# Directv's plans for Online Streaming(WatchEspn, FoxSportsGo, WatchDisney, etc)



## TravelFan1

Mods >> I tried to search for a similar topic, but I couldn't find it - apologies if there's an appropriate place already and, if I may suggest, how about making this a sticky topic?

I've been a very happy Directv TV customer for the last 2 1/2 years. I like the DVR, and I like the innovation Directv showed when they came with the Directv Deportes package, which is perfect for someone like me, a non-Spanish-speaking futbol/soccer fan - as far as I know, no other provider has a similar add-on package. I also love all special channels to carry the Tennis Grand Slams, the UEFA Champions League and Europa League and I even enjoy Directv's Red Zone channel.

But I must say I think Directv lags in online streaming compared to every other provider that's available to me. And yes, I know usually the online streaming is usually tied to a larger carriage contract.But Fox Sports 1 and 2 launched recently and FoxSportsGo isn't available. And, what is the real deal breaker for me in 2014, the lack of WatchEspn will prevent me to be able to watch the Fifa World Cup on my computer in the office or my cell phone during my commute - there will be late afternoon(ET) matches. And rumor has it that Dish is very close to signing a new contract with ESPN that, for sure, will include WatchESPN. If that indeed happens, Directv will be the only provider that's available to me(available providers to me are Comcast and Dish). 

Let me even suggest that Directv advertises more when new online streaming content is made available to its subscribers - while writting this topic, I just realized that Directv subscribers now can watch BenInSport Play, which wasn't available last time I checked, in December - but I went to check the app name at BeIn's Website and, sure enough, Directv is now one of the eligible providers!


----------



## hancox

A very fair question, given how many other providers are signed up now. D* is now an outlier, especially if Dish re-ups.

My commitment is up in March, and this will factor in.


----------



## KyL416

Disney refuses to negotiate the rights to their Watch products in a seperate deal so DirecTV has to wait until the existing contract is up for renewal.


----------



## inkahauts

As far as Fox Sports go many providers don't have that yet because they decided not to go with a new contract but rather continue caring the channels as they used to be under the old contract.

As for ESPN we'll see what happens when the next contract negotiations, which is rumored to be sometime this year. Time will tell. 

I think DirecTV would carry every single channel live streaming if they could.


----------



## Bambler

KyL416 said:


> Disney refuses to negotiate the rights to their Watch products in a seperate deal so DirecTV has to wait until the existing contract is up for renewal.


I personally think that's DirecTV's propaganda.

I think Disney negotiated with cable carriers to allow streaming during and within an existing contract. I think other channels have done the same.

If this is true, then obviously the holdup is with DirecTV and their refusal to either touch the existing contract or provide for any additions.


----------



## KyL416

Bambler said:


> I personally think that's DirecTV's propaganda.


Nope, the person responsible at ESPN was quoted as saying so in an interview:
http://www.multichannel.com/content/upfronts-2012-bratches-watch-espn-affiliate-base-reach-80-million-subscribers-over-next-year


> I think Disney negotiated with cable carriers to allow streaming during and within an existing contract. I think other channels have done the same.


Nope, EVERY SINGLE announcement of a new provider joining the Watch Apps in the past 2 years was part of a renewal:
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2013/01/the-walt-disney-company-and-att-u-verse-announce-broad-distribution-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/12/the-walt-disney-company-and-charter-communications-announce-new-distribution-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/12/the-walt-disney-company-and-cox-communications-announce-comprehensive-distribution-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/10/disney-cablevision-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/01/the-walt-disney-company-and-comcast-corporation-announce-a-long-http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/01/disney-comcast-agreement/


----------



## Satelliteracer

KyL416 said:


> Disney refuses to negotiate the rights to their Watch products in a seperate deal so DirecTV has to wait until the existing contract is up for renewal.


I think you will find, as you state later, that when distributor deals are done with ESPN that new deals include those type of rights along with other stuff (Longhorn, etc).


----------



## Satelliteracer

inkahauts said:


> As far as Fox Sports go many providers don't have that yet because they decided not to go with a new contract but rather continue caring the channels as they used to be under the old contract.
> 
> As for ESPN we'll see what happens when the next contract negotiations, which is rumored to be sometime this year. Time will tell.
> 
> I think DirecTV would carry every single channel live streaming if they could.


That's a fair assumption in my opinion


----------



## coolman302003

Satelliteracer said:


> I think you will find, as you state later, that when distributor deals are done with ESPN that new deals include those type of rights along *with other stuff (Longhorn, etc).*


SEC Network perhaps? :biggrin:


----------



## osu1ne

Thanks for all the input. I was wondering the same thing. I have time warner as my isp and can't get WatchESPN unless I upgrade to TWC. I hope Directv can negotiate a deal with ESPN like they have with BTN2GO. I travel a lot and rely on my laptop and smartphone for most of my sports.


----------



## JosephB

It's also important to note that DirecTV and Dish aren't also internet providers, unlike every one of ESPN's other carriers. I'm sure the discussions between the satellite companies regarding Watch ESPN rights are slightly more complicated, since ESPN 3 availability is usually tied to your ISP, but the rest of Watch ESPN streaming is tied to your TV subscription.


----------



## domingos35

I have Watch ESPN and ESPN3 Because Comcast is my ISP and can watch it on Xbox LIVE


----------



## JosephB

domingos35 said:


> I have Watch ESPN and ESPN3 Because Comcast is my ISP and can watch it on Xbox LIVE


You can't stream live ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNews, though, without an appropriate TV subscription. "WatchESPN" is confusing because it is an umbrella service for two separate things: ESPN3, which is tied to your ISP and live streaming of ESPN's traditional channels which is tied to your TV provider. Further complicating it is that on some devices you can't even watch ESPN3 without an appropriate TV subscription.


----------



## slice1900

ESPN's whole streaming thing is a confusing mess for the average person. It depends on what you want to watch, who provides your internet or TV, whether they have an agreement with ESPN, where you're trying to watch from...

It would be nice if when Directv redoes their deal, they manage to get the ability to show all the ESPN3 content via satellite. They could easily manage the bandwidth, if they provided SD only feeds - the quality of that would still be better than what I typically see from ESPN3. Despite plenty of bandwidth and no problem with other streams, ESPN3 seems to hiccup and pixellate regularly. I doubt Directv has much interest in carrying some of the stuff on ESPN3, like cricket matches, but it would be a boon for the average customer to not have to deal with streaming if they're intended on watching on their TV.


----------



## Bambler

The biggest question--from a logical perspective--is this: if you offer something new (as an addition), why would you not want to up sell? 

If that's the case, then it is DirecTV who refuses to renegotiate the existing contract to "add" this additional feature. Why would they? As it would most likely mean higher prices. Carriers in the midst of an ending contract may have no choice to but to carry it as part of their new "bundled" agreement. 

So, I still believe that DirecTV saying that the broadcasters "refusal" to negotiate is akin to their refusal to ask for more money, which to me seems highly unlikely and, as a result, means DirecTV is being disingenuous.


