|
Post by aztech on Jan 20, 2011 18:12:28 GMT -8
You sure I'll get the games here in Nor Cal? I live in the SF Bay Area and changed to Direct TV. You will get it with the Sports Package. Best move I ever made and I was a long time Comcast customer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2011 18:13:36 GMT -8
I actually think we will want Comcast in control on this one. They are ging to make a major play in the sports television landscape as soon as all the merger stuff is complete. They are the largest cable company in the US and with the NBC assets added in they will have the ability to force their will on most others when it comes to programming carriage agreements. They will have too many "must haves" for their customers. The fight with Direct TV for Verses is small and Verses on its own does not command much, but now Comcast will have NBC, a slew of owned and operated NBC affiliates, USA, CNBC, MSNBC, SYFY, Verses, Golf Channel, The Mountain, the various Comcast Sports Nets, and a bunch of others that it could bundle together as one package, so they will say "no Verses, fine, you get none of these...package deal now" Their strength will be in that bundle. It could be a good thing later down the road (from the distribution side) especially from what we hear they are wanting to do in the Video on Demand area and with digital. Best thing Mtn West can do is to stay relevent, which will raise interest/demand and make them look at the TV deals. Comcast could add it to all their own markets tomorrow if it wanted, 23,000,000 subs nationwide, and most in top 20 TV markets. The bad in all this could mean rates for all go up...cable and satellite both. IIRC, you're in the broadcasting business so I'll defer to you. However, I feel compelled to ask why you think I shouldn't continue to be skeptical based on how minimally valuable Comcast's deal with CBS-C has proven to be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2011 18:22:45 GMT -8
Except that Big Ten teams also get shown on ESPN and CBS on a regular basis. MWC conference games do not. That's the VS/CBS CS part of the deal and it may not be the best but I don't know if there's a better deal out there waiting for us. It's not like ESPN has a bunch of empty time slots on Saturday for MWC games and I don't know about you, but I'm not down with playing Monday through Friday, no matter what network it's on. The MWC isn't like most conferences out there. The MWC has its own network, which could easily be leased to ESPN in a deal which would have the benefit of upgrading programming technology (all HD all the time), allow for cross-publicizing of programming on all networks within the ESPN family which CBS has abjectly refused to do because it's the SEC's bitch, etc. Would the MWC have to play some midweek games? No doubt about it. However, is it going to kill us to have 10 or so per season? One thing is apparent. That is that the MWC and CUSA are not going to reach any kind of TV deal. Therefore, the MWC is now on its own to force Comcast into providing a good service at a good price, neither of which it has been doing for the last five years or however long it's been. With the greatest of respect, James, I think some of you are just butt hurt because ESPN laid a power trip on the MWC and we told them to shove it. Well, everybody here except the foster guy thinks The Mtn. has been great. However, that's the sole part of bolting from ESPN which has. Time for the MWC to admit that however much it might piss us off, ESPN is the powerbroker and unless Bauer is correct that Comcast's new deal with NBC will actually change that and turn Comcast into somebody besides an inept POS, ESPN will always have the upper hand on us.
|
|
|
Post by csfoster on Jan 20, 2011 18:55:39 GMT -8
That's the VS/CBS CS part of the deal and it may not be the best but I don't know if there's a better deal out there waiting for us. It's not like ESPN has a bunch of empty time slots on Saturday for MWC games and I don't know about you, but I'm not down with playing Monday through Friday, no matter what network it's on. The MWC isn't like most conferences out there. The MWC has its own network, which could easily be leased to ESPN in a deal which would have the benefit of upgrading programming technology (all HD all the time), allow for cross-publicizing of programming on all networks within the ESPN family which CBS has abjectly refused to do because it's the SEC's bitch, etc. Would the MWC have to play some midweek games? No doubt about it. However, is it going to kill us to have 10 or so per season? One thing is apparent. That is that the MWC and CUSA are not going to reach any kind of TV deal. Therefore, the MWC is now on its own to force Comcast into providing a good service at a good price, neither of which it has been doing for the last five years or however long it's been. With the greatest of respect, James, I think some of you are just butt hurt because ESPN laid a power trip on the MWC and we told them to shove it. Well, everybody here except the foster guy thinks The Mtn. has been great. However, that's the sole part of bolting from ESPN which has. Time for the MWC to admit that however much it might piss us off, ESPN is the powerbroker and unless Bauer is correct that Comcast's new deal with NBC will actually change that and turn Comcast into somebody besides an inept POS, ESPN will always have the upper hand on us. Add the fact that Mnt.Tv game production is second rate and enough said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2011 19:01:40 GMT -8
Add the fact that Mnt.Tv game production is second rate and enough said. If you're suggesting the MWC should just disband the network to save the money spent on it, I very much disagree.
