Nfl Network

[Brewer4]

That makes sense! Especially if you throw in ESPN2 HD. I wonder if that has occured to old Charlie? I'll bet it has - he doesn't miss too much.

--Doug

Exactly. You may not say you have every football channel out there but you can cover a good portion of college games with ESPN2 HD and and some pro football HD games with the NFL Network. And with the channels, you can get creative with marketing spins to make it look more attractive.

 

[Slamminc11]

Slamminc11, its about going after a LARGE group in the US with money. Not knocking all the niche sports fans and international fans but NFL watchers are a very large and very PAYING group. I dont like NASCAR, but thats another key group I would go after. If you could help .5 - 1 million subscribers slide over to your subscribers for the addition of a part time HD channel and some other small packaging changes, it makes sense to me.

If I am not mistaken, cable already offers NASCAR in demand deals, and Direct already offers NFL Network, so if the subs are already with them, by dish adding NFL it wouldn't make the subs switch. Adding a channel that the company I'm with already has wouldn't make me switch. for example, lets say I was with Direct and they had LogoTV on their lineup (which they have) and then dish (which they don't right now) decided to add Logo to their line up, why should I switch? I am already with a company that has what I want.
The argument of them switching because Dish decides to carry NFL Network doesn't work unless you add something to it that Direct doesn't carry. I think the exodus of subs if Dish doesn't add NFL would be a whole lot less than what you all suspect it would be, and I think Dish realizes that. I do the fantasy football thing, and having the NFL channel would be nice for that, but it is only for 16 weeks that it really matters, there are other channels that would be more compelling to subs that are of interest 52 weeks a year that in my opinion would be better to add at this point.

 

[GaryPen]

What about the audience for soccer fans, indoor lacrosse fans, outdoor lacrosse fans, arena football fans, blacks, gays, library book readers? everyone wants their own channels on cable or Dish, but you can't have it all. What makes you think that you deserve a channel over anyone else?

Because football fans far outnumber the others. (assuming of course that many blacks and gays are football fans.) I don't care for football, myself. But, I am a realist. I thought you were too.

If I am not mistaken, cable already offers NASCAR in demand deals, and Direct already offers NFL Network, so if the subs are already with them, by dish adding NFL it wouldn't make the subs switch. Adding a channel that the company I'm with already has wouldn't make me switch. for example, lets say I was with Direct and they had LogoTV on their lineup (which they have) and then dish (which they don't right now) decided to add Logo to their line up, why should I switch? I am already with a company that has what I want.

Really? What about all of the cable subs whose areas have lousy cable service, which is still many. Dish would offer a possibly lower cost TV solution, with possibly better PQ, and possibly better overall programming. The thing that may have kept them from switching was the NFL Network.
Or, what about the DirecTV sub that wants a dual output DVR and and International channel that D* doesn't have, but won't switch to Dish because of the lack of the NFL Network?
Or, what about the Cable or DirecTV sub that gets the bulk of their programming from C* or D*, subs to some niche programming on E*, such as Voom or an International, but won't make the full switch to E* due to lack of the NFL Network?

You may not realize just how popular the NFL is in this country.

 

[Brewer4]

If I am not mistaken, cable already offers NASCAR in demand deals, and Direct already offers NFL Network, so if the subs are already with them, by dish adding NFL it wouldn't make the subs switch. Adding a channel that the company I'm with already has wouldn't make me switch. for example, lets say I was with Direct and they had LogoTV on their lineup (which they have) and then dish (which they don't right now) decided to add Logo to their line up, why should I switch? I am already with a company that has what I want.
The argument of them switching because Dish decides to carry NFL Network doesn't work unless you add something to it that Direct doesn't carry. I think the exodus of subs if Dish doesn't add NFL would be a whole lot less than what you all suspect it would be, and I think Dish realizes that. I do the fantasy football thing, and having the NFL channel would be nice for that, but it is only for 16 weeks that it really matters, there are other channels that would be more compelling to subs that are of interest 52 weeks a year that in my opinion would be better to add at this point.

There's obviously more at stake hear. NFL Network is just one small piece or sample. E* tends to be compete well on price. So here is only ONE example of someone that might analyze this.

