmed where and by who? Just curious.


----------



## FTA Michael

In another thread, Aransay said a friend told him about it. If I read it correctly.


----------



## Aransay

yes


----------



## tsduke

How is this friend in the "know"?


----------



## M. Campbell

FTA Michael said:


> In another thread, Aransay said a friend told him about it. If I read it correctly.


Okay, I just read that. I am doubting the information without any background.


----------



## James Long

I'm remembering how long Logo and other channels have been uplinked and never seen a subscriber's screen. How long did it take to add Oxygen? Where is "InHD"? (Now renamed, but not on satellite.)

Uplinked does not guarantee carriage. E*'s just playing with their receivers and transponders "just in case" there is a deal. It makes it easier to say "we can have you on our system tonight" at the negotiating table. But there is no guarantee "tonight" will ever come.


----------



## projectorguru

ok so still no BIG TEN? or am I in the wrong thread?


----------



## nmetro

projectorguru said:


> ok so still no BIG TEN? or am I in the wrong thread?


This is the right thread. BTN is not active yet or if at all on DISH Network. The testing by DISH on channel 439 indicates the possibility they could be testing Big Ten Network, according to previous posts in this thread and the Uplink Activity for the week of 09-04-2007 thread. This is just one of those things that we have to wait and see on.


----------



## jhamps10

more potential good news for us in an updated uplink today.

440 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)
441 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)
442 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)
443 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)

All right above 439 uplinked yesterday or early this morning.... not saying we see it today or tomorrow, but I feel much better that we will see BTN sooner rather than later.


----------



## garn9173

BigBuckeyeFan said:


> I don't get this. From the article:
> 
> Okay, so Mediacom hasn't inked a deal to carry BTN, correct? And Mediacom has its own channel that normally would carry the Iowa State game, and - since there is currently no deal with BTN - who cares what it would conflict with? So why does Mediacom *need* Fox's permission to use Mediacom's own conduit to carry the Iowa State game in the first place?
> 
> What exactly is missing in this story?


Fox has the Big 12 TV contract and Mediacom needed permission from Fox to carry the game. BTW, Fox had no problem granting Mediacom permission to televise Iowa State's 2006 season opener.


----------



## Codeman00

jhamps10 said:


> more potential good news for us in an updated uplink today.
> 
> 440 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)
> 441 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)
> 442 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)
> 443 - TEMP [MPEG2 SD] added to EchoStar8 110W TP 24 ConUS beam (Not Available)
> 
> All right above 439 uplinked yesterday or early this morning.... not saying we see it today or tomorrow, but I feel much better that we will see BTN sooner rather than later.


Especially since there happens to be 5 games starting at the same time this Saturday. Nice!


----------



## James Long

439-444 certainly looks promising!


----------



## Lord Vader

nmetro said:


> This is the right thread. BTN is not active yet or if at all on DISH Network. The testing by DISH on channel 439 indicates the possibility they could be testing Big Ten Network, according to previous posts in this thread and the Uplink Activity for the week of 09-04-2007 thread. This is just one of those things that we have to wait and see on.


They wouldn't be testing it unless Charlie and the Big Ten came to an agreement for DISH to carry TBN, and as far as I remember, they haven't.


----------



## James Long

Agreements are often announced as the channels become active.

If these are BTNs they are just getting ready for the weekend and are encouraged enough by the current state of negotiations that they expect to be using the channel.

It would be nice if E* would work out a multichannel mosaic of the channel on multi-game weekends.


----------



## jhamps10

James Long said:


> Agreements are often announced as the channels become active.
> 
> If these are BTNs they are just getting ready for the weekend and are encouraged enough by the current state of negotiations that they expect to be using the channel.
> 
> It would be nice if E* would work out a multichannel mosaic of the channel on multi-game weekends.


Now we're talking, They used to do that mosaic with mulitple cameras with the TBS games, but I don't think they are doing college football this year.


----------



## Lord Vader

According to the latest news, DISH and TBN aren't even close to an agreement. Charlie's still balking on paying the asking price.


----------



## OrangeandBlue33

Here's a link to what us E* customers missed last week...

First 4:40 of the Big Ten Network

Hopefully we'll be able to watch it for ourselves soon!


----------



## projectorguru

ok, what I don't understand is, I have the AT100, will I get BTN if infact we do get it? Or will it be in another channel package, I've been readin this stuff too much, so forgive if the answer was in this thread somewhere, I'm now confused up to this point


----------



## JohnH

projectorguru said:


> ok, what I don't understand is, I have the AT100, will I get BTN if infact we do get it? Or will it be in another channel package, I've been readin this stuff too much, so forgive if the answer was in this thread somewhere, I'm now confused up to this point


If. when, how much and/or what it will be is not known until it is offered.