----------



## JosephB

It's not DirecTV saying the broadcasters refuse to negotiate. Links above quote Disney and ESPN employees. It is Disney's policy that they do not renegotiate their deals until they expire.


----------



## Beerstalker

ESPN/Disney will not sign a seperate contract just for the streaming rights. They have said so to the press like posted above.

Now you very well may be right about the other part though. I'm sure ESPN/Disney would be more than happy to sign a new deal right now that would cover all the channels and streaming rights in one contract and declare the current contract null/void. However, I'm sure doing so would make DirecTV's costs for the actual channels go up sognificantly compared to what they are paying currently under the contract that is in place. DirecTV has obviously decided that the increased cost at this time does not make sense just to get access to the streaming channels.

For example let's say DirecTVs current contract has them paying $5/month per subscriber for all the channels. Then let's say that currently ESPN/Disney charges all their customer $1/month per subscriber for the streaming package. DirecTV may be willing to pay $1/month for the streaming package. However, ESPN/Disney says that they won't sell the streaming package seperate for $1/month. Instead they tell DirecTV that they have to sign a new contract, and under that contract they will get the streaming package for $1/month, but the cost of the channels goes up to $6/month. So in essence if DirecTV were to sign the new contract just to get the streaming rights it would really end up costing them an extra $2/month per subscriber for each month that would have been left in the current contract. DirecTV doesn't feel that the streaming package is worth $2/month at this time so they decide to just wait until their current contract expires.


----------



## CincySaint

More stuff we can't stream due to no agreement with D* -- The Simpsons on FXX.

ARTICLE


----------



## mnassour

Does anyone know when the next round of talks with Disney/ESPN begin?


----------



## JimAtTheRez

mnassour said:


> Does anyone know when the next round of talks with Disney/ESPN begin?


Ditto.
Satracer, any idea? Thanks in advance. BTW, I love D*. I have been here 10 years, have 6 receivers including 1 Genie and 4 HD DVR's. But if D* drags their feet on the SEC Network and does not add WatchESPN, I will have to reconsider. I did a trial of ATT Uverse Tv and the picture quality was very, very close to D* on HD. And the price, for me, would save me around $40/month b/c I already have their Internet/Phone service.


----------



## JosephB

Beerstalker said:


> ESPN/Disney will not sign a seperate contract just for the streaming rights. They have said so to the press like posted above.
> 
> Now you very well may be right about the other part though. I'm sure ESPN/Disney would be more than happy to sign a new deal right now that would cover all the channels and streaming rights in one contract and declare the current contract null/void.


No....Disney does not renegotiate deals until their current ones are expiring. That's what those links say. It's not that they won't negotiate a separate contract.


----------



## Bambler

Those links say nothing more than streaming rights were incorporated into new contracts. It says nothing of their willingness to offer a new, reworked contract (at a higher price) for additional capabilities/channels. 

To me, not offering that would be kind of dumb from Disney's perspective. Why would they not get a chance to gain more per subscriber if they could, without waiting for the end of the existing contract? 

However, this is a two-way street, and DirecTV must also agree to unravel their existing contract and be susceptible to price increases. Looking at this situation from an outsider's perspective, it would seem logical that it is DirecTV who refuses to negotiate as they risk losing their existing per customer price. So yes, if this is true, then DirecTV is probably lying. 

In regards to other providers, like Fox, the same can be said. Fox would be only too willing to either sell it as a stand alone or, if the carrier is willing, junk the existing contract and rework a new deal with the streaming rights so customers can have access immediately.


----------



## coolman302003

mnassour said:


> Does anyone know when the next round of talks with Disney/ESPN begin?


The last deal was signed in January 2005, for 10 years. However in the article it does state, "DirecTV's agreements with Disney expired Sept. 30 and the new agreement is retroactive to that date." Since it states "...its retroactive to that date" I guess the current contract could expire before September 2014 or possibly as late as January 2015?

DirecTV, ESPN sign for 10 years (Sports Business Journal)

Also details in this recent article
"DIRECTV is still under a 10-year contract with ESPN that was signed in 2005, meaning that bridge won't be crossed in the immediate future. However, 2014 will be the year of NFL negotiations."


----------



## mnassour

Thanks Cool Man. So it's the NFL this year, Disney soon after. The way I read the article the contract end for Disney is Sept. 30, 2014. That means the start of negotiations is closer than I might have thought.


----------



## john262

I don't know all of the details about Directv's contract with Disney/ESPN. I will take the word of the other posters in this thread about it. But I have got to believe that if Directv really wanted to support Watch ESPN they could find a way to do it. This will also factor into my decision on whether to stay once my contract is up.


----------



## phat78boy

I personally think Directv would make better use of its resources and money by creating a "slingbox" device for its DVR products. Do users really want an individual application for every channel? I would rather one app that let me watch TV just as if I was at home. 

I know 3rd party solutions are available, as mentioned, but a homegrown solution would bring support comforts to those technically challeneged.


----------



## peds48

phat78boy said:


> I personally think Directv would make better use of its resources and money by creating a "slingbox" device for its DVR products. Do users really want an individual application for every channel? I would rather one app that let me watch TV just as if I was at home.
> 
> I know 3rd party solutions are available, as mentioned, but a homegrown solution would bring support comforts to those technically challeneged.


is already there, open the DIRECTV tablet app. What we need is for DIRECTV contacts to allow more channels out of home

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tonyd79

peds48 said:


> is already there, open the DIRECTV tablet app. What we need is for DIRECTV contacts to allow more channels out of home
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Well, more exactly, DirecTV's slingbox-like app is the GenieGo and it is not quite a slingbox as it does not do live TV (it will let you see things that are currently recording) and requires a wifi connection on the mobile device. Almost, but not quite.


----------



## peds48

tonyd79 said:


> Well, more exactly, DirecTV's slingbox-like app is the GenieGo and it is not quite a slingbox as it does not do live TV (it will let you see things that are currently recording) and requires a wifi connection on the mobile device. Almost, but not quite.


Only on iOS devices, Android stream on cellular. of course, JB iDevices works as well.


----------



## HoTat2

JimAtTheRez said:


> Ditto.
> Satracer, any idea? Thanks in advance. BTW, I love D*. I have been here 10 years, have 6 receivers including 1 Genie and 4 HD DVR's. But if D* drags their feet on the SEC Network and does not add WatchESPN, I will have to reconsider. I did a trial of ATT Uverse Tv and the picture quality was very, very close to D* on HD. And the price, for me, would save me around $40/month b/c I already have their Internet/Phone service.


At what profile or maximum number of simultaneous HD streams does AT&T U-verse offer at your location I wonder though?

Given your current setup, it would be quite a comedown from the 13 or 14 (depending on what type the 6th receiver is) HD program capacity you have now with DIRECTV for the typical 2 HD + 2 SD simultaneous stream max. AT&T U-verse offers.


----------



## tonyd79

peds48 said:


> Only on iOS devices, Android stream on cellular. of course, JB iDevices works as well.


