E-Mail from Big Ten Network

[oswald]

Hi folks,

I sent an email to the BTN folks about 10 days ago, asking for an update on their negotiations with Dish. I have cut and pasted part of their reply below (omitted blah,blah,blah for your reading pleasure).

Our goal is to bring the Big Ten Network to Big Ten fans. BTN will offer programming that caters to the more than 4 million Big Ten alumni and millions more Big Ten fans who live and die with their teams. An agreement with Dish Network would help us give fans more coverage and more access to the universities and teams they love than ever before.



Unfortunately, the Dish Network has stated it is unwilling to negotiate further leaving their subscribers who are Big Ten fans to seek other options. Dish Network's concerns relate to two specific areas: price and level of service. You should know that the national average price to carry the Big Ten Network is less than at least 65 other national networks. In addition, BTN is offering cable operators a dynamic video-on-demand programming service and a rich broadband video package for their high-speed internet customers. All of these offerings are available at a combined fee that is two-thirds less than what certain major national cable operators charge for their own regionalized sports services (which they also carry on expanded basic on their systems).

Of course, this can probably be expected given the nature of negotiations over carriage generally, and E*'s recent decision to appeal to the FCC. But I still think it looks pretty ominous for Dish network subscribers hoping to watch the BTN this fall. I have Directv coming by tomorrow for an install.

 

[mdonnelly]

And the key word there is of course, "national". Dish doesn't see BTN as anything but an RSN, and wants it priced accordingly.

 

[ScoBuck]

And the key word there is of course, "national". Dish doesn't see BTN as anything but an RSN, and want's it priced accordingly.

But if read correctly it is priced LOWER than the RSNS:
All of these offerings are available at a combined fee that is two-thirds less than what certain major national cable operators charge for their own regionalized sports services (which they also carry on expanded basic on their systems).

I think its Charlie and sports - business as usual, that's not his major interest for programming. No big deal, he already doesn't carry the largest RSN (as every other provider does). Not a knock - but if I had DISH I would expect this when it comes to negotiating for a sports channel.

 

[Hall]

The Big 10 Network needs to come up with an intelligent response that they use to respond to people instead of that one. As mdonnelly points out, they are NOT a "national" network so it's stupid of themselves to compare their cost against national networks. Then in a later sentence, they mention being carried on cable systems and "regionalized sports services".

I have to side with Dish on this one, even though I'd like to see this network. Of course, I think it should be a regional network too and if people outside the Big 10 region want it, they pay a bit more.

Finally, when they say "...leaving their subscribers who are Big Ten fans to seek other options", hate to break it to ya', Big 10 Net, my other options include not watch.

 

[mdonnelly]

But if read correctly it is priced LOWER than the RSNS:
All of these offerings are available at a combined fee that is two-thirds less than what certain major national cable operators charge for their own regionalized sports services (which they also carry on expanded basic on their systems).

I think its Charlie and sports - business as usual, that's not his major interest for programming. No big deal, he already doesn't carry the largest RSN (as every other provider does). Not a knock - but if I had DISH I would expect this when it comes to negotiating for a sports channel.

If those certain major national cable operators carry YES, then yeah, I'll bet that the BTN is charging less. Probably not much less.

 

[ScoBuck]

The issues between DISH and the BIG TEN NETWORK are much deeper I see:

EchoStar to FCC: Big Ten Network Is an RSN - 7/23/2007 4:56:00 PM - Multichannel News

 

[mdwatt]

I agree that Big 10 should be an RSN.

 

[riffjim4069]

I disagree...the Big Ten Network is national network provider. I know of at least six Dish Network customers in my area who require this channels...and I don't know that may people.

 

[thedamaja]

I hope Dish gets it all hashed out and picks up this RSN. Even if they don't I'm not worried about missing any Badgers games

 

[ScoBuck]

What defines what is or is not a national channel?

Is a national channel Channel 2 (CBS in NY)? Well if its Conus and available to subs nationwide (as it is for many with waivers) it IS CONSIDERED BY ALL TO BE A NATONAL FEED - I have never seen this disagreed with.

But how could that be? I ALSO get it on channel 2 in MPEG4 from DirecTV, so its really a local isn't it? After all its the IDENTICAL channel isn't it?

So, if a RSN is carried on Conus and I can get a programming package that offers it, why isn't that a national channel? What makes a channel a national channel anyhow? Is it because I have to purchase a special package to get it? If so, HBO and all those channels aren't national either - I would have to purchase a special package to get them wouldn't I?

 

[gadgtfreek]

The fact they want to be carried on the lowest price tier nationally and want $1.10 per sub is exactly why I hope E* does not carry them.

Woohoo, softball and lacrosse


BTW, I love how people think this channel is gonna be so great. Theres only so many sports on per season and only so many games weekly. Do you really think its gonna be great programming, all the time. Id like to see the schedule before everyone kneels to the BTN.

