Charlie Chat Recap March 12, 2007

[MyDogHasFleas]

Apparently the new competition among programming carriers is content, not capability. Capability is becoming a wash where consumers really don't care that much whether it's satellite, cable, or Internet TV. Consumers are looking for content, apparently. And sports content is one of the huge content drivers (since everyone pretty much has the same entertainment and news content).

Therefore... the major sports leagues (NFL, MLB, NASCAR) are using this as a bargaining chip to drive even higher revenues from the carriers. Deal with it people. I think it's going to get worse, not better. I think the day will come when the Super Bowl will be bargained off to the highest bidder and not be on an "all-carry" channel. Not to mention the World Series, the NBA Finals, and whatever big NASCAR races there are (I know literally nothing about that sport).

I think we will start seeing consumers who sign up with multiple programming providers, once the technology starts becoming a bit interoperable (IPTV is probably how this is going to happen), so that they can get all the events they want to see, across multiple providers. Hard core enthusiasts are already doing this via multiple dishes and wires coming into their houses.

After all, we have choice on the Internet, right? We can log into any web site we want to through one pipe. Why should television be any different?

 

[bela_blasko2006]

I don't understand what the fuss is over. Charlie says they want to be treated "fairly" in order to carry extra innings. Baseball says they will get the same deal as Direct. From what i have read Direct is going to produce some content (ie channels with spilt screens of multiple games) etc and so thats why they are getting ownership in the MLB channel. That seems fair to me. As far as putting it on the "basic" tier-this a smoke screen by Dish and Cable. In April 2009 there won't be anymore analog broadcasting. Everything will have to be digital-the basic tier analog channels 2-77 will disappear on cable. Everyone will need a digital box. Dish put the NFL network on americas Top 60 so whats the problem with this channel being there. I'm sure by 2009 one of the channels there will be out of business anyway. It seems to be Dish has no intention of adding Extra Innings so these are some of the excuses they are giving. Charlie says they don't want to subject customers to programming they don't want-apparently that doesn't apply to the Charlie Chat because he must think we all just LOVE sitting through 60 mins of NASCAR promos.

 

[Robert NTSC Archivist]

Well its sad Charlie has just told the 1% of us that subscribe to MLB EI to take our business else where. From the cold emotionless way he talked about it he does not care if he looses one customer over this issue. Kind of sad to be treated that way after almost 9 years as a customer with them.

God I remember when he would not carry the NFL Network because he was not allowed NFL ST then a year or two later he comes and tells us all about this new commitment to sports program that Dish Network has. Last night he is talking about how great the March Madness basketball championship is but DirecTV has an EXCLUSIVE on that one. Oh boy CST will have 2 extra games but I see Dish is not able to offer that package either,

In the New York area there is no YES and I understand about that situation but how many subscribes has it cost him over not carrying the New York Yankees. There signal I believe goes threw out New York, New Jersey and parts of Connecticut and Pennsylvania. . . .

Down in Virginia MASN has taken over the Baltimore Orioles telecasts (owned by the O's) and Washington Nationals games. That market runs from Washington D.C. all the way down south past Virginia Beach (where I used to live) into North Carolina. Not to mention the Maryland and Pennsylvania areas that get that coverage.

Sadly in the name of saving money he has cut off a good portion of the Eastern United States from watching baseball. In Virginia no Orioles / Nationals or MLB EI.


Well done Charlie you HAVE INDEED saved subscribers from increased fees but at the same time cut off subscribers from programing that they want.

What a mess this has all become. So what goes exclusive on DirecTV next. NBA or NHL or one of the other packages Charlie wont want to pay for. I will wait till the end of the month but if no baseball I will be forced to add MLB on DirecTV even though deep down inside I dont want to.

 

[navychop]

In April 2009 there won't be anymore analog broadcasting. Everything will have to be digital-the basic tier analog channels 2-77 will disappear on cable. Everyone will need a digital box.

Feb 17, 2009 is the last day NTSC analog OTA transmissions are allowed in the United States and it's possessions. There may be exceptions for some low power stations/repeaters. That law does not apply to cable. How/if/when there will be a cable transition is yet to be determined.

The purpose of the law was to free up spectrum for sale by the government. Cable does not use this spectrum. The advantage of cable will remain, in that they can connect their cable directly to an analog TV. No STB needed. Many/most TVs can access analog cable channels directly, using the TV's tuner. Simple. Just the way a lot of folks like it.