Okay but still a geniego restriction. Only thing I have that won't stream in cellular.


----------



## ejbvt

KyL416 said:


> Disney refuses to negotiate the rights to their Watch products in a seperate deal so DirecTV has to wait until the existing contract is up for renewal.


I doubt it. Some cable companies added it the day it was available. I doubt they'd delay the start of their service to when contracts were up, so I am sure it was negotiated with them.


----------



## KyL416

ejbvt said:


> I doubt it. Some cable companies added it the day it was available. I doubt they'd delay the start of their service to when contracts were up, so I am sure it was negotiated with them.


Go back and read the links in post 6, the part where the person in charge at Disney flat out said so in an interview:
http://www.multichannel.com/content/upfronts-2012-bratches-watch-espn-affiliate-base-reach-80-million-subscribers-over-next-year

The only people who got it the day WatchESPN was launched was Verizon FiOS TV and Time Warner Cable (along with Brighthouse):
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2011/04/watchespn/

And that's because their renewals ocurred during the pre-WatchESPN days:
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2010/09/disneyabc-espn-and-time-warner-cable-sign-long-term-wide-ranging-agreement-to-carry-a-variety-of-video-digital-services/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2010/10/21187/

EVERY SINGLE announcment of a provider joining after the April 2011 launch was related to a contract renewal:
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/01/the-walt-disney-company-and-comcast-corporation-announce-a-long-term-comprehensive-distribution-agreement-that-advances-the-successful-multichannel-business-model/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/01/disney-comcast-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/10/disney-cablevision-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/12/the-walt-disney-company-and-cox-communications-announce-comprehensive-distribution-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2012/12/the-walt-disney-company-and-charter-communications-announce-new-distribution-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2013/01/the-walt-disney-company-and-att-u-verse-announce-broad-distribution-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2013/07/the-walt-disney-company-and-the-national-rural-telecommunications-cooperative-announce-comprehensive-long-term-distribution-agreement/
http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2014/03/walt-disney-company-dish-network-sign-groundbreaking-long-term-wide-ranging-agreement/


----------



## Jason Whiddon

I sure hope they work something out this summer. I'd really like WatchESPN access, and now I see SEC Net will have a Sunday night game...


----------



## dualsub2006

I want WatchESPN and SEC Network. I took the free upgrade from D* and didn't switch to cable because I felt like this would be the year. 

I hope I'm not wrong.


----------



## phat78boy

peds48 said:


> is already there, open the DIRECTV tablet app. What we need is for DIRECTV contacts to allow more channels out of home
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


This application is very lacking. None of the movie channels work, no DVR'd shows are available, and live sports is also lacking. Instead of working with all of these providers to allow them to redistribute via the Internet, just allow us to place shift our current receivers.



tonyd79 said:


> Well, more exactly, DirecTV's slingbox-like app is the GenieGo and it is not quite a slingbox as it does not do live TV (it will let you see things that are currently recording) and requires a wifi connection on the mobile device. Almost, but not quite.


GenieGo is rather pointless to me, but I'm sure some make good use of it. Having an app that lets me watch my TV as if I am in front of my TV is what I'm looking for. Again, I know 3rd party companies do this. I just think it would be better received if it was from DirecTV. In addition, it could easily be another monthly revenue stream.


----------



## KyL416

Have you used the DirecTV app lately? They added a LOT more Movie channels a few months ago

They have live out of home streaming of the following movie channels:
HBO East
Cinemax East
Starz Kids & Family
Starz Comedy
Starz East
Starz Edge
Starz Cinema
Encore East
Encore Action
Showtime East
Showtime 2
Showtime Extreme
Showtime Beyond
Showtime Next
Showtime Women
TMC East
TMC Xtra
Sony Movie Channel

They also have out of home streaming for the following sports channels:
NBA TV
Tennis Channel
beIn Sports Dos
beIn Sports

And in home streaming of the following sports channels:
NFL Network
MLB Network
NHL Network
Golf Channel
Fox Sports 1
NBCSN
Univision Deportes
TWC Deportes
BTN
Fox Sports 2
TWC SportsNet

DirecTV is part of BTN Go, BeIN Play and NBC Sports Live Extra which gives out of home streaming for select programming from their networks as well as extra live content that doesn't fit the schedule on their main channels. CBS and Turner for out of home streaming of March Madness. If you're in the LA market you also have access to TWC SportsNet's app for the Lakers.

Contract issues are holding up WatchESPN and Fox Sports Go. WatchESPN's is explained multiple times in this thread, Fox Sports Go goes back to them wanting a significant price increase when Speed and FUEL became Fox Sports 1 and Fox Sports 2. Most providers are waiting for the exisiting cheaper contract to run its course and see how the channel is doing AFTER the launch, while the others had their renewals after Fox made its plans to rebrand the channels and it was already factored in. Not exactly sports, but the same thing happened when Discovery Health became OWN, they wanted a huge increase despite the network being delayed over a year and only 3 shows being announced, none of which were hosted by Oprah and none of them survived the first year. By the time their contract was up for renewal DirecTV had a much better position in negotations which resulted in us getting OWN HD, VOD content available out of home and the channel moving up to a higher package.

You can thank the different internet, mobile and other rights the sports leagues sold before live streaming from the providers was common, which prevents more out of home sports coming directly from the providers. (i.e. WatchESPN and WatchABC have to black out NFL games on mobile phones because of the NFL's exclusive deal with Verizon Wireless for mobile rights. WatchESPN had to blur the screen anytime MLB highlights appeared on SportsCenter until they made a new deal with the MLB. NHL made an exclusive deal with Verizon Wireless that gives their subscribers NHL On the Fly via NHL GameCenter, NBCU has to black out content like WWE and some movies on their live streams of USA and Syfy)


DVR recordings need the GenieGo because most mobile devices do not have built in MPEG2 and AC3 codecs and many devices cannot support full HD content so something is needed to transcode the content to mobile friendly codecs and resolution. DirecTV's receivers don't have built in encoders, just decoders. Things like the GenieGo and Slingbox have built in hardware encoders to do that. Which also brings up the question, can DirecTV even implement streaming live TV from the receiver over the internet without infringing on EchoStar's Sling patents?