 

[Poke]

I like the RSN Idea but again I like what Dish is doing which to me sounds like they are trying to get the best price to carry the channel. I like it that my TV Provider does not just lay down and let any Network charge them whatever. Or let a Network charge them the same price that they might charge another TV Provider like cable or Direct. One thing will be interesting to see when the Big 10 Network goes live. The TV Providers that do carry Direct or Cable or whoever is too see if your rates go up as well.

 

[Hall]

CBS out of New York is a "local" station. Ask the station, ask your local CBS, and ask Nielsen. The fact that it's available (was, actually) nationwide via waivers was an exception to the rule.

 

[Hall]

According to that MultiChannel article, Dish says they want to carry Big 10 Network. That's a good sign ! What the B10 Network fails to grasp is Dish will survive without this channel. A very small percentage of customers will cancel their service due to lack of carriage. Many who would like to cancel can't, of course.

You also have to believe that the B10 Network wants too much when Time Warner in Columbus OH, heart of Buckeye country, doesn't carry them !! I can see why the B10 Network wants carriage on satellite though.... When the local cablecos don't pick them up, people can cancel cable service on the spot because few require contracts. The B10 Network will run ads "Switch to Dish Network or DirecTV Buckeye fans to see your favorite sports...." to push the issue too.

 

[db2]

This p*ssing match between E* and the BTN is ridiculous. Wouldn't it be nice if just once both sides could make some concessions and just come to an agreement for the sake of the customers??

 

[JAG72]

According to that MultiChannel article, Dish says they want to carry Big 10 Network. That's a good sign ! What the B10 Network fails to grasp is Dish will survive without this channel. A very small percentage of customers will cancel their service due to lack of carriage. Many who would like to cancel can't, of course.

You also have to believe that the B10 Network wants too much when Time Warner in Columbus OH, heart of Buckeye country, doesn't carry them !! I can see why the B10 Network wants carriage on satellite though.... When the local cablecos don't pick them up, people can cancel cable service on the spot because few require contracts. The B10 Network will run ads "Switch to Dish Network or DirecTV Buckeye fans to see your favorite sports...." to push the issue too.

The same thing happened last year with the local providers with ESPNU and a week or two before OSU was to play they all of a sudden added the channel to the local cable packages. I bet the same thing will happen this year also.

The main problem that TWC has with the B10 network is they want it on the lowest tier package. TWC wants to add it to their digital sports tier. At $1.10 per sub having it on the digital tier would cost the B10 lots of revenue.

 

[ScoBuck]

CBS out of New York is a "local" station. Ask the station, ask your local CBS, and ask Nielsen. The fact that it's available (was, actually) nationwide via waivers was an exception to the rule.

I think the East & West Network feeds are in fact considered NATIONAL. And BTW, they are still available where legal. There are still some D* subs that are grandfathered and get BOTH the East and the West Coast Feeds. Sounds national to me.

My bigger question - what makes a channel local, regional, or national other than its AVAILIBILITY to be offered to and then received by viewers? I can't think of any other criteria that can be used.

So instead of picking things apart - what is the criteria? DirecTV obviously feels they are national when offered Conus. What is YOUR criteria?

Another way to look at it - if DirecTV (of DISH, or cable) added a new package called Choice-Sports, and as part of that package it included all of the RSN's - would those channels now be national? How could they not be?

Is TBS a national channel? I think we all would say yes. But - it is actually an Atlanta local station (channel 17).
Atlanta Television Stations - Station Index

Chew on that one for a bit before you answer.

 

[ScoBuck]

This p*ssing match between E* and the BTN is ridiculous. Wouldn't it be nice if just once both sides could make some concessions and just come to an agreement for the sake of the customers??

This seems to be the DISH SOP regarding negotiation of carriage agreements. I guess they feel it works out best for them in the end.

 

[johnpas73]

Ah well, I dont really care that much. Theres 2 Buckeyes games on the network this year, and it just gives me an excuse to go to the neighborhood bar to have a beer and watch the game.

Would I like to see it on Dish and watch at home? Absolutely. Is it the end of the world if I cant? No, not really. Uverse picked it up, and my best friend/next door neighbor gets Uverse (but I am "too far away" go figure) so Ill go there to watch too.

 

[LASooner]

First, let me say, that any channel that broadcasts more college football is what I want on Dish.

But the Big 10 really needs to get over itself on this one. As a college football fan I would pay the extra to get more college football coverage, so give me that option, but don't try to force it on the people who don't.

Most likely the only games they'll get will be the left overs from ABC/ESPN (which is basically already 'The Big Ten Network')

If the Multisport package had to go up $1 or 2, it would be ok with me if that meant access to YES and Big Ten Network and any other niche sports channel that pops up in the next couple years. All I want is the access and the option to add it if I want it.

I appreciate Dish trying to save me money, but it's frustrating to not get something that is available to other systems. The RSN's in HD last year really irritated me, because there were 3 OU games in HD last year that I could only watch in SD. I'm glad they finally got them going for this year. As Fox adds HD cams and trucks into the field we may get more regional college games in HD and that multisport package will be a lot more valuable.

I know the Big 10 is trying to get as much money as possible, but they're not national, regional may be the wrong word, but they are niche.