----------



## skizer

Big Ten Network Is Live On Channel 439 As Of 5:30 Est!!!

Woooo Hooooo


----------



## DishTSR3Mentor

Dish has Big Ten... Channel 439 (440 - 443 will be BTN Alts) this is effective NOW.


----------



## spdmonkey

This is awesome! Just hope Charlie only paid $.50 or less per sub in b10 country.

Dave


----------



## lionsrule

wait a minute, where's my BIGTENHD??

come on, I don't want to watch the games in SD. (sarcasm)


seriously, what are the prospects of getting the games in HD?


----------



## OrangeandBlue33

Thank You Charlie!


----------



## gopherscot

lionsrule said:


> wait a minute, where's my BIGTENHD??
> 
> come on, I don't want to watch the games in SD. (sarcasm)
> 
> seriously, what are the prospects of getting the games in HD?


Probably when space becomes available. For now this will work!


----------



## tdw

Sweet! Now I can rewatch the end of the Mich/App St. game again that I had to watch on my gloating brother's Directv system.


----------



## Codeman00

Sweet! Watching it now!!!!


----------



## James Long

http://www.bigtennetwork.com/corporate/PR090607.asp

DISH Network will broadcast two games in high-definition Saturday on Channel 9467, including Akron @ Ohio State (12:00 p.m. ET) and Syracuse @ Iowa (8:00 p.m. ET), and officially launch the HD simulcast of the Big Ten Network the following week.

What I like is that the BTN homepage has a big E* logo on it. So much for D*'s early adopter status. 

AT100 level ... I hope the price was good.


----------



## terfmop

Thanks Charlie!!




go BOILERS!


----------



## nmetro

Hi Everyone,

Well our long wait is over. I know it was already announced in this forum, but It is great to say it again!

From the unofficial Dish Network Channel Chart:

Channel 439 changed from "Temp" to BIG10 and was made available to subscribers as of 5pm eastern today. Channels 440-443 are now called ALT10 meaning they are alternate channels for simultaneous BIG10 games especially Saturdays.

Right now, App State vs Michigan. 

Now I can see the Buckeyes on Saturday!

As for everyone who contributed to this thread, thank you for support and comments. I never expected this thread to grow as big as it did. Who knows, maybe DISH was watching.

Now, onto football season!

Go Bucks!

Nick


----------



## John W

lionsrule said:


> wait a minute, where's my BIGTENHD??
> 
> come on, I don't want to watch the games in SD. (sarcasm)
> 
> seriously, what are the prospects of getting the games in HD?


http://www.bigtennetwork.com/corporate/PR090607.asp

DISH Network will broadcast two games in high-definition Saturday on Channel 9467, including Akron @ Ohio State (12:00 p.m. ET) and Syracuse @ Iowa (8:00 p.m. ET), and officially launch the HD simulcast of the Big Ten Network the following week.


----------



## Chris Blount

The Big Ten Network reached an agreement Thursday with DISH Network that will allow the satellite television provider to broadcast Big Ten Conference games as early as this weekend.

DISH Network customers who subscribe to "America's Top 100" and higher will find the Big Ten Network on channel 439.

More *HERE*.


----------



## angiecopus

Did you see where it says that the entire nation will get the station until early 2008 and then it will only be seen by those people who live in the 8 big ten states. I think 

Interesting.


----------



## James Long

Yep ...
http://www.dishnetwork.com/downloads/pdf/about_us/press_room/Big10.pdf

"DISH Network customers nationwide who subscribe to America's Top 100 and higher will find the Big Ten Network on Channel 439. Customers throughout the nation will also have the opportunity to preview the network until early 2008. At that time, the channel will be carried on America's Top 100 Plus service within the eight states with Big Ten institutions."

It is going to be an RSN ...


----------



## aaronbud

James Long said:


> Yep ...
> http://www.dishnetwork.com/downloads/pdf/about_us/press_room/Big10.pdf
> 
> "DISH Network customers nationwide who subscribe to America's Top 100 and higher will find the Big Ten Network on Channel 439. Customers throughout the nation will also have the opportunity to preview the network until early 2008. At that time, the channel will be carried on America's Top 100 Plus service within the eight states with Big Ten institutions."
> 
> It is going to be an RSN ...


So if it's an "RSN" it will be part of the "SportsPack" correct?


----------



## James Long

We can hope ...