----------



## dennisj00

KyL416 said:


> Have you used the DirecTV app lately? They added a LOT more Movie channels a few months ago
> 
> They have live out of home streaming of the following movie channels:
> HBO East
> Cinemax East
> Starz Kids & Family
> Starz Comedy
> Starz East
> Starz Edge
> Starz Cinema
> Encore East
> Encore Action
> Showtime East
> Showtime 2
> Showtime Extreme
> Showtime Beyond
> Showtime Next
> Showtime Women
> TMC East
> TMC Xtra
> Sony Movie Channel
> 
> They also have out of home streaming for the following sports channels:
> NBA TV
> Tennis Channel
> beIn Sports Dos
> beIn Sports
> 
> And in home streaming of the following sports channels:
> NFL Network
> MLB Network
> NHL Network
> Golf Channel
> Fox Sports 1
> NBCSN
> Univision Deportes
> TWC Deportes
> BTN
> Fox Sports 2
> TWC SportsNet
> 
> DirecTV is part of BTN Go, BeIN Play and NBC Sports Live Extra which gives out of home streaming for select programming from their networks as well as extra live content that doesn't fit the schedule on their main channels. CBS and Turner for out of home streaming of March Madness. If you're in the LA market you also have access to TWC SportsNet's app for the Lakers.
> 
> Contract issues are holding up WatchESPN and Fox Sports Go. WatchESPN's is explained multiple times in this thread, Fox Sports Go goes back to them wanting a significant price increase when Speed and FUEL became Fox Sports 1 and Fox Sports 2. Most providers are waiting for the exisiting cheaper contract to run its course and see how the channel is doing AFTER the launch, while the others had their renewals after Fox made its plans to rebrand the channels and it was already factored in. Not exactly sports, but the same thing happened when Discovery Health became OWN, they wanted a huge increase despite the network being delayed over a year and only 3 shows being announced, none of which were hosted by Oprah and none of them survived the first year. By the time their contract was up for renewal DirecTV had a much better position in negotations which resulted in us getting OWN HD, VOD content available out of home and the channel moving up to a higher package.
> 
> You can thank the different internet, mobile and other rights the sports leagues sold before live streaming from the providers was common, which prevents more out of home sports coming directly from the providers. (i.e. WatchESPN and WatchABC have to black out NFL games on mobile phones because of the NFL's exclusive deal with Verizon Wireless for mobile rights. WatchESPN had to blur the screen anytime MLB highlights appeared on SportsCenter until they made a new deal with the MLB. NHL made an exclusive deal with Verizon Wireless that gives their subscribers NHL On the Fly via NHL GameCenter, NBCU has to black out content like WWE and some movies on their live streams of USA and Syfy)
> 
> DVR recordings need the GenieGo because most mobile devices do not have built in MPEG2 and AC3 codecs and many devices cannot support full HD content so something is needed to transcode the content to mobile friendly codecs and resolution. DirecTV's receivers don't have built in encoders, just decoders. Things like the GenieGo and Slingbox have built in hardware encoders to do that. Which also brings up the question, can DirecTV even implement streaming live TV from the receiver over the internet without infringing on EchoStar's Sling patents?


It's near live within 4 minutes or so. . . just set a remote recording.

And instead of recording a game that I want to stream semi-live, I'll set 1 hour manual recordings for the duration so I don't have to restart from the beginning if something glitches.


----------



## todwest

I really don't care why DirecTV isn't an approved provider of ESPN streaming apps and services. All I care about is that I can't watch the FIFA World Cup while I am at my office. This is a deal-breaker for me. I will have to DVR the games and watch them when I get home. Thus I will be terminating my DirecTV account, after 18 years, just as soon as the tournament is over. Time-Warner is awful. But at least I can watch the soccer games I want (DirecTV also doesn't carry Gol TV, except as part of the Spanish language package; so, no Bundesliga! Time-Warner carries the English language version of Gol TV as part of its regular sports package). DirecTV needs to fix this. I have complained repeatedly. I have also written to corporate. The letter I received back didn't address my concerns, and was willfully obtuse about the solution. They actually told me that ESPN3 is online-only, and that I need to speak to my ISP about it. DirecTV is a satellite company, thus it has no wires in the ground or on telephone poles. Seriously. That's what they said. Of course, DishTV comes with access to ESPN3 and Watch ESPN, as does every major cable provider in the US. But no DirecTV. Enough, already. I'm done with this crap.


----------



## joshjr

todwest said:


> I really don't care why DirecTV isn't an approved provider of ESPN streaming apps and services. All I care about is that I can't watch the FIFA World Cup while I am at my office. This is a deal-breaker for me. I will have to DVR the games and watch them when I get home. Thus I will be terminating my DirecTV account, after 18 years, just as soon as the tournament is over. Time-Warner is awful. But at least I can watch the soccer games I want (DirecTV also doesn't carry Gol TV, except as part of the Spanish language package; so, no Bundesliga! Time-Warner carries the English language version of Gol TV as part of its regular sports package). DirecTV needs to fix this. I have complained repeatedly. I have also written to corporate. The letter I received back didn't address my concerns, and was willfully obtuse about the solution. They actually told me that ESPN3 is online-only, and that I need to speak to my ISP about it. DirecTV is a satellite company, thus it has no wires in the ground or on telephone poles. Seriously. That's what they said. Of course, DishTV comes with access to ESPN3 and Watch ESPN, as does every major cable provider in the US. But no DirecTV. Enough, already. I'm done with this crap.


Supposedly ESPN will only add in the app when the current contract runs out. There are alot of us that have been waiting on it for awhile. Not a good reason to leave DirecTV though. I imagine they will get it before to long. Good luck with your new provider. I hope it works out for you.


----------



## slice1900

todwest said:


> I really don't care why DirecTV isn't an approved provider of ESPN streaming apps and services. All I care about is that I can't watch the FIFA World Cup while I am at my office. This is a deal-breaker for me. I will have to DVR the games and watch them when I get home. Thus I will be terminating my DirecTV account, after 18 years, just as soon as the tournament is over. Time-Warner is awful. But at least I can watch the soccer games I want (DirecTV also doesn't carry Gol TV, except as part of the Spanish language package; so, no Bundesliga! Time-Warner carries the English language version of Gol TV as part of its regular sports package). DirecTV needs to fix this. I have complained repeatedly. I have also written to corporate. The letter I received back didn't address my concerns, and was willfully obtuse about the solution. They actually told me that ESPN3 is online-only, and that I need to speak to my ISP about it. DirecTV is a satellite company, thus it has no wires in the ground or on telephone poles. Seriously. That's what they said. Of course, DishTV comes with access to ESPN3 and Watch ESPN, as does every major cable provider in the US. But no DirecTV. Enough, already. I'm done with this crap.


That's because they've renegotiated their contracts with Disney/ESPN more recently than Directv. Directv's contract is up this September, so it is very likely they'll be adding these within the next few months. If that's the only reason you switch, you may regret it, but if you don't have any particular reason to stick with Directv versus Dish or cable then you might as well switch now so you can get the World Cup.


----------



## daniloni

todwest said:


> I really don't care why DirecTV isn't an approved provider of ESPN streaming apps and services. All I care about is that I can't watch the FIFA World Cup while I am at my office. This is a deal-breaker for me. I will have to DVR the games and watch them when I get home. Thus I will be terminating my DirecTV account, after 18 years, just as soon as the tournament is over. Time-Warner is awful. But at least I can watch the soccer games I want (DirecTV also doesn't carry Gol TV, except as part of the Spanish language package; so, no Bundesliga! Time-Warner carries the English language version of Gol TV as part of its regular sports package). DirecTV needs to fix this. I have complained repeatedly. I have also written to corporate. The letter I received back didn't address my concerns, and was willfully obtuse about the solution. They actually told me that ESPN3 is online-only, and that I need to speak to my ISP about it. DirecTV is a satellite company, thus it has no wires in the ground or on telephone poles. Seriously. That's what they said. Of course, DishTV comes with access to ESPN3 and Watch ESPN, as does every major cable provider in the US. But no DirecTV. Enough, already. I'm done with this crap.


