MLB Network

[vampz26]

Sorry. I should have just ignored him. Feel free to delete my post if you like.

For the record. Pardon me Scott but this needs to be addressed based on the accusation...

I have never lied in this forum ever. Believe what you like, I've relied on memory and other commentary to make a point just like you just did, but I have never lied.

Thank you.

 

[ScoBuck]

IIRC, the terms of carriage require that ALL of the providers who offer MLB-EI to put the MLB Network channel on the lowest tier as a full-time channel.

And as FiOS just recently came to terms to offer EI, they have added the MLB Network channel as well.

What this shows to me is that if DISH still wanted to get in the game they would be 'pitched' to by MLB. But it seems that they have no real interest in trying to work out a deal.

 

[vampz26]

IIRC, the terms of carriage require that ALL of the providers who offer MLB-EI to put the MLB Network channel on the lowest tier as a full-time channel.

And as FiOS just recently came to terms to offer EI, they have added the MLB Network channel as well.

What this shows to me is that if DISH still wanted to get in the game they would be 'pitched' to by MLB. But it seems that they have no real interest in trying to work out a deal.

Whats your point?

 

[ScoBuck]

Whats your point?

Well the first part answers your question in post 4 and the question in post 10.

The second part refers back to the comments made in post 31, that there is 'hope' that DISH can get the package.

Now stay on topic and maybe you won't get so

 

[DodgerKing]

IIRC, the terms of carriage require that ALL of the providers who offer MLB-EI to put the MLB Network channel on the lowest tier as a full-time channel.

And as FiOS just recently came to terms to offer EI, they have added the MLB Network channel as well.

What this shows to me is that if DISH still wanted to get in the game they would be 'pitched' to by MLB. But it seems that they have no real interest in trying to work out a deal.

Does this mean that those providers that do not carry IE cannot carry MLB Net and/or those that do not carry MLB Net cannot carry IE???

 

[ScoBuck]

That's my understanding of the agreement. They are soup and sandwich. And the MLB Network is on the lowest tier I believe - DirecTV says it is in their 'BASIC' package.

From the press release announcing the terms:

"Additionally, in keeping with MLB's desire to provide as much MLB programming to as many baseball fans as possible, MLB and DIRECTV have agreed to include a provision that allows MLB EXTRA INNINGS to be offered to other incumbents - In Demand and DISH Network - at consistent rates and carriage requirements with a deal to be concluded before the baseball season begins. The provision also requires the incumbents to agree to carriage rights to the MLB Channel proportionally equivalent to DIRECTV's commitment."

Full press release:
http://dtv.client.shareholder.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=286326

 

[vampz26]

Well the first part answers your question in post 4 and the question in post 10.

The second part refers back to the comments made in post 31, that there is 'hope' that DISH can get the package.

Now stay on topic and maybe you won't get so

LOL...I just wanted to be sure where you stood in your comment and I just wanted you to admit it...

Its yet another swindle...

promoted as a separate channel...

BUT

sold as part of an overpriced sports package deal...

Glad we got some closure to this, Sco...thanks...you always come through for me :up
(I just wish your Giants did... )

 

[apollog]

If you DEMAND MLB Network, Charlie will get it. Enough subs have to voice their requests, and it will happen.

 

[vampz26]

If you DEMAND MLB Network, Charlie will get it. Enough subs have to voice their requests, and it will happen.

Not on this planet...Charlie goes for the deal to save his subs the cabbage...

...from the sounds of it, if Sco is to be believed...MLB isn't giving him, or anyone else, a deal...

Its a case where one doesn't get kissed first...

 

[mhowie]

Not on this planet...Charlie goes for the deal to save his subs the cabbage...

Please...he could care less about saving you money. He does care, however, about maximizing his bottom line.

 

[mikew]

If you DEMAND MLB Network, Charlie will get it. Enough subs have to voice their requests, and it will happen.

So true. If only a few million others had requested YES, maybe it would be carried on Dish

 

[vampz26]

Please...he could care less about saving you money. He does care, however, about maximizing his bottom line.

Running a Business 101:

Raise the topline

Lower the bottom line.


...and somewhere along the line, buy avoiding overpriced carraige agreements for overpriced sports packages, Charlie believes he is doing both...

I'm not saying he's right, I'm saying he believes he is doing both...though his 'hard sell' at lowering the bottom line with regards to carraige agreements may be jeoprodizing his topline in subs in the long run.

 

[Rangers484]

Running a Business 101:

Raise the topline

Lower the bottom line.


...and somewhere along the line, buy avoiding overpriced carraige agreements for overpriced sports packages, Charlie believes he is doing both...

I'm not saying he's right, I'm saying he believes he is doing both...though his 'hard sell' at lowering the bottom line with regards to carraige agreements may be jeoprodizing his topline in subs in the long run.

I agree, he may believe he is doing the right thing for his company and his customers.

Doesn't he have anyone at Dish who is responsible for reporting to him on what the competition is doing and what they are charging?

With all of the "over priced" packages Direct has, at the end of the day there is barely a difference in the cost of the 2 services anymore.

 

[vampz26]

I agree, he may believe he is doing the right thing for his company and his customers.

Doesn't he have anyone at Dish who is responsible for reporting to him on what the competition is doing and what they are charging?

With all of the "over priced" packages Direct has, at the end of the day there is barely a difference in the cost of the 2 services anymore.

True, but if Charlie were to take on EI again, just to get MLB-Network, what would that mean?