"I dont want to pay the mucho bucks for football and tired of some things that D* does. I have always been reluctant to leave D* because of my need for football. But now that Sunday Ticket is outrageous, I can get by with ESPN, NFL Network and my HD OTA channels. Gee, Dish got that and I can save 10 bucks a month. Hmmmmm. "

Its either you get it or dont. I just think a few more sports channels makes Dish a nice option to D*. I have both so I can compare side to side. I just wish I had only one and could save some bucks.

 

[Slamminc11]

Because football fans far outnumber the others. (assuming of course that many blacks and gays are football fans.) I don't care for football, myself. But, I am a realist. I thought you were too.

I do realize that the NFL network is good for 16 weeks (or through the playoffs I guess) while there are other channels out that that people would like to watch 52 weeks of the year. I'm not saying it has to be the ones I would like them to add (if I had wanted them that badly, I would have switched to Direct or Comcast) but the big picture it seems to me, would be to add something that would generate revenue all year long, not just during the season. Gary, I do happen to fall into one of the two categories you mentioned, I like football and do the whole fantasy football thing, so if it were added the channel would at least get viewed in my house a bit, but I'm also a baseball fan and a hockey fan, but even if there was an MLB network or a NHL network, I just don't see the point of any of them taking up space for 6 months when there are other channels could be put up that more people would be interested in.

 

[Brewer4]

I do realizes that the NFL network is good for 16 weeks (or through the playoffs I guess) while there are other channels out that that people would like to watch 52 weeks of the year. I'm not saying it has to be the ones I would like them to add (if I had wanted them that badly, I would have switched to Direct or Comcast) but the big picture it seems to me, would be to add something that would generate revenue all year long, not just during the season. Gary, I do happen to fall into one of the two categories you mentioned, I like football and do the whole fantasy football thing, so if it were added the channel would at least get viewed in my house a bit, but I'm also a baseball fan and a hockey fan, but even if there was an MLB network or a NHL network, I just don't see the point of any of them taking up space for 6 months when there are other channels could be put up that more people would be interested in.

Here's what is interesting. NFL Network is an SD channel year round. Not much bandwidth there. There are only a few HD showings a week so the marketing spin of having HD football games in relation to bandwidth usage is great.

I agree a great channel year round is worth its bandwidth but football adds billions to the US GNP and offering a good package to tap into the millions of dollars NFL fans spend on programming is worth it. Thats all. The same argument can be said about other channels too. This one is "low hanging fruit" as its called.

 

[GaryPen]

This one is "low hanging fruit" as its called.

You may not realize that you just gave him a compliment.

 

[Mr Tony]

but even if there was an MLB network or a NHL network, I just don't see the point of any of them taking up space for 6 months when there are other channels could be put up that more people would be interested in.

There is a NHL Network....well, Its on Canadian systems but it IS a network. A really good one if you ask me

It was nice to see the older games and hilites.

 

[Slamminc11]

Here's what is interesting. NFL Network is an SD channel year round. Not much bandwidth there. There are only a few HD showings a week so the marketing spin of having HD football games in relation to bandwidth usage is great.

I agree a great channel year round is worth its bandwidth but football adds billions to the US GNP and offering a good package to tap into the millions of dollars NFL fans spend on programming is worth it. Thats all. The same argument can be said about other channels too. This one is "low hanging fruit" as its called.

Look, I am for Dish adding this channel, just not under the way things are set up now. Until Dish has a viable sports package put together so that for those that don't want sports or don't want to have their monthly bill go to pay for the sports channels (NFL Network, FSC, Speed, ESPNU, etc.) I just can't support them adding another sports related channel. Once they put a sports package together so that those that want sports can pay above and beyond to see it and those that don't won't have to pay for it, I will be in the front of the line rooting for it to happen, hell depending on what's offered, I might even spend the money to have it in my home. I just don't see how it is fair for people (and lets face it, there are a whole lot more people that don't like sports than do) who don't want sports to have to pay extra for a channel that covers a sport that lasts less than six months of the year.
Someone convince the powers that be at Dish to have a sports tier that doesn't affect my monthly bill unless I decide to subscribe to it, and you will have my complete support!

You may not realize that you just gave him a compliment.

i'm so flattered that you would think of me from his statement!!!