I replied to this in your other thread, suggesting a slingbox. As far as GolTV, I agree. Note that GolTV (in both English and Spanish, albeit in SD) is now available in the "Deportes Pack" for just $5 per month (also including Univision Deportes, ESPN Deportes, Fox Deportes, BeIN Español and TyC Sports). Unfortunately, the other providers bring their own cans of worms. Dish does not offer GolTV at all. GolTV will be losing the rights to Bundesliga after this season in favor of Fox. As far as I know, TWC carries Fox Sports 2 only in standard definition, although that will probably be corrected by the time the Bundesliga lands on Fox in August 2015.


----------



## islesfan

tonyd79 said:


> Well, more exactly, DirecTV's slingbox-like app is the GenieGo and it is not quite a slingbox as it does not do live TV (it will let you see things that are currently recording) and requires a wifi connection on the mobile device. Almost, but not quite.


And assuming you don't want to watch your very expensive sports package programs like NHL Center Ice, because those won't work with the GenieGo.


----------



## trh

todwest said:


> Thus I will be terminating my DirecTV account, after 18 years, just as soon as the tournament is over.


Not sure why you're waiting until the tournament is over. Do it now so can get everything in place. And make sure you can stream to your office. Many IT departments block streaming sites.


----------



## peds48

trh said:


> Not sure why you're waiting until the tournament is over. Do it now so can get everything in place. And make sure you can stream to your office. *Many IT departments block streaming sites.*


that is an awesome point not to be dismissed. at the end of the day, the companies wants their employees working instead of facebooking or watching a game. :righton:


----------



## Laxguy

Many companies want their employees working for the company at the beginning of the day, too.....


----------



## mnassour

Perhaps the question of availability at a workplace is a good thought, but I don't think that we should be judging the concept of watching TV while at work. 

But the bottom line is that DirecTV, for whatever reason, has sadly fallen behind the curve when it comes to college sports. If you had told me 24 months ago that Dish would be blowing them away in that area, I would have laughed out loud. Instead, I'm now preparing to switch to Dish when I relocate come the middle of the summer. I've been with DirecTV since 1999 and still think it has a superior picture to Dish. But for years, I've told people to choose the provider (sat or cable) that carries the channels they want to watch, and not to be swayed by rumors and promises of channels that will be/may be added "soon". You can only judge a provider on what it delivers today. I guess it's time to take my own advice.


----------



## slice1900

How is Dish blowing them away? They have Pac 12 that Directv doesn't, but SEC Network and WatchESPN is only because Dish finished their renegotiation with Disney/ESPN first and Directv is doing so now. By the fall I think there's a 99% chance Directv will have those, thus having everything Dish does except Pac 12 college sports wise.


----------



## inkahauts

It seems as though Directv was one if the last if not the last provide to negotiate a deal with Disney before they began adding watch espn apps to their negotiations. That's a big reason and understandable. 

Let's see where they are in august. 

But yeah neither is really blowing the other away overall unless you live on New York.


----------



## todwest

peds48 said:


> that is an awesome point not to be dismissed. at the end of the day, the companies wants their employees working instead of facebooking or watching a game. :righton:


I'm self employed :righton:


----------



## Laxguy

Then you better have a good talking to with your top employee!


----------



## James Long

todwest said:


> I'm self employed :righton:


Then your clients would rather have you concentrating on what they are paying you for than Facebook or the game. 

(Unless you work in marketing and use Facebook for business or in media and need the game for business use.)


----------



## mnassour

slice1900 said:


> How is Dish blowing them away? They have Pac 12 that Directv doesn't, but SEC Network and WatchESPN is only because Dish finished their renegotiation with Disney/ESPN first and Directv is doing so now. By the fall I think there's a 99% chance Directv will have those, thus having everything Dish does except Pac 12 college sports wise.


When DirecTV has those channels, Dish will no longer be "blowing it away". But rule one of satellite or cable TV is never, ever, ever purchase a programming system based on what you expect will be carried in the future. When DirecTV gets its act together, it'll be back where it needs to be. Today, as far as college sports and streaming video is concerned, it's a sorry second at best.


----------



## dualsub2006

It's disingenuous to say that it's ESPN's fault for not negotiating the Watch apps outside of a renewal. 

At any point D* could have approached Disney about an early renewal of their contract. D* didn't because they wanted to put off any increase in carriage fees, but D* could have had the Watch apps on day 1. 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## KyL416

Go look at the dates in the releases for each provider joining in post 33 on the previous page. No one ended their contract early to get it, the only people who got it on Day 1 were Time Warner/Brighthouse and Verizon who had their renewal before the Watch launch and after the previous broadband provider based incarnation ESPN 360 debuted. It took a year before Comcast came on board and almost another year before Cablevision did. Cox, Charter and U-Verse didn't get it until 2013, the NRTC (which STILL can't authenticate on the mobile apps) joined late last year, while Dish was just a few months ago. If you dig back in the press release archive to the renewals that occured during the 00s, it's the same interval with all the providers, NO ONE renewed early.


----------



## James Long

KyL416 said:


> No one ended their contract early to get it . . . NO ONE renewed early.


Which is a shame, especially for the companies that had the longest to wait. The fear of a price increase on the rest of the channels must have been pretty high to decide to be the last major company to offer the streamed content. Yes, it appears that they all followed the same path of "wait for renewal" - but that does not make the last major company to join look proactive in bringing the best content to their subscribers. Regardless of what company that is.


----------



## dualsub2006

KyL416 said:


> If you dig back in the press release archive to the renewals that occured during the 00s, it's the same interval with all the providers, NO ONE renewed early.


I don't care about anyone other than D* in this discussion, but if you look at the major providers, everyone else has it.

D* could have had it by now. A call to Disney, let's redo our deal now and they could have had it at will. Instead, they're the largest provider that doesn't offer it.

D* didn't do that, and they nearly lost me to TWC because of it. I cared about more than just Watch ESPN or I would have been gone. It was a close call, and I canceled the TWC install the day they were supposed to come.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> Which is a shame, especially for the companies that had the longest to wait. The fear of a price increase on the rest of the channels must have been pretty high to decide to be the last major company to offer the streamed content. Yes, it appears that they all followed the same path of "wait for renewal" - but that does not make the last major company to join look proactive in bringing the best content to their subscribers. Regardless of what company that is.


So what's the solution? What if ESPN announces some new feature tomorrow, and Directv is the first to get it and and cable companies and Dish can't get it for years because they don't want to re-negotiate their contracts? Should Dish go back and renegotiate to add it?

If there's any blame to be laid for this, it should be with Disney/ESPN who either won't renegotiate contracts at all until they expire or tries to impose term so onerous that providers are unwilling to renegotiate with them earlier.

