Big Ten Network

[BigTimMN]

Sorry, but that doesn't even pass the smell test of believability. There is FAR FAR FAR LESS than a 0% chance that E* will agree to carry BTN before Comcast. They have no reason to. E* wants BTN to DIE A CRUEL AND COLD DEATH, as DO I! Comcast holds all the cards here and if they don't sign, E* will NEVER pay more $.10/month for BTN.

Wow a little melodramatic there.... and not very informed.

E* has more to lose than Comcast right now, people that already have gone to Satellite, are more likely to switch satellite companies than are people leaving cable to satellite. They know the "truth" about "rain fade" and the extra HD capabilities of both D* and E* over comcast.

 

[oswald]

E* wants BTN to DIE A CRUEL AND COLD DEATH, as DO I!

I think most of us have figured out your position on the BTN by now, LOL.

 

[flyingsquirrel]

Comcast wants BTN to die, not Dish

Comcast is the one that wants BTN to die a cruel Death, not Dish.

From the point of view of E* and D*, the enemy is CABLE in all its flavors. And from a technical and business standpoint, the more channels there are, the better it is for Satellite. Cable is much more bandwidth constrained than Satellite. That's why Cable is in Favor or ala carte. It will limit the number of channels. D* and E* are against it.

E* will eventually carry BTN. They just have to get the terms right. There is no particular pressure on them to be there at launch. Although they may be there at launch.

Look at Comcast Sports Net Chicago as an example. It was nine months before Dish picked it up, but they did eventually. When? Opening day of Baseball Season.

Both sides wanted the moon in the beginning. Evnetually they settled in the middle. But there was no way Dish could be without it.

Same with BTN. Dish Needs it. BTN needs Dish. They will figure something out. Perhaps not as fast as we would like ...

COMCAST, on the other hand, has two axes to grind:

1) They wanted to be the BTN partner, but lost out to Fox. Why did they lose out? They told the Big Ten that they could expect to get $.50 to $.75 per sub per month, and they said that $1.10 was unrealistic. So now they are going to resist that $1.10 price point to prove they were right! And they will be very bitchy during this whole process.

2) Comcast does not really want new channels at all. They are trying to provide Analog Cable, SD digital Cable, HD cable, VOD, voice and high speed internet on one thin wire. There is a limit to what they can take on. At a certain point it will be a zero-sum game and they will have to take one channel off for every one they put on. D* and E* can just launch more birds.

D* and E* like new channles, from a competitive point of view. Just as long as they don't cost too much. It's a differentiator with Cable.

 

[oswald]

E* will eventually carry BTN. They just have to get the terms right. There is no particular pressure on them to be there at launch. Although they may be there at launch.

Same with BTN. Dish Needs it. BTN needs Dish. They will figure something out. Perhaps not as fast as we would like ...

D* and E* like new channles, from a competitive point of view. Just as long as they don't cost too much. It's a differentiator with Cable.

This is what I have thought for awhile. It would seem that Dish would be in alot better position to come to terms with the BTN than some other distributors. What I keep wondering about is the arrangement that Dish subscribers have currently with RSNs. Isn't your regional sports network a must carry on Dish? Or is it a higher package? What I do know is that I don't opt in or out for my RSN with the tier that I get from Dish--I already get it (or for the non-sports fans out there, I am "forced" to get it). If I want an RSN from outside of my region, I have to buy the sports pack, correct? So how far is the current arrangement on Dish away from what BTN wants? It seems to me that the basic structure of the availability ("forced" within the region, opt in outside of it) is already in place with Dish (except that RSNs have smaller coverage areas than the BTN wants with 8 states). This is why I think that E* will come to an agreement with BTN at some point, when the COST is right for them.

 

[db2]

Comcast is the one that wants BTN to die a cruel Death, not Dish.

From the point of view of E* and D*, the enemy is CABLE in all its flavors. And from a technical and business standpoint, the more channels there are, the better it is for Satellite. Cable is much more bandwidth constrained than Satellite. That's why Cable is in Favor or ala carte. It will limit the number of channels. D* and E* are against it.

E* will eventually carry BTN. They just have to get the terms right. There is no particular pressure on them to be there at launch. Although they may be there at launch.

Look at Comcast Sports Net Chicago as an example. It was nine months before Dish picked it up, but they did eventually. When? Opening day of Baseball Season.

Both sides wanted the moon in the beginning. Evnetually they settled in the middle. But there was no way Dish could be without it.

Same with BTN. Dish Needs it. BTN needs Dish. They will figure something out. Perhaps not as fast as we would like ...