|
|
|
Post by dbauer on Jan 21, 2011 11:21:49 GMT -8
I actually think we will want Comcast in control on this one. They are ging to make a major play in the sports television landscape as soon as all the merger stuff is complete. They are the largest cable company in the US and with the NBC assets added in they will have the ability to force their will on most others when it comes to programming carriage agreements. They will have too many "must haves" for their customers. The fight with Direct TV for Verses is small and Verses on its own does not command much, but now Comcast will have NBC, a slew of owned and operated NBC affiliates, USA, CNBC, MSNBC, SYFY, Verses, Golf Channel, The Mountain, the various Comcast Sports Nets, and a bunch of others that it could bundle together as one package, so they will say "no Verses, fine, you get none of these...package deal now" Their strength will be in that bundle. It could be a good thing later down the road (from the distribution side) especially from what we hear they are wanting to do in the Video on Demand area and with digital. Best thing Mtn West can do is to stay relevent, which will raise interest/demand and make them look at the TV deals. Comcast could add it to all their own markets tomorrow if it wanted, 23,000,000 subs nationwide, and most in top 20 TV markets. The bad in all this could mean rates for all go up...cable and satellite both. IIRC, you're in the broadcasting business so I'll defer to you. However, I feel compelled to ask why you think I shouldn't continue to be skeptical based on how minimally valuable Comcast's deal with CBS-C has proven to be. You should certainly be skeptical, and with just cause. Comcast is all business and IMO the reason they have not added the Mtn to their lineup nationwide is that they see no value to the subscribers there, in otherwords they dont think anyone in Philly cares about Mtn West sports enough to pay for it monthly. Adding it will need to justify revenue as they will ask for more money from all their customers, probebly $.50-$1.00 per sub (so every subsciobers bill will go up). Now, should the Mtn west teams continue to thrive and win their way into BCS games and make noise in the NCAA Tourn, and become a national story Comcast may feel compelled to offer this across the board if they feel they can make more money with it. They will consolidate their offerigs and force MSO's to take their product all or nothing, it's how this biz works. Take Disney, they own ABC, ESPN and all that is under that ESPN2, Classic, News, Deportes, U, etc...then ABC Family, Disney XD, etc, etc...they negotiate as a whole, you cant just take ESPN without the rest of the ESPN stuff, and then they negotiate the tier of coverage as well, which is why you see ESPN and ESPN2 always on a "normal" tier and usually with a great channel position. If and when they do this, all subscribers will be paying them money for The Mtn (most wont even know it) as it will roll all into one big fee for the "Comcast bundle". My gut still says Comcast will look to form a "rival" net to ESPN and use all its current assets to fill the programming, Mtn West, PAC 10, Big 12 for college, NHL, tons of PGA, UFC, NASCAR, the originals they have now like Junior Seau's Sports Jobs, and then whatever else they can pick up, remember they almost got NFL games back in 05. Comcast has all the money in the world to buy the rights to whatever they want and could do so to make this net extremely relevant. It would not shock me if they simply rebranded Versus again. The good is that we could see a Mtn west game of the week or even see a situation where they move programming around to accomodate a big game like next wednesday's match-up against BYU.
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jan 21, 2011 11:32:46 GMT -8
UNLV SID told me just now that the VS deal was mad 6 years ago. And Mnt.tv may have generated a little money but certainly has cost the MWC a lot more in lack of national exposure. Yeah,,I loved the national exposure we had when on ESPN...uhh...well...uh...maybe that one regional game or 11pm Thursday Eastern time, that was some great stuff back then, good times... Friend, no offense but either: you weren't around then or purposefully don't want to admit the truth. As a So Cal Exile who has lived in the South and East Coast for a few decades, there was NO repeat NO national exposure when on ESPN. We got perhaps one football game nationally, and always at a screwy time that the East couldn't see anyway or it was a regional game. Hoops, forget it, we got virtually none. Now, it is pretty good, even if the quality of broadcast isn't perfect.
|
|
|
Post by NTU on Jan 21, 2011 11:44:55 GMT -8
And Mnt.tv may have generated a little money but certainly has cost the MWC a lot more in lack of national exposure. Yeah,,I loved the national exposure we had when on ESPN...uhh...well...uh...maybe that one regional game or 11pm Thursday Eastern time, that was some great stuff back then, good times... Friend, no offense but either: you weren't around then or purposefully don't want to admit the truth. As a So Cal Exile who has lived in the South and East Coast for a few decades, there was NO repeat NO national exposure when on ESPN. We got perhaps one football game nationally, and always at a screwy time that the East couldn't see anyway or it was a regional game. Hoops, forget it, we got virtually none. Now, it is pretty good, even if the quality of broadcast isn't perfect. First off: Stu: Nail meet head! Well put! I LOVE the fact that I no longer have to wonder IF an SDSU game will be on TV. I KNOW it will be. And for you out of towners, it may take a little bit more effort to find the game than you'd prefer, but at least you know you CAN find it and where. Although I do kind of miss those "Big Monday" games......those were kind of fun, and usually drew pretty big crowds, even against Wyoming...... Second: With all due respect to bekays, I think you need to stop listening to this source of yours. It's just wishful thinking that ESPN was going to be clamoring to buy this game out. There's a contract with The Mtn./CBSC/Versus that is pretty much ironclad. Versus, being the "national" network in this deal, gets a choice of games. ESPN would have to buy it out from them, and it wouldn't matter much what SDSU, BYU, or the MWC wanted. It's out of their hands. This is the second week where your source was trying to tell us that ESPN was going to buy out a game on extremely short notice. I find that to be a preposterous notion, and merely wishful thinking. Perhaps games like this one will cause them to reconsider what they're willing to offer our conference in the next round of TV contract negotiations, but for now, can we please set aside this silliness that ESPN is begging to televise our games? It's just not gonna happen, and it's just not true. I think your source is badly misinformed.
|
|