Nobody can force Disney to negotiate earlier than their time, and if they're willing but want a lot more money, should Directv have just eaten it to get WatchESPN? People wished they could have it a few years ago, but probably not if it meant paying an extra dollar or two a month due to Disney increasing prices on all their channels. They'll have it soon enough, which doesn't help those who wanted it two years ago, but someone who leaves Directv over it might end up missing out on something else Directv gets that the provider they switch to won't have for years. There's just no way to tell, given the way Disney appears to do business with the providers.


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> So what's the solution? What if ESPN announces some new feature tomorrow, and Directv is the first to get it and and cable companies and Dish can't get it for years because they don't want to re-negotiate their contracts? Should Dish go back and renegotiate to add it?


If the new feature or channel is important, yes.



slice1900 said:


> If there's any blame to be laid for this, it should be with Disney/ESPN who either won't renegotiate contracts at all until they expire or tries to impose term so onerous that providers are unwilling to renegotiate with them earlier.


We do not know how onerous the terms would be. All we know is that a company who claims they are a "leader" is last in line of the major providers to add the content. The details are irrelevant to the general public ... all they see is "DirecTV doesn't have that".

Long explanations of why DirecTV didn't lead in getting WatchESPN and the other streaming tie-ins don't change the fact that DirecTV doesn't have them. And while it would be a fairly good bet that DirecTV will have them by the end of the year, being "last" does not give the impression of being a leader.


----------



## slice1900

Give one example of anyone renegotiating their contract with Disney before it was up. I don't think you can find one, which pretty much says to me the providers see whatever terms Disney may have offered as onerous.


----------



## prushing

James Long said:


> If the new feature or channel is important, yes.
> 
> We do not know how onerous the terms would be. All we know is that a company who claims they are a "leader" is last in line of the major providers to add the content. The details are irrelevant to the general public ... all they see is "DirecTV doesn't have that".
> 
> Long explanations of why DirecTV didn't lead in getting WatchESPN and the other streaming tie-ins don't change the fact that DirecTV doesn't have them. And while it would be a fairly good bet that DirecTV will have them by the end of the year, being "last" does not give the impression of being a leader.


How about paying extra for ESPN for the rest of time? That's what will happen if DTV went and renegotiated as it would be a whole new contract at increased rates for everything.

Sent from my KFTHWI using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> Give one example of anyone renegotiating their contract with Disney before it was up. I don't think you can find one, which pretty much says to me the providers see whatever terms Disney may have offered as onerous.


Not the point. You have made your assertion that no one renegotiated. My point was that regardless of all the explanations / excuses you or anyone else can give, the last major provider to offer a service does not look like a leader.

If you believe being the last major provider to offer a service appears to be leadership I can't help you.


----------



## ynavti

Rather than switching from Directv and then later on regretting it, how about switching internet provider to one that provides ESPN3 if possible? That's what I did when I went from Time Warner to ATT Uverse.


----------



## peds48

FWIW, I have Optimum internet service and in order for me to get ESPN3 online I would need to subscribe to their video package as well. So with some ISPs, internet only may not be enough, YMMV


----------



## dualsub2006

ynavti said:


> Rather than switching from Directv and then later on regretting it, how about switching internet provider to one that provides ESPN3 if possible? That's what I did when I went from Time Warner to ATT Uverse.


ESPN3 is most definitely NOT Watch ESPN.

Aside from that, lots of people like me would suffer with horrible Internet speeds if they switched to get ESPN3.

I'd rather be a little disappointed with Time Warner TV service than be totally disappointed with Cincinnati Bell DSL, so I would never consider changing ISP's just to get ESPN3.


----------



## osu1ne

I am betting that Directv will have WatchESPN and ESPN3 by the end of the year under new contract. I currently have Time Warner for phone and internet and Directv for tv. I don't want to get Time Warner tv to get ESPN online service. I am happy with phone and internet but unhappy that they won't provide WatchESPN or ESPN3 without tv subscription.


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> Not the point. You have made your assertion that no one renegotiated. My point was that regardless of all the explanations / excuses you or anyone else can give, the last major provider to offer a service does not look like a leader.
> 
> If you believe being the last major provider to offer a service appears to be leadership I can't help you.


If you believe that leadership can only mean "first to offer everything" then I can't help you either. Directv offers more sports content than any other provider, which allows them to claim they're the "sports leader" by that definition, even if they don't offer Pac 12 and will be last to add WatchESPN.

Whatever the reason, they were unwilling or unable to get WatchESPN during the middle of their existing contract. Too bad for those who wanted it sooner, just as it was too bad for Dish subscribers who wanted ESPNU in HD that they had to wait until Dish renewed their contract to finally get it a couple months ago.


----------



## James Long

Every explanation / excuse / deflection supports my point.


----------



## dualsub2006

slice1900 said:


> If you believe that leadership can only mean "first to offer everything" then I can't help you either.


First to offer? No, not necessary at all.

Last to offer? If we're talking PAC 12 or Longhorn Network that's one thing. This is Watch ESPN.

Being last to offer Watch ESPN isn't leadership. At all.


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> Every explanation / excuse / deflection supports my point.


Ignoring what I post and claiming "victory" for yourself supports a conclusion all right, but not what you think.


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> Ignoring what I post and claiming "victory" for yourself supports a conclusion all right, but not what you think.


This is about DirecTV being the LAST major distributor to offer WatchESPN and other Disney/ESPN products. You don't have an answer for that other than excuses, explanations and deflections. All you seem to be able to post is that you are sure that it isn't DirecTV's fault that they are the LAST major distributor. And that is just your opinion. You cannot prove that it isn't DirecTV's fault. But you can keep posting excuses, explanations and deflections.

And none of that changes the fact that DirecTV is the last major distributor. Being last does not make a company look like a leader. Appearances matter in today's marketplace. Customers and potential customers who expect DirecTV to lead can say "that isn't leading". (Other companies are not expected to lead - so don't expect your deflection tactic to work.)


----------



## slice1900

There's no point in arguing with someone who uses typical internet troll tactics of accusing those who disagree with him of "making excuses", "deflection", etc. over and over again. If I disagree with you I'm wrong, if I agree with you I was wrong to have disagreed. You're right no matter what, we get it.

You sound a lot like someone else with a dog avatar who likes to visit from the Dish forums...


----------



## acostapimps

Everybody have opinions on renegotiation deals with ESPN, but I never heard of early deals with any content providers, But that doesn't mean that both parties can't have early talks leading up to a deal, but it will take time for any agreement to be reached especially from a high magnitude of ESPN's cost with digital rights, so don't expect any different like Dish's deal, will have to wait and see on what both they can agree to in terms of price, I just don't see ESPN/Disney removing their channels because of no agreement, maybe extending expired contract if it comes to that, or simply channels staying put until a deal is reached, Just like Dish's deal.