----------



## nmetro

From DISH's press release:

DISH Network customers nationwide who subscribe to America's Top 100 and higher will find the Big Ten Network on Channel 439. Customers throughout the nation will also have the opportunity to preview the network until early 2008. At that time, the channel will be carried on America's Top 100 Plus service within the eight states with Big Ten institutions.

Can this be interpreted as:

1. Only available above AT 100 for everyone (AT 150 or higher).
2. Only available in the Big 10 states at AT 100 or higher and no where else, even if you subscribe to all the RSNs. 
3. You need to subscribe to AT 100 or higher and to all the RSN's ($5.99/month) to get BTN outside the Big 10 states. 

Things could get interesting during basketball season. Remember, Big 10 games are no longer on Full Court.

Only time will tell.

Nick


----------



## aaronbud

James Long said:


> Yep ...
> http://www.dishnetwork.com/downloads/pdf/about_us/press_room/Big10.pdf
> 
> "DISH Network customers nationwide who subscribe to America's Top 100 and higher will find the Big Ten Network on Channel 439. Customers throughout the nation will also have the opportunity to preview the network until early 2008. At that time, the channel will be carried on America's Top 100 Plus service within the eight states with Big Ten institutions."
> 
> It is going to be an RSN ...


"DISH Network will broadcast two games in high-definition Saturday on Channel 9467, including
Akron @ Ohio State (12:00 p.m. ET) and Syracuse @ Iowa (8:00 p.m. ET), and officially launch the HD
simulcast of the Big Ten Network the following week."

Awesome!


----------



## James Long

> At that time, the channel will be carried *on America's Top 100 Plus* service *within the eight states* with Big Ten institutions.


Seems pretty clear ...
AT100 Plus (which is AT100 plus your local RSNs) _*and*_ in one of the eight states.

You can't get the "Sports Pack" without AT100 _Plus_ or higher ... not AT100. Hopefully AT100 Plus and the Sports Pack combined will give access to BTN ... but that is an issue for 2008.

Let's enjoy BTN nationwide on AT100 (and in HD on Saturday and "24/7" next week).


----------



## Hound

It is a great deal for everyone.


----------



## garn9173

I'm really surprised this deal got done. Pressure is now on the cable co's to get a deal done.


----------



## nmetro

James Long said:


> Seems pretty clear ...
> AT100 Plus (which is AT100 plus your local RSNs) _*and*_ in one of the eight states.
> 
> You can't get the "Sports Pack" without AT100 _Plus_ or higher ... not AT100. Hopefully AT100 Plus and the Sports Pack combined will give access to BTN ... but that is an issue for 2008.
> 
> Let's enjoy BTN nationwide on AT100 (and in HD on Saturday and "24/7" next week).


I never heard of AT 100 Plus, hence the question. Actually, I am an AT250 + HD subscriber. I also have subscribed to all the RSNs. So, I am hoping that this will be enough to keep BTN.

But, you are right let's enjoy it now and worry about this issue next year. By then, DISH will pretty much have an idea of how many Big 10 fans live outside the Big 10 states.

It is great to see the ASU-Michigan game as it unfolded, even though I know the outcome, it was still exciting to see.

Nick


----------



## angiecopus

i am lucky to live in ohio and in the top 250, now my father does not have to switch,
plus it gives me a chance to see Thom Brennamen( his father is the reds announcer)
announce a football game instead of doing a baseball game for once.


----------



## jhamps10

nmetro said:


> I never heard of AT 100 Plus, hence the question. Actually, I am an AT250 + HD subscriber. I also have subscribed to all the RSNs. So, I am hoping that this will be enough to keep BTN.
> 
> But, you are right let's enjoy it now and worry about this issue next year. By then, DISH will pretty much have an idea of how many Big 10 fans live outside the Big 10 states.
> 
> It is great to see the ASU-Michigan game as it unfolded, even though I know the outcome, it was still exciting to see.
> 
> Nick


AT 100+ is AT 100, just with sportspak added in, same price as ordering the Sportspak too.

which speaking of this at100+, If your in say st louis, Louisville, Omaha, Paducah, KY, which all have large numbers of different big 10 fans, It's a lot cheaper to order sportspak, than ordering ESPN game plan, and then ordering the Full Court package too. that's if you only cared for the big 10 teams. lets see here,

what $129 for each Game plan and full court?

Sportspack, $5 a month x 12= $60 for all 12 months.

Lets just say this, if BTN won't be available outside of the region, then it could get real ugly come 2008 for dish.


----------



## Richard King

Go Gophers.


----------



## JohnH

jhamps10 said:


> AT 100+ is AT 100, just with sportspak added in, same price as ordering the Sportspak too.