He would be paying an exhorbant amount for something he would most certainly be taking a loss on. I mean, sure...current E* subs will be pleased...some may sign up, etc...but anyone who wants MLB-EI bad enough is already with the competition. Its not likely that you will see enough patronage in your current sub base, or even enough turnover in the competitions sub base to justify the move. He would essentially be raising his bottom line with a huge carraige fee for EI, with no foreseeable increase in the topline to make it worth while. Inevitably, he would have to defer the costs amongst his existing subs until enough MLB-EI subs caught on, which...well...nah...

Anyway, all these rah-rah boys who want to condemn E* for not carrying EI, need to take a business class and look at the economics of the situation. There is no way to cost justify the move at this point, and if MLB is hinging MLB-Network carraige on EI, well then...its just a big swindle now, isn't it...more like extortion.

 

[Rangers484]

True, but if Charlie were to take on EI again, just to get MLB-Network, what would that mean?

He would be paying an exhorbant amount for something he would most certainly be taking a loss on. I mean, sure...current E* subs will be pleased...some may sign up, etc...but anyone who wants MLB-EI bad enough is already with the competition. Its not likely that you will see enough patronage in your current sub base, or even enough turnover in the competitions sub base to justify the move. He would essentially be raising his bottom line with a huge carraige fee for EI, with no foreseeable increase in the topline to make it worth while. Inevitably, he would have to defer the costs amongst his existing subs until enough MLB-EI subs caught on, which...well...nah...

Anyway, all these rah-rah boys who want to condemn E* for not carrying EI, need to take a business class and look at the economics of the situation. There is no way to cost justify the move at this point, and if MLB is hinging MLB-Network carraige on EI, well then...its just a big swindle now, isn't it...more like extortion.

I am not advocating Dish taking on MLB EI or NFL Sunday Ticket when it is up for renegotiation.

My point is that Charlie claims he is trying to save his company and his subs money by not signing up over priced programing.

He is failing. Direct and Dish are priced almost the same cost now.

Time for him to try a different strategy or at least stop publicly saying how he is trying to save us money by holding the line. .

 

[vampz26]

I am not advocating Dish taking on MLB EI or NFL Sunday Ticket when it is up for renegotiation.

My point is that Charlie claims he is trying to save his company and his subs money by not signing up over priced programing.

He is failing. Direct and Dish are priced almost the same cost now.

Time for him to try a different strategy or at least stop publicly saying how he is trying to save us money by holding the line. .

This is a double-edged sword here...

In the case of MLB-EI, Charlie is right. Carraige would impact the bottom line and necessitate a cost increase for existing subs. No doubt. FOr all the reasons I've previously stated...

However if we are talking about holding the line with existing channels like Lifetime, Nick, and whomever and us losing channels periodically because of it as Charlie claims to be saving US money, well then...I certainly agree with you...

However, we are strictly talking about MLB Network here...and that is really all I'm talking about as well...

 

[Rangers484]

This is a double-edged sword here...

In the case of MLB-EI, Charlie is right. Carraige would impact the bottom line and necessitate a cost increase for existing subs. No doubt. FOr all the reasons I've previously stated...

However if we are talking about holding the line with existing channels like Lifetime, Nick, and whomever and us losing channels periodically because of it as Charlie claims to be saving US money, well then...I certainly agree with you...

However, we are strictly talking about MLB Network here...and that is really all I'm talking about as well...

Let me ask this another way.

How does Direct TV offer almost identical HD content plus MLB EI and their price is almost identical to Dish? If MLB EI is so overpriced shouldn't DirectTV be much higher than Dish?

That's that part that does not pass the smell test with me.

 

[DodgerKing]

Let me ask this another way.

How does Direct TV offer almost identical HD content plus MLB EI and their price is almost identical to Dish? If MLB EI is so overpriced shouldn't DirectTV be much higher than Dish?

That's that part that does not pass the smell test with me.

A larger total Direct sub base and a much larger EI sub base to offset much of the costs; as well as part owner of some of the channels.

Direct may even lose money on some of the packages, like ST and EI (I don't know for sure what their profits or losses are on these packages alone). But due to the fact that the packages attract more subs, they end up making up much of the cost due to the increase in the subscriptions of the base and other additional packages from these additional subs, because of ST and EI, ex.

Besides, it doesn't matter. Direct and Dish will be merging anyway.

 

[ScoBuck]

LOL...I just wanted to be sure where you stood in your comment and I just wanted you to admit it...

Its yet another swindle...

promoted as a separate channel...

BUT

sold as part of an overpriced sports package deal...

Glad we got some closure to this, Sco...thanks...you always come through for me :up
(I just wish your Giants did... )

Listen well pal. I stand nowhere in my comment, I posted no opinion as I see it, just the facts of the agreement with no comment either way pro or con. I don't have an issue for or against DISH getting this channel - just that DISH can negotiate if it chooses to.

Also, I think you are just dead wrong here. The MLB Network is a separate channel, and a sub does NOT have to purchase EI to receive it, just has to sub to a provider that is carrying EI as an OPTION for its subs.

Are you bringing the Giants up in a totally unrelated thread in a totally unrelated forum to continue your M.O. of flaming? My advice - stop it quickly.

 

[vampz26]

Look, all I am trying to say is this. If MLB attempting to make MLBNetwork only available only thru providers that currently carry EI, than this puts other providers at a huge disadvantage that don't carry EI, particularly in E*'s case. Simply put, while current subs may be interested in the MLB channel, there is more than likely not enough interest in EI to justify the expenditure. Any subs who want EI bad enough are already with D* and aren't very likely to switch any time soon. And I am sure if it was all a matter of negotiations, they would have happened by now.

So basically, when it comes to the MLB channel on E*, we may just need to accept the fact we are SOL at this point.