----------



## inkahauts

James Long said:


> This is about DirecTV being the LAST major distributor to offer WatchESPN and other Disney/ESPN products. You don't have an answer for that other than excuses, explanations and deflections. All you seem to be able to post is that you are sure that it isn't DirecTV's fault that they are the LAST major distributor. And that is just your opinion. You cannot prove that it isn't DirecTV's fault. But you can keep posting excuses, explanations and deflections.
> 
> And none of that changes the fact that DirecTV is the last major distributor. Being last does not make a company look like a leader. Appearances matter in today's marketplace. Customers and potential customers who expect DirecTV to lead can say "that isn't leading". (Other companies are not expected to lead - so don't expect your deflection tactic to work.)


Why is it his reasons which everyone has seen proven (espn won't negotiate early) excuses? It's simply reality.

And I dot think you can claim someone as not being a leader because they are the last to get one particular thing. Not when they are so far ahead that everyone else having that thing still doesn't put them ahead of DIRECTV. What it does is differentiate the others so maybe some will find a compelling reason to like them better but that doesn't make companies leaders over DIRECTV in sports.

Especially when watch espn is an add on and not a major front line linear channel. While we here care about watch apps from everyone I think the overwhelming vast majority of the 100 million pus cable and sat subscribers don't care yet about them. They are niche market still and will be for several more years.

Apps don't determine leaders in any kind or actual programming today. Someday maybe but not today. Linear and on demand is how it's determined today and on demand isnt a player in sports yet either.

I think to many people focus on little things like espn apps when if you want to make a real argument it should be about Philly and the Dodgers and Huston and Portland. Then you'd have some firepower about being a leader. But when you ignore the Lakers (and Dodgers and Huston too) and all of New York dish can't say much. And there is no cable company in aware of that can come close to either dish or DIRECTV in sports.

It's not about any one thing. It's about the whole package. And until the niche things have real importance to a much larger base it's more about working a new tech into the game. Not about who has it first. I fully believe by the time all these apps are truly important everyone will have them. Everyone.

And if you break apps out and ask who is a leader in apps I don't think there is a leader yet as everyone has something a bit different. Dish has some advantages and DIRECTV some and Time Warner Cable some etc. no one is a leader right now as far as I'm concerned.

DIRECTV has had more sports for ages. They did have more Hi Definition than anyone else for a long time and where the leader in that. That's gone now as thinks have evened out overall accept for a few things for some individuals but there's nothing big overall that someone has another doesn't. So DIRECTV is back to hanging their hat on sports only for now.

Of course what I think don't matter much anyway. :lol:


----------



## James Long

inkahauts said:


> Why is it his reasons which everyone has seen proven (espn won't negotiate early) excuses? It's simply reality.


The reality is a couple of years ago DirecTV changed. They went from a provider who one could assume had whatever a person was looking for (perhaps an unearned reputation, but still their reputation) to a provider that a person had to compare. There was a time where it seemed that DirecTV was in control of the pay TV market - that they could get what they wanted, adding channels in HD before there were HD feeds to any other provider, getting exclusive content no other provider had - sign up for DirecTV and they will get it for you. The service may be more expensive but it was complete.

Now more than ever people have to compare. Having NFL Sunday Ticket doesn't help a viewer who wants WatchESPN or WatchDisney on their mobile devices. And while I'd be one that would argue that packaged pay TV is NOT going away any time soon, having streaming options as part of the service is becoming so common that a service without streaming is like a service without a core "everybody has it" linear channel. It is important.


----------



## prushing

inkahauts said:


> Why is it his reasons which everyone has seen proven (espn won't negotiate early) excuses? It's simply reality.


I think there is a little bit of a semantic issue with the words.

I don't think ESPN will renegotiate the current contract to add watchespn.

I think ESPN would negotiate a new contract that included watchespn along with everything else at the new going rate, which will be higher than DTV is paying now.

The only reason they wouldn't do this was to keep the contracts split up and arbitrarily increase revenues every year they have a new contract.

Sent from my KFTHWI using Tapatalk


----------



## TravelFan1

Contract negotiations aside, it's fairly disappointing that every single other major provider - Fios, Comcast, Cablevision, Dish, AT&T, you name it - now have WatchEspn available, except Directv. And with the World Cup in less than 2 weeks, I'm fine because I bought a slingbox. But other Directv subscribers wishing to watch the World Cup online that don't own a slingbox will be out of luck. I'm not saying it's Directv's or Disney's fault - and I understand it's probably more Disney's than Directv's. It's just that, as Directv customer, the actual outcome is that we can't watch ESPN networks on WatchEspn.


----------



## TravelFan1

Now to add a positive one: Directv is one of a very few providers with Tennischannel.com available. I found out last week, while watching a few Roland Garros matches online. Comcast, for example, isn't a provider for which tennischannel.com is available.


----------



## KyL416

I made a list of the biggest providers and who has what when it comes to authenticated players. Some are lumped together when they share a player and app. (i.e. CNN/HLN, Fox News/Fox Business, FX/FXX/FXM with FX Now)

"E" means that they only have an ISP deal in place with ESPN3 but not the rest of Watch ESPN, "S" means that their addition has been announced but it isn't available yet.

View attachment 24910

(Updated to include RCN)


----------



## vandergraff

Wow - I haven't been following this but I am stunned DirecTV doesn't have Watch ESPN with the World Cup starting.

I am about to go on a road trip for and would like to watch the World Cup games online.

I would actually activate a Comcast TV account to get the games (my ISP is Comcast) if necessary.

If this article is right Univision may also be an online option for the first two rounds. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/soccer-insider/wp/2014/06/09/streaming-the-world-cup/

Can't believe DirecTV wants me to do this - I have been a subscriber since they started in 1994 (maybe I will get a DirecTV gold watch this year....) - but now they want me to try Comcast or Univision


----------



## daniloni

vandergraff said:


> I would actually activate a Comcast TV account to get the games (my ISP is Comcast) if necessary.


Most games are are available on ESPN3. For those games, you're good to go with Comcast as your ISP. No need to add TV. It's kind of difficult to follow which games are being transmitted in English on ESPN3. It seems like most games are available in English, and all games are available in Portuguese or Korean. I'm not totally clear on why some games are not being shown on ESPN3 in English.


----------



## prushing

daniloni said:


> Most games are are available on ESPN3. For those games, you're good to go with Comcast as your ISP. No need to add TV. It's kind of difficult to follow which games are being transmitted in English on ESPN3. It seems like most games are available in English, and all games are available in Portuguese or Korean. I'm not totally clear on why some games are not being shown on ESPN3 in English.


Actually most games are NOT on ESPN3. ESPN3 will be showing some surround thing with a few different camera angles. I haven't seen it said if you will be able to watch it with the normal ESPN3 login or if you need WatchESPN access.


----------



## daniloni

If you go to the website and narrow it down to espn3, you see that generally two of the three games per day during the group stage are shown as being broadcast on espn3.


----------



## prushing

It's shown, but I don't think you are going to be able to watch it. This would be against everything ESPN has done in the past. They do not stream things that are on ESPN channels on ESPN3.