 

[atvman]

People said they want NFL Network. It is uplinked. Tells me charlie is listening and working on it. Keep working charlie, my son and I would love NFL Network!

 

[voomvoom]

The problem with NFL Network and I don't think a lot of you realize, is the only live games are in pre-season. When regular season starts, you will only get a game of the week rebroadcast a couple of times later in the week. And there's a good chance it won't be the one you want to see.

Al

 

[James Long]

E* has survived many years without this network. I don't see why there is an annual doom and gloom fest at the beginning of every season when it's not there.

JL

 

[stevendbs]

Come on Dish get this channel running! I miss this channel a lot from when we had cable, I hope they get it up ASAP so we can catch the preseason games.. Do you guys think it would do any good to call E*'s CSR's and hound them with requests to maybe light a fire under E*'s negotiation people?

 

[David Dietzel]

It's pretty obvious that Dish will launch NFL Network at some point in the near future -- those that crave need only be a little patient.

 

[GaryPen]

The only thing that's obvious is that they have it uplinked, but not available to subscribers. They have uplinked many channels that never saw the light of day on their service.

 

[Purogamer]

It doesn't matter if they don't play every game, or even more than 1 that's tape-delayed. We want NFL coverage, we want the news, insider-coverage from around the league, etc...It's a network, not a ppv...

It's nice, when nothing else is on, to be able to turn on and see some football coverage on a tuesday afternoon...or at least i'd like to think one day it will be...

The channel is up, they just won't give it to us, and that's absurd. I can't even play the bingo crap but that's staring me in the face in the program guide...

 

[Brewer4]

The problem with NFL Network and I don't think a lot of you realize, is the only live games are in pre-season. When regular season starts, you will only get a game of the week rebroadcast a couple of times later in the week. And there's a good chance it won't be the one you want to see.

Al

Doesnt matter to me. Football is football and I tend to find myself watching one every week when nothing else is on. Its hard to watch every game on Sunday so a game of the week is a great way to "browse" an HD game.

 

[Mr Tony]

The problem with NFL Network and I don't think a lot of you realize, is the only live games are in pre-season. When regular season starts, you will only get a game of the week rebroadcast a couple of times later in the week. And there's a good chance it won't be the one you want to see.

Al

and??

I have the NHL Network on StarChoice and they havent had live hockey in a year and a half but I still like watching the oldr games. They were showing the 2003-2004 playoffs. Now they're back to 2002-2003

 

[ken0042]

I'm with Iceberg. The NHL Network from Canada has helped me get through this 15 month period with no hockey. If there's "nothing on TV" I know I can always tune into a Jets vs. North Stars game.

Now in July I have the choice of watching said hockey game or a Vikings- Packers game.

 

[waltinvt]

I do realize that the NFL network is good for 16 weeks (or through the playoffs I guess) while there are other channels out that that people would like to watch 52 weeks of the year. I'm not saying it has to be the ones I would like them to add (if I had wanted them that badly, I would have switched to Direct or Comcast) but the big picture it seems to me, would be to add something that would generate revenue all year long, not just during the season. Gary, I do happen to fall into one of the two categories you mentioned, I like football and do the whole fantasy football thing, so if it were added the channel would at least get viewed in my house a bit, but I'm also a baseball fan and a hockey fan, but even if there was an MLB network or a NHL network, I just don't see the point of any of them taking up space for 6 months when there are other channels could be put up that more people would be interested in.

There is no comparision. Nascar is the fastest growing sport in this country right now with currently more fans than all the other professional sports combined. Nascar runs from Feb to Nov (almost every week for 9 months out of the year). The typical attendence at a Nextel Cup race is between 150,000 to 200,000. I don't know what the figures are for TV advertising at a Nextel Cup race but I bet that command at least as much as much as a MLB, NBA or NFL game.

As you can guess, I am a Nascar fan (along with my daughter) but my wife and I like to watch the Pats and Red Sox too. But if I owned a satelllite company and had to pick which sport would give me the largest viewership, I think it would have to be Nascar. But what do I know - I just sit up here in Vt raising kids and watching tv.

We don't get out much . Although I do go to the Nascar race at Loudon NH every year and heck - that little 'ol 1 mile track draws 135,000 twice a year and is sold out 6 months ahead.