Wrong. AT100+ just includes your local RSN(s). You have to add the Multisports pack to that to get the rest of the RSNs.


----------



## dclaryjr

Any indication which satellite this is going to be on? I sure hope it ain't 129!


----------



## jhamps10

JohnH said:


> Wrong. AT100+ just includes your local RSN(s). You have to add the Multisports pack to that to get the rest of the RSNs.


Whoops, Anyway, so it would only be 10 bucks a month if folks outside the BTN region did not have AT 100+ or higher, just 5 if you have the RSN's in your area.


----------



## jhamps10

dclaryjr said:


> Any indication which satellite this is going to be on? I sure hope it ain't 129!


110.


----------



## dclaryjr

jhamps10 said:


> 110.


Thanks. That reply was too quick to allow me to edit my question. Is the HD version going to be there as well?


----------



## nmetro

dclaryjr said:


> Thanks. That reply was too quick to allow me to edit my question. Is the HD version going to be there as well?


DISH Network will broadcast two games in high-definition Saturday on Channel 9467, including Akron @ Ohio State (12:00 p.m. ET) and Syracuse @ Iowa (8:00 p.m. ET), and officially launch the HD simulcast of the Big Ten Network the following week.


----------



## heisman

<<<<<<<<<<<< egg on face! :eek2:


----------



## dclaryjr

nmetro said:


> DISH Network will broadcast two games in high-definition Saturday on Channel 9467, including Akron @ Ohio State (12:00 p.m. ET) and Syracuse @ Iowa (8:00 p.m. ET), and officially launch the HD simulcast of the Big Ten Network the following week.


.

My question concerned the satellite that the HD feed will be on.


----------



## James Long

9467 is on 110° ... no word yet on where the permanent BTN HD 24/7 channel will be next week (likely 61.5°/129°).

FYI: AT100 Plus
BTN isn't listed yet.


----------



## colavsfaninnwia

What 8 states are considered Big Ten country?


----------



## Lord Vader

IA, MN, WI, IL, IN, MI, OH, and PA


----------



## yuppers519

hmmmm. i have the big ten network on channel 439 on my dish network.


----------



## James Long

Until 2008 it is available to everyone with AT100 (or above).


----------



## bobukcat

dclaryjr said:


> .
> 
> My question concerned the satellite that the HD feed will be on.


FSN Ohio and other Northern Ohio RSNs are on 129 so I can't believe they'd put BTN on 61.5 exclusively, but I guess stranger things have happened.


----------



## stlmike

Lord Vader said:


> IA, MN, WI, IL, IN, MI, OH, and PA


Glad I have D* (since I live in Missouri). Seems rather restrictive to me.....


----------



## James Long

Most RSNs are restrictive. There is no guarantee that D* won't be dropping BTN out of Choice next year as well. Successfully placing the channel as an RSN sets a precedent.

BTN has stated that they wanted to be on the basic cable level within the eight states. E* will be placing them (after the introductory period) at the same level as other RSNs in the eight states. If D* treats BTN as an RSN they will remain available in Choice but only within the eight states.

Those that happen to be outside the eight state area will have to do as they do for any other out of market RSN ... subscribe to the Sports Pack and hope their favorite games are not blacked out. The only difference being that E* charges $5.99 for their sports pack and D* charges $12 for theirs.

At today's prices it would cost the E* viewer a minimum $34.99 in market and $40.98 out of market (also including all other RSNs - subject to blackout). It would cost the D* viewer $49.99 in market and $61.99 out of market. With today's placement the viewer cost is $29.99 for E* and $49.99 for D* (current new subscriber rates before introductory offers).


----------



## projectorguru

so what happens after 2008? what package?


----------



## dclaryjr

bobukcat said:


> FSN Ohio and other Northern Ohio RSNs are on 129 so I can't believe they'd put BTN on 61.5 exclusively, but I guess stranger things have happened.


Yeah, like putting Fox Sports Southwest on 129 where a good portion of south Texas can't get it with Dish-provided equipment.

What is the footprint of 61.5? I don't see it on EKB.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> Most RSNs are restrictive. There is no guarantee that D* won't be dropping BTN out of Choice next year as well. Successfully placing the channel as an RSN sets a precedent.
> 
> BTN has stated that they wanted to be on the basic cable level within the eight states. E* will be placing them (after the introductory period) at the same level as other RSNs in the eight states. If D* treats BTN as an RSN they will remain available in Choice but only within the eight states.
> 
> Those that happen to be outside the eight state area will have to do as they do for any other out of market RSN ... subscribe to the Sports Pack and hope their favorite games are not blacked out. The only difference being that E* charges $5.99 for their sports pack and D* charges $12 for theirs.
> 
> At today's prices it would cost the E* viewer a minimum $34.99 in market and $40.98 out of market (also including all other RSNs - subject to blackout). It would cost the D* viewer $49.99 in market and $61.99 out of market. With today's placement the viewer cost is $29.99 for E* and $49.99 for D* (current new subscriber rates before introductory offers).