The source of those signals to the cableco may become digital, but the cableco can distribute them as analog cable signals. No laws or regulations prevent this today. The cablecos do not want to spend the money on a huge number of new STBs. But they see the advantage in that the STBs offer additional services they can charge the customer for, such as PPV.

It gets further complicated in that there is currently a requirement for cablecard version 1, and version 2 is under development. Why spend a fortune on boxes that may become obsolete before being paid for? And the government is pushing for a standard box that works with all cablecos. This would allow future TVs to once again be hooked up directly to a cable, and yet have PPV, EPG and other features available. Or consumers could own their box and take it with them as they move. But the cablecos would lose STB rental revenue. Of course, they would also have reduced maintenance & installation expenses and less money tied up in cable box inventory. And how likely is any "standard" to work well across all cable companies? The cutoff/switchover would be h, er- interesting.

And welcome to our little group here.

 

[ccash]

Any replays scheduled. I could not find any in the guide. Not that I need to see it after reading everything here, but I might want to get drunk this weekend and yell at the TV.

 

[navychop]

Oh, yes, they'll rerun it. Probably be a week before it shows up on the 101 guide. Try not to throw anything at the screen.

 

[Jimmy J]

Oh, yes, they'll rerun it. Probably be a week before it shows up on the 101 guide. Try not to throw anything at the screen.

I'd rather get my Johnson slammed in a car door than watch that again!!!:haha

 

[skidog]

Christ, don't say things like that, I just got a bad tingling when I read that!!

 

[BobMurdoch]

RE: the baseball deal... this is how I read it from the outside looking in....

1. Pay the same subscriber rates as D* (Since they are charging $159 it looks doable)

2. Put the MLB Channel on the basic tier. Hard to swallow, but this is definitely a good channel add. I understand that folks that don't watch baseball don't want it, but I feel the same way about Lifetime....

3. Mosaic Channel. BFD. They are doing it already. Change channel 100 to show the baseball channels when games are on, and put it back to the news channels when the games are off. Not unreasonable.

That's it? Buy a chunk of minority ownership in the mlb channel at the same ratio as D* maybe... So that you don't feel you are enriching your competitors.....

There are supposedly 200,000 subscribers that were hardcore enough to get the extra innings package.... I would submit though that many of those are the Platinum level customers since they don't mind paying $200 a year for out of market baseball channels....

 

[Peter Parker]

Feb 17, 2009 is the last day NTSC analog OTA transmissions are allowed in the United States and it's possessions. There may be exceptions for some low power stations/repeaters. That law does not apply to cable. How/if/when there will be a cable transition is yet to be determined.

The purpose of the law was to free up spectrum for sale by the government. Cable does not use this spectrum. The advantage of cable will remain, in that they can connect their cable directly to an analog TV. No STB needed. Many/most TVs can access analog cable channels directly, using the TV's tuner. Simple. Just the way a lot of folks like it.

The source of those signals to the cableco may become digital, but the cableco can distribute them as analog cable signals. No laws or regulations prevent this today. The cablecos do not want to spend the money on a huge number of new STBs. But they see the advantage in that the STBs offer additional services they can charge the customer for, such as PPV.

It gets further complicated in that there is currently a requirement for cablecard version 1, and version 2 is under development. Why spend a fortune on boxes that may become obsolete before being paid for? And the government is pushing for a standard box that works with all cablecos. This would allow future TVs to once again be hooked up directly to a cable, and yet have PPV, EPG and other features available. Or consumers could own their box and take it with them as they move. But the cablecos would lose STB rental revenue. Of course, they would also have reduced maintenance & installation expenses and less money tied up in cable box inventory. And how likely is any "standard" to work well across all cable companies? The cutoff/switchover would be h, er- interesting.

And welcome to our little group here.

It i amazing how misunderstood the conversion is.

 

[Peter Parker]

BTW I actually tried to record this last night since I was out till about 10. But I came home to a blank screen that began at the beginning of the chat and ended at its conclusion. So thanks for these summaries. Not that anything really happens in these things but it is good to be able to see that confirmed.