2nd link shows that something will be on ESPN3, but it doesn't say what type of login you will need. It looks like they are showing additional camera angles, so maybe they will have that available.

http://www.cnet.com/how-to/how-to-stream-the-world-cup/

http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2014/05/espn-to-deliver-comprehensive-coverage-of-the-2014-fifa-world-cup-on-digital-platforms/


----------



## daniloni

When something is on ESPN3 as opposed to ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Deportes, etc., a Comcast ISP login is all that is required. So when I log into the watchespn site, the non-ESPN content has keys next to it, meaning that authentication is required, whereas the ESPN3 content (including for instance Brazil-Croatia on Thursday) has no key graphic next to it. Meaning that I'm good to go just logging in on my Comcast internet. ESPN sometimes simulcasts things that are shown on ESPN and ESPN2 on ESPN3 although you are correct that it's not their normal modus operandi.


----------



## vandergraff

daniloni said:


> When something is on ESPN3 as opposed to ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Deportes, etc., a Comcast ISP login is all that is required. So when I log into the watchespn site, the non-ESPN content has keys next to it, meaning that authentication is required, whereas the ESPN3 content (including for instance Brazil-Croatia on Thursday) has no key graphic next to it. Meaning that I'm good to go just logging in on my Comcast internet. ESPN sometimes simulcasts things that are shown on ESPN and ESPN2 on ESPN3 although you are correct that it's not their normal modus operandi.


 Interesting. You are right when I log into Watch ESPN with my Comcast (ISP) log-in I can watch ESPN3 (but not ESPN, ESPN2 etc).

Now the question is whether some games will be on ESPN3. I will try tomorrow and see. I will also try Univision online as that is supposed to be available without sign-in for the first two rounds.


----------



## evotz

Rather than start a new thread, I thought I'd reply to this one.

Is DirecTV negotiating with ESPN for the WatchESPN app? I gather that DirecTV is still in negotiations with Disney/ESPN regarding the SEC Network. Is this negotiation part of a larger negotiation regarding ESPN and perhaps WatchESPN?

Is DirecTV's contract with ESPN up in September of this year? If so, I'm assuming any negotiations with ESPN (regardless if they are tied with the current SEC Network negotiations) would include WatchESPN. Has any TV provider (especially large ones) that have renegotiated with ESPN since the WatchESPN app has been release, not included WatchESPN?


----------



## joshjr

dualsub2006 said:


> First to offer? No, not necessary at all.
> 
> Last to offer? If we're talking PAC 12 or Longhorn Network that's one thing. This is Watch ESPN.
> 
> Being last to offer Watch ESPN isn't leadership. At all.


How about the fact that Dish does not carry Sunday Ticket and no longer carries MLB Extra Innings either. So they have some college confereneces network and DirecTV don't. Big whoop. Every provider has their short comings.


----------



## dualsub2006

joshjr said:


> How about the fact that Dish does not carry Sunday Ticket and no longer carries MLB Extra Innings either. So they have some college confereneces network and DirecTV don't. Big whoop. Every provider has their short comings.


I wasn't speaking about Dish specifically, but I can go to a sports bar and watch any football game that I want, and MLB.TV is available from the source.


----------



## inkahauts

evotz said:


> Rather than start a new thread, I thought I'd reply to this one.
> Is DirecTV negotiating with ESPN for the WatchESPN app? I gather that DirecTV is still in negotiations with Disney/ESPN regarding the SEC Network. Is this negotiation part of a larger negotiation regarding ESPN and perhaps WatchESPN?
> 
> Is DirecTV's contract with ESPN up in September of this year? If so, I'm assuming any negotiations with ESPN (regardless if they are tied with the current SEC Network negotiations) would include WatchESPN. Has any TV provider (especially large ones) that have renegotiated with ESPN since the WatchESPN app has been release, not included WatchESPN?


Every Disney owned channel and offering is being renegotiated right now. I believe it's not actually up till the end of the year but not positive on the exact date.


----------



## bigdaddy51200

Any updates on this ? I thought when we got the SECnetwork it would be done but thats not the case .


----------



## KyL416

bigdaddy51200 said:


> Any updates on this ? I thought when we got the SECnetwork it would be done but thats not the case .


DirecTV only signed a deal for the SEC Network, they're still negotiating for the rest of the Disney/ESPN package.


----------



## DBSSTEPHEN

One good thing is I get to watch all those apps


----------



## dualsub2006

Some (who may well not have any idea what they are talking about) say that the price for the Watch apps is a sticking point. 

I'd say D* gets them, but I'll not be shocked if they don't. 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## ejbvt

There is no excuse for Directv's lack of progress. When Dish has sports that Directv does not, something is wrong. Pac 12, LHN, WatchESPN, etc. There are of course plenty of sports Directv has that Dish doesn't like MSG, Comcast SportsNet New England, YES. Each should have all. End of discussion.


----------



## tonyd79

ejbvt said:


> There is no excuse for Directv's lack of progress. When Dish has sports that Directv does not, something is wrong. Pac 12, LHN, WatchESPN, etc. There are of course plenty of sports Directv has that Dish doesn't like MSG, Comcast SportsNet New England, YES. Each should have all. End of discussion.


The "excuse" is that they are still working a deal and are still under contract. Disney/ESPN does these things at end of contract. Dish, by the way, had an extension for months while working their deal with Disney and had nothing new until the deal was done. It is possible that directv/Disney talks will go beyond the end of the current contract and you won't see a change until the new deal is signed.

Mostly it is the way business is done but it has been demonstrated over and over it is the way Disney does business.

That they added the sec channel is a good sign that talks are going well between them, however.


----------



## DBSSTEPHEN

Watch watch ESPN watch Disney channel watch Disney Junior watch Disney XD channels and I only have one service provider


----------



## dualsub2006

DBSSTEPHEN said:


> Watch watch ESPN watch Disney channel watch Disney Junior watch Disney XD channels and I only have one service provider


I have no idea what that is even supposed to mean.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## DBSSTEPHEN

I was saying is I only have DIRECTV and I can watch them through Comcast communication


----------



## acostapimps

And if Directv included those you mentioned, then you wouldn't need to use Comcast as your login credentials.


----------



## DBSSTEPHEN

You're right I wouldnt


----------



## slice1900

ejbvt said:


> There is no excuse for Directv's lack of progress. When Dish has sports that Directv does not, something is wrong. Pac 12, LHN, WatchESPN, etc. There are of course plenty of sports Directv has that Dish doesn't like MSG, Comcast SportsNet New England, YES. Each should have all. End of discussion.


So both Directv and Dish should just pay whatever any provider asks to make sure they have all sports? What happens when your bill becomes $200/month because RSNs and networks know they "have" to have everything and are willing to pay whatever is asked? Then you'll whine about how your bill is too high...or even if you have no problems paying that, a lot of other people will.


----------



## acostapimps

$200 is pretty high bill for TV, but some are already paying that with all the price increases, coupled that with add ons like premiums, sports packages and a lot of receivers in their account, Plus sales tax for some states, A lot can go up in price besides tier packages.


----------