You have to remember that D* does not compete in the 29.99 market and has
left all those subs to Dish. Also, D* has not made an announcement that
BTN will be treated as an RSN. The comparison should be in the markets where
D* competes with E*.

If you want HD and locals, the cost for E* is $59.99 and $59.98 for D*.

If you go for E* AEP and are out of the eight state area with HD and locals,
the cost is $120.98, and with D*, the cost for premier and HD is $109.98.


----------



## stlmike

James Long said:


> Most RSNs are restrictive. There is no guarantee that D* won't be dropping BTN out of Choice next year as well. Successfully placing the channel as an RSN sets a precedent.
> 
> BTN has stated that they wanted to be on the basic cable level within the eight states. E* will be placing them (after the introductory period) at the same level as other RSNs in the eight states. If D* treats BTN as an RSN they will remain available in Choice but only within the eight states.
> 
> Those that happen to be outside the eight state area will have to do as they do for any other out of market RSN ... subscribe to the Sports Pack and hope their favorite games are not blacked out. The only difference being that E* charges $5.99 for their sports pack and D* charges $12 for theirs.
> 
> At today's prices it would cost the E* viewer a minimum $34.99 in market and $40.98 out of market (also including all other RSNs - subject to blackout). It would cost the D* viewer $49.99 in market and $61.99 out of market. With today's placement the viewer cost is $29.99 for E* and $49.99 for D* (current new subscriber rates before introductory offers).


Lots of supposition there. I'd say anything is possible, but if D* lauched and promoted the BTN as nationally available with no mention that they intended to do something similar to E*, they would have major problems with all the disgruntled customers. Has there ever been a similar case of a channel moving from nationally availble to inclusion on a RSN package? I can't think of one.

Also, it is in the BTN's best interest to have as much coverage as possible to help with recruiting and to promote their agendas. I don't think they intended to put a bubble around the eight state area and only show their product there and no where else in the country. I don't see a day when they move the BTN from where it is now.


----------



## tnsprin

Lord Vader said:


> IA, MN, WI, IL, IN, MI, OH, and PA


Not sure what they are planning on doing but its on in NY at the moment.

Ps: Okay now see mention that it will be available for this year in all states. What is the plan after that? Optional package for others states? Include in the extra all RSN package?


----------



## Hound

Wind_River said:


> Everyone? Even for the people who have no idea what schools are in the Big Ten?
> 
> :lol:


I will narrow the definition of everyone to BTN and Dish Network.

When you sub to an MVP, there are always channels that many subs could care
less about. With Dish keeping BTN out of the low margin 29.99 package, my
speculation is that Dish will have a net positive by retaining higher margin subs
who cannot live without BTN.


----------



## nmetro

Wind_River said:


> Everyone? Even for the people who have no idea what schools are in the Big Ten?
> 
> :lol:


For the record, they are:

University of Illinois
Indiana University
University of Iowa
University of Michigan
Michigan State University
University of Minnesota
Northwestern University
The Ohio State University
The Pennsylvania State University
Purdue University
University of Wisconsin


----------



## Bubba3

We Are........................Penn State!


----------



## gopherscot

nmetro said:


> For the record, they are:
> 
> University of Illinois
> Indiana University
> University of Iowa
> University of Michigan
> Michigan State University
> University of Minnesota
> Northwestern University
> The Ohio State University
> The Pennsylvania State University
> Purdue University
> University of Wisconsin


ROTF .....:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## ernste40

James Long said:


> Most RSNs are restrictive. There is no guarantee that D* won't be dropping BTN out of Choice next year as well. Successfully placing the channel as an RSN sets a precedent.
> 
> BTN has stated that they wanted to be on the basic cable level within the eight states. E* will be placing them (after the introductory period) at the same level as other RSNs in the eight states. If D* treats BTN as an RSN they will remain available in Choice but only within the eight states.
> 
> Those that happen to be outside the eight state area will have to do as they do for any other out of market RSN ... subscribe to the Sports Pack and hope their favorite games are not blacked out. The only difference being that E* charges $5.99 for their sports pack and D* charges $12 for theirs.
> 
> At today's prices it would cost the E* viewer a minimum $34.99 in market and $40.98 out of market (also including all other RSNs - subject to blackout). It would cost the D* viewer $49.99 in market and $61.99 out of market. With today's placement the viewer cost is $29.99 for E* and $49.99 for D* (current new subscriber rates before introductory offers).