 

[Cyclone]

Well its sad Charlie has just told the 1% of us that subscribe to MLB EI to take our business else where. From the cold emotionless way he talked about it he does not care if he looses one customer over this issue. Kind of sad to be treated that way after almost 9 years as a customer with them.

Let me do some math here and see how things work out

D* is paying MLB $700 for 7 years. Or $100m per year
E* can match it if they wish to also pay $100m per year

1% of E*'s 13 million customers actually sub'd to MLB:IE. So there are 130k E* MLB:EI subs.

So 100,000,000 ÷ 130,000 = $769 per MLB:EI subscriber.

Now that is if every MLB:EI sub from last year renews. Would you want to renew for $769? If not, then the rest of us would have to eat the difference.

Sorry, but Charlie gets my vote on this round.

 

[navychop]

Wow. I second the motion. I sure don't want to pay for it.

 

[howie14]

Down in Virginia MASN has taken over the Baltimore Orioles telecasts (owned by the O's) and Washington Nationals games. That market runs from Washington D.C. all the way down south past Virginia Beach (where I used to live) into North Carolina. Not to mention the Maryland and Pennsylvania areas that get that coverage.

Sadly in the name of saving money he has cut off a good portion of the Eastern United States from watching baseball. In Virginia no Orioles / Nationals or MLB EI.

The MLB EI and local RSN questions are two different issues. I can see Charlie's point if indeed Direct and MLB put enough poison pills in the EI contract to make it unprofitable for DISH to match it. Local RSNs are another story.

I'd like to see the actual numbers (I'm not holding my breath, though), I find it hard to believe that a deal for MASN would destroy Charlie's price structure and business model. With both the Orioles and Nats on MASN, CSN-MA is a waste of time as an RSN during the summer months.

Still, I took heart from the fact that they said they are still negotiating for MASN and should know something by the end of this week.

 

[John Kotches]

Let me do some math here and see how things work out

D* is paying MLB $700 for 7 years. Or $100m per year
E* can match it if they wish to also pay $100m per year

1% of E*'s 13 million customers actually sub'd to MLB:IE. So there are 130k E* MLB:EI subs.

So 100,000,000 ÷ 130,000 = $769 per MLB:EI subscriber.

Now that is if every MLB:EI sub from last year renews. Would you want to renew for $769? If not, then the rest of us would have to eat the difference.

Sorry, but Charlie gets my vote on this round.

Yes, but if you amortize the cost of EI across all subscribers it is ~7.69 per subscriber per year for everyone to pay for it evenly. The revenues from the 130K subscribers would be about 20.8 million. This leave 79.2 million to subsidize. That's $6.31 per year per subscriber or ~$0.52/month.

I'm not saying it's wrong or right, I'm just pointing out what the actual numbers work out to be.

Is MLB getting any cut out of the fees besides the $100 million? Is 100M a minimum guarantee?

Good questions to ask

 

[BlackHitachi]

RE: the baseball deal... this is how I read it from the outside looking in....

1. Pay the same subscriber rates as D* (Since they are charging $159 it looks doable)

2. Put the MLB Channel on the basic tier. Hard to swallow, but this is definitely a good channel add. I understand that folks that don't watch baseball don't want it, but I feel the same way about Lifetime....

3. Mosaic Channel. BFD. They are doing it already. Change channel 100 to show the baseball channels when games are on, and put it back to the news channels when the games are off. Not unreasonable.

That's it? Buy a chunk of minority ownership in the mlb channel at the same ratio as D* maybe... So that you don't feel you are enriching your competitors.....

There are supposedly 200,000 subscribers that were hardcore enough to get the extra innings package.... I would submit though that many of those are the Platinum level customers since they don't mind paying $200 a year for out of market baseball channels....

Yea this is true!

 

[Jimmy J]

Christ, don't say things like that, I just got a bad tingling when I read that!!

What, to graphic? Sorry!:haha

 

[navychop]

I don't want to pay even 52 cents a month to subsidize someone else watching a "premium" sports package. Pay full freight if you want it. And when enough refuse to pay that much, maybe the price will come down.

 

[visiter555]

Did you get the DVR Advantage screen cap? I missed it completely it was so fast!

 

[Tom Bombadil]

So was there anything of interest to an existing HD sub, who already has a DVR?

Nowadays this is the only topic of interest to me. If E* signed up 30 new SD channels and threw them into my package for free, that would be meaningless.