COMCAST, on the other hand, has two axes to grind:

1) They wanted to be the BTN partner, but lost out to Fox. Why did they lose out? They told the Big Ten that they could expect to get $.50 to $.75 per sub per month, and they said that $1.10 was unrealistic. So now they are going to resist that $1.10 price point to prove they were right! And they will be very bitchy during this whole process.

2) Comcast does not really want new channels at all. They are trying to provide Analog Cable, SD digital Cable, HD cable, VOD, voice and high speed internet on one thin wire. There is a limit to what they can take on. At a certain point it will be a zero-sum game and they will have to take one channel off for every one they put on. D* and E* can just launch more birds.

D* and E* like new channles, from a competitive point of view. Just as long as they don't cost too much. It's a differentiator with Cable.

Dude I always like your points. You should work for E*. Seriously.

 

[flyingsquirrel]

Thanks.

 

[kennya]

I am from Indiana origanally and I love IU basketball (of course). I live in Oklahoma now and am wondering. If E* ever does pick up BTN, will I be able to see it here in O.K.?

 

[oswald]

I am from Indiana origanally and I love IU basketball (of course). I live in Oklahoma now and am wondering. If E* ever does pick up BTN, will I be able to see it here in O.K.?

If E* picks it up, you would be able to get it either as part of the sports pack (most likely) or ala carte (unlikely, IMHO). But you will be able to get it, if E* carries it.

 

[FKy.Guy]

I think most of us have figured out your position on the BTN by now, LOL.

,yep we have !!!!!!!

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Exactly. It's all a game. Sounds like a scare tactic to get Comcast and E* on board.

They said in the conference call that it was unlikely that Comcast would sign.

 

[gable_guy]

Re:

It appears Mediacom has now reached an agreement with the Big Ten Network. After their battle with Sinclair, I imagine they couldn't lose any more customers...

Link

 

[db2]

I hate to ask such a dumb question but, how big is Mediacom? How big compared to Comcast and/or Dish?

 

[Posty-McPOst]

According to wikipedia mediacom has 1.5 million subs and Time Warner has over 13 million. TWC has close to 1.5 million in Ohio alone. Comcast has just over 24 million.

 

[gopherscot]

I hate to ask such a dumb question but, how big is Mediacom? How big compared to Comcast and/or Dish?

It is the 8th largest cable company and it includes Des Moines, Quad Cities, Cedar Rapids and major areas of Iowa... which is my territory. Also heard it was channel 220 of the digital tier. That gives me hope that maybe it can go into the AT200 package on Dish. Hopefully it works out and many of us will get the channel we want.

 

[jldhawk]

Just an observation regarding Cableone and BTN.

Cableones coverage area is in DARK blue, theres not many Big Ten Teams in that area. I would say a SNOW balls chance in hell of that channel being on Cableone (10th largest Cable CO. in the USA)

I guess I won't be going BACK to Cableone.

 

[Posty-McPOst]

Big Ten Network, Mediacom denie deal

Big Ten Network, Mediacom deny deal | GazetteOnline.com - Cedar Rapids, Iowa City

Classic. I'll give them credit, they fixed the misspelling within a minute.

 

[oswald]

It is the 8th largest cable company and it includes Des Moines, Quad Cities, Cedar Rapids and major areas of Iowa... which is my territory. Also heard it was channel 220 of the digital tier. That gives me hope that maybe it can go into the AT200 package on Dish. Hopefully it works out and many of us will get the channel we want.

It's the largest cable provider in Iowa, correct? Would be a significant addition if paper's "source" is right.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Mediacom is an important deal for the BTN to land. This is no mom & pop 30,000 subscriber cable company. Across the Midwest, they probably have close to 1/3rd as many subs as Dish has.

Their own web site seems optimistic about landing a BTN deal:
Mediacom | Big Ten | Football

If Mediacom does sign, it puts pressure on providers like Charter, for then Iowa fans would have the BTN but Wisconsin fans would not.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Just an observation regarding Cableone and BTN.

Cableones coverage area is in DARK blue, theres not many Big Ten Teams in that area. I would say a SNOW balls chance in hell of that channel being on Cableone (10th largest Cable CO. in the USA)

If the BTN gives them a price of around 10 cents per sub for their non-B10 region subs, or allows them to put the channels into a sports tier (as has been rumored for the E* negotiations for the non-B10 region subs), then there's still a chance that Cableone could get a reasonable deal. After all, they would only be paying the "full freight charges" for their Minnesota and Iowa subscribers.

 

[jldhawk]

The only problem is, that IOWA, and Minnesota are BOTH in the Big Ten, there for being inside the BTN Footprint.

This story is even making the LA Times

LA Times