I don't see D* dropping BTN nationally. The whole reason they picked it up in the first place is due to their ownership connection to News Corp. Since Fox also owns 49% of BTN, the corporation had D* pick up BTN immediately so they could bolster the network's "national" carriage from their initial announcement.


----------



## Madison Hawk

ernste40 said:


> I don't see D* dropping BTN nationally. The whole reason they picked it up in the first place is due to their ownership connection to News Corp. Since Fox also owns 49% of BTN, the corporation had D* pick up BTN immediately so they could bolster the network's "national" carriage from their initial announcement.


Fox/News Corp. has an agreement to sell its stake in DirecTV to Liberty Media, pending regulatory approval.

Although I would not be completely surprised if DirecTV moved the BTN to a sports tier out of market, I would not expect it because the BTN's asking price out of market is fairly cheap and DirecTV has the potential to gain new subscribers from cable companies (and to a lesser extent Dish customers) who are not carrying the BTN out of market or on a higher tier. The fact that DirecTV placed the BTN channel next to the ESPNs and NFL Network sends a message that DirecTV will not relegate the BTN to RSN status in the near future.


----------



## elbodude

nmetro said:


> For the record, they are:
> 
> University of Illinois
> Indiana University
> University of Iowa
> University of Michigan
> Michigan State University
> University of Minnesota
> Northwestern University
> The Ohio State University
> The Pennsylvania State University
> Purdue University
> University of Wisconsin


Big 11


----------



## James Long

Hound said:


> You have to remember that D* does not compete in the 29.99 market and has left all those subs to Dish.


That's priceless. D* isn't losing to E*, they are just not bothering to compete. :grin:



> If you want HD and locals, the cost for E* is $59.99 and $59.98 for D*.


It smacks of fraud to ignore E*'s price list. HD and locals are $34.99 via E*. If you would also like the 33 video and 64 audio that upgrading to AT200 brings you then you can pay $67.99 (vs $59.98 for less channels - currently 24 video, 47 audio and 30 HD more channels on E* for that $8).



> If you go for E* AEP and are out of the eight state area with HD and locals,
> the cost is $120.98, and with D*, the cost for premier and HD is $109.98.


Today the price is $114.99 vs $109.98 . You can bet that in 2008 D* won't be selling Premier with HD for $110. 

Whether or not BTN stays national on D* ... E*'s deal opens the door.


----------



## Hound

James Long said:


> That's priceless. D* isn't losing to E*, they are just not bothering to compete. :grin:
> 
> It smacks of fraud to ignore E*'s price list. HD and locals are $34.99 via E*. If you would also like the 33 video and 64 audio that upgrading to AT200 brings you then you can pay $67.99 (vs $59.98 for less channels - currently 24 video, 47 audio and 30 HD more channels on E* for that $8).
> 
> Today the price is $114.99 vs $109.98 . You can bet that in 2008 D* won't be selling Premier with HD for $110.
> 
> Whether or not BTN stays national on D* ... E*'s deal opens the door.


Who is losing:

E* year to date earnings for period ending 6/30/07 - $381 Million
D* year to date earnings for period ending 6/30/07 - $784 Million

D* earnings ratio over E* 206 percent

E* year to date gross revenue for p/e 6/30/07 - $5.4 Billion
D* year to date gross revenue for p/e 6/30/07 $8.0 Billion

D* revenue ratio over E* 148 percent

E* total subs at 6/30/07 13.6 Billion
D* total subs at 6/30/07 16.3 Billion

D* sub ratio over E* 120 percent

E* keeps gaining subs on D* but D* is more than twice as profitable.
Lets see if E can make a dent in the 206 percent ratio next quarter.
D* is not in the low margin price range.

E* with AEP, HD, locals and sports pak is $120.98 right now. D* is $109.98.
BTN on E* with locals and HD is $59.99 and D* is $59.98 end of story.


----------



## msmith198025

i think u meant millions on subs, not billions.


----------



## Hound

msmith198025 said:


> i think u meant millions on subs, not billions.


good catch


----------



## James Long

Sorry for waking the troll.  

Years in business? Number of quarters that were not profitable in the past five years? D* has done well recently ... but such has not been the case until recently. And unless you are a shareholder how profitable the company is really isn't the issue.

Winning customers - despite all the gloom and doom predictions.


----------



## nmetro

James Long said:


> Sorry for waking the troll.
> 
> Years in business? Number of quarters that were not profitable in the past five years? D* has done well recently ... but such has not been the case until recently. And unless you are a shareholder how profitable the company is really isn't the issue.
> 
> Winning customers - despite all the gloom and doom predictions.


The real gloom and doom will come to D* subscribers, if Liberty Media purchases them, Do you remember TCI Cable? If was TCI's poor service that was a major catalyst for the launching of DISH Network. While I have read several DISH horror stories, nothing was worse than what one had to put up with than TCI. I suspect that D* folks will learn that rather quickly. Finally, for those who think Charlie is cheap, Malone makes Charlie look like the most generous person on the planet.


----------



## Paul Secic

John W said:


> http://www.bigtennetwork.com/corporate/PR090607.asp
> 
> DISH Network will broadcast two games in high-definition Saturday on Channel 9467, including Akron @ Ohio State (12:00 p.m. ET) and Syracuse @ Iowa (8:00 p.m. ET), and officially launch the HD simulcast of the Big Ten Network the following week.


I'm shocked & mad. Watch for a BIG rate next year!


----------



## nmetro

Paul Secic said:


> I'm shocked & mad. Watch for a BIG rate next year!


More than likely, if there is a rate increase, it will be similar to this year's. Also, the rate increase would occur due to inflation, the addition of new programming and HD content. It looks like BTN will not be thrusted upon all subscribers, based upon the press release.

Those, who live outside the Big 10 states will most likely have to subscribe to all the RSNs to get the channel (this is why the word "preview" is mentioned in the press release). An example of a preview was access to Setanta Sports for the past month or so. Also, college sports are not subject to the blackout rules as pro teams are, and the Big 10 has agreements with ABC and ESPN to allow BTN games to be shown as second tier to what ABC/ESPN chooses to air. This is why the Wisconsin game was shown on the ESPN alternate last Saturday. Finally, if worse come to worse, BTN could be offered ala-carte like Setanta, but this would be highly unlikely.


----------



## Lord Vader

nmetro said:


> The real gloom and doom will come to D* subscribers, if Liberty Media purchases them, Do you remember TCI Cable? If was TCI's poor service that was a major catalyst for the launching of DISH Network. While I have read several DISH horror stories, nothing was worse than what one had to put up with than TCI. I suspect that D* folks will learn that rather quickly. Finally, for those who think Charlie is cheap, Malone makes Charlie look like the most generous person on the planet.


Malone is also a big fan of TIVO, too. There have been reports that he'd like to re-energize the TIVO and DirecTV relationship.


----------



## jefbal99

nmetro said:


> More than likely, if there is a rate increase, it will be similar to this year's. Also, the rate increase would occur due to inflation, the addition of new programming and HD content. It looks like BTN will not be thrusted upon all subscribers, based upon the press release.
> 
> Those, who live outside the Big 10 states will most likely have to subscribe to all the RSNs to get the channel (this is why the word "preview" is mentioned in the press release). An example of a preview was access to Setanta Sports for the past month or so. Also, college sports are not subject to the blackout rules as pro teams are, and the Big 10 has agreements with ABC and ESPN to allow BTN games to be shown as second tier to what ABC/ESPN chooses to air. This is why the Wisconsin game was shown on the ESPN alternate last Saturday. Finally, if worse come to worse, BTN could be offered ala-carte like Setanta, but this would be highly unlikely.


Update from the BTN FAQ



> Q: As a DISH Network customer, do I get the Big Ten Network?
> A: Yes. *DISH Network customers nationwide who subscribe to America's Top 100 and higher will find the Big Ten Network on Channel 439 through March 2008.*
> 
> Additionally, the satellite provider has also committed to carrying the network's overflow games so subscribers will have access to all Big Ten Network games when multiple games are being produced. Call your DISH Network provider for more information.
> 
> Beginning in March 2008 for DISH customers inside the Big Ten's eight states, DISH Network will move the Big Ten Network from America's Top 100 (AT100) service to its America's Top 100 Plus service (AT100+) where all its regional sports networks are carried. That level of service is the equivalent to expanded basic cable.
> 
> *Beginning in March 2008 for DISH customers outside the Big Ten's eight states, DISH Network will move the Big Ten Network from AT100 to a to-be-determined level of service.*
> 
> This remains consistent with our stance that if you live within the Big Ten footprint, you should be able to receive the Big Ten Network on an expanded basic - or the equivalent - level of service. Outside of the Big Ten region, we are flexible on our carriage terms.


----------



## James Long

> This remains consistent with our stance that if you live within the Big Ten footprint, you should be able to receive the Big Ten Network on an expanded basic - or the equivalent - level of service. Outside of the Big Ten region, we are flexible on our carriage terms.


Nice to see in print.

"Yet to be determined level." Interesting.


----------



## jacmyoung

Hound said:


> ...E* keeps gaining subs on D* but D* is more than twice as profitable...


Here is the key, when you gain more new subs, the cost goes up. Of course there are many other factors when it comes to earning.

But if you really want to compare their finiancials, why conviniently leave out their YTD stock performance?


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Gross revenue does not reflect profit either. If DirecTV spends proportionally more than Dish does for the same or more subscribers, then even with higher gross revenue DirecTV may not be as profitable as Dish. Without listing expenditures, gross revenue is a useless statistic.

We know DirecTV spends way more on advertising than Dish does.. and we also know of at least one lawsuit recently where DirecTV settled, but Dish fought and won... so that is another area where Dish spent less money this year.

I would not be surprised to see Dish at the same or higher level of profitability even with less subscribers.


----------



## colavsfaninnwia

I want to know why South Dakota cannot be placed into the category of being a Big Ten State. They have a big Big Ten fan base there. And they technically have a D-1 school, but not too many many people are a big fan.


----------



## Hound

jacmyoung said:


> Here is the key, when you gain more new subs, the cost goes up. Of course there are many other factors when it comes to earning.
> 
> But if you really want to compare their finiancials, why conviniently leave out their YTD stock performance?


You can add stock price performance to the thread. It was not conveniently
left out. The bottom line is the bottom line. Adding 50,000 more low margin subs
is not going to account for $400 million of net income.


----------



## Hound

HDMe said:


> Gross revenue does not reflect profit either. If DirecTV spends proportionally more than Dish does for the same or more subscribers, then even with higher gross revenue DirecTV may not be as profitable as Dish. Without listing expenditures, gross revenue is a useless statistic.
> 
> We know DirecTV spends way more on advertising than Dish does.. and we also know of at least one lawsuit recently where DirecTV settled, but Dish fought and won... so that is another area where Dish spent less money this year.
> 
> I would not be surprised to see Dish at the same or higher level of profitability even with less subscribers.


With D* apparently (we do not have their advertising budgets) spending way more than E* on advertising, it is surprising that D* earns more than twice as much as E*.

When you sit in a meeting with the CEO, the Division Presidents and the CFO,
the CEO looks at the bottom line, sees if the Divisions are making their budgets,
and if not, cuts their advertising. It has been my experience that advertising
budgets are adjusted to make quarterly earnings.


----------



## Paul Secic

Lord Vader said:


> Malone is also a big fan of TIVO, too. There have been reports that he'd like to re-energize the TIVO and DirecTV relationship.


I heard D will bring Tivo back on Leo LaPorte's syndicated radio show today. I might follow because of E's HD prices.


----------



## Richard King

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=DTV&annual
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=DISH&annual
In looking at the two income statements above, it would appear that Dish had a rather large G&A expense in 2006 (for some reason). If they get G&A expenses down to a more average number this year they should easily be more profitable than DTV (dropping down to $500M in '06 would have given them a profit of over $2Billion). Hopefully, these were non recurring events that gave them the high charges. I could dig out the annual reports to find out, but I'm too lazy. 

Disclaimer; I have stock in both.


----------



## jefbal99

Any announcements on the HD simulcast and/otr if *ALL AVAILABLE* HD feeds will be available for the overflow games?


----------



## Jim5506

Charlie said ALL on the Charlie Chat, but then that's Charlie.


----------



## James Long

Yeah, just a very successful guy running a very successful company.


----------



## db2

Are you sure? I just got done watching the chat and they did mention the main channel but I don't remember anything mentioned about the overflow games being HD??


----------



## James Long

The graphic said ALL the weekend games were going to be in HD.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

James Long said:


> The graphic said ALL the weekend games were going to be in HD.


I think the thing here worth noting is... There is only 1 Big Ten Network... and 1 Big Ten Network HD. Everything else is on the overflow. So... if there are games with overlapping start/end times, it will not be possible to show all of them in HD on Big Ten Network HD.

This is not a failing in Dish... but rather exactly the plan of the Big Ten Network. I'm sure what this means is that some weeks not all games will be in HD.. but that whatever games are in HD Dish will have them.


----------



## jefbal99

HDMe said:


> This is not a failing in Dish... but rather exactly the plan of the Big Ten Network. I'm sure what this means is that some weeks not all games will be in HD.. but that whatever games are in HD Dish will have them.


The Big Ten Network can do either 3 or 4 games in HD at the same time and send out the feeds to providers. Its up to provider if they have bandwidth to show all the HD feeds or just one HD feed and the rest SD.


----------

