Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

All in One DirecTV Hates Pac-12 Network Thread (Was Larry Scott Thread)

All valid points SD, but I am out of the footprint and I am forced to make a decision and at this point paying anything to watch CU Football, and that's what this is about CU Football or Denver Broncos football. When paying that is a easy choice, an its not CU. Scott claimed a lot, I am sure some of you feel he has delivered, I don't. I am not going to just switch after 15 years to suck Larry Scotts C*** because he has a hard on for DTV. So I you want to call me a thief do it, I don't feel guilty in the least
 
Last edited:
Fair enough. I guess I don't understand the contention with Scott when DirecTV can simply pay what every other MSO is paying. I would be pissed at DirecTV (and have switched by now), not Scott.
 
I get the trend of "cutting the cord", "streaming", etc.
But there is also a trend of using timeshifting (DVR). Even CU games I'm often needing to watch after they have begun or after they are completed. I'm not aware of how I can timeshift live sport events via internet feed. This would require the ability to stream it and capture. Not so easy.
 
buffalo1 said:
I get the trend of "cutting the cord", "streaming", etc.
But there is also a trend of using timeshifting (DVR). Even CU games I'm often needing to watch after they have begun or after they are completed. I'm not aware of how I can timeshift live sport events via internet feed. This would require the ability to stream it and capture. Not so easy.
Click to expand...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0018LX0DY

Here you go buddy. Time shift away.
 
SD Buff said:
Fair enough. I guess I don't understand the contention with Scott when DirecTV can simply pay what every other MSO is paying. I would be pissed at DirecTV (and have switched by now), not Scott.
Click to expand...

Fact is DTV doesn't need the PAC as long as they have have the NFL. DTV has 90% of the commercial business and Scott gets zero of it, he can play tough all he wants but the fact is he needs the exposure and with DTV having exclusive Sunday Ticket he gets it in every sports bar and pub in America. Fact is the exposure and more subscribers merits a better deal.
 
We have been over the favored nation clause many times. The numbers must not be working out. If the rumored deal DTV offered s accurate, PAC makes significantly more without DTV. You are certainly right about exposure and no doubt that is factored in. We'll see how the SEC network plays out. Unlike PAC fans, SEC fan won't hesitate to switch

From phone
 
SD Buff said:
We have been over the favored nation clause many times. The numbers must not be working out. If the rumored deal DTV offered s accurate, PAC makes significantly more without DTV. You are certainly right about exposure and no doubt that is factored in. We'll see how the SEC network plays out. Unlike PAC fans, SEC fan won't hesitate to switch

From phone
Click to expand...

Mfns can work in both directions. The issue here is that the p12 will likely have mfn issues with the cable guys if they do the deal with directv. The cable guys plus dish will thus be entitled to similar rates, crushing the economics for the p12.

The way this gets resolved other than enough viewers moving away to cause directv to bite the bullet, is the nfl deal. Directv is saving all it's reserves for the renewal. If they don't win, then they will open budget for the p12 and others.

The NFL Sunday ticket renewal is going to shake a lot up in a big way. Think about what happens if Xbox or Apple wins. It will change the tv landscape, just like when directv won it ahead of the cable guys many years ago.
 
The NFL sunday ticket will no longer be exclusive to one provider after the current deal with Directv expires, that is my prediction.
 
Google TV is prepared to offer as much as 1.5 Billion per season, DTV currently pays 1 billion. Its a well known fact DTV does not make money on the deal but gets it back with subscriptions to their service because of it. Goggle on the other hand is trying to blow up the cable/sate bundle. They are rumored to want Sunday Ticket to offer it like Hulu Plus or Netflix for a 1 time payment of $200 from a dongle that costs $35. Their logic is they can better then double DTV's current buyers. Ala carte is coming if the cable/sate companies are not ready they will go the way of the land line phone companies, and Blockbuster. More directly a problem, Larry Scott better have a plan.
 
EddieCrowder said:
Google TV is prepared to offer as much as 1.5 Billion per season, DTV currently pays 1 billion. Its a well known fact DTV does not make money on the deal but gets it back with subscriptions to their service because of it. Goggle on the other hand is trying to blow up the cable/sate bundle. They are rumored to want Sunday Ticket to offer it like Hulu Plus or Netflix for a 1 time payment of $200 from a dongle that costs $35. Their logic is they can better then double DTV's current buyers. Ala carte is coming if the cable/sate companies are not ready they will go the way of the land line phone companies, and Blockbuster. More directly a problem, Larry Scott better have a plan.
Click to expand...
WTF is a "dongle?" Sounds like something you'd see in a porno.
 
SD Buff said:
Much more likely its not coming. Won't get past Congress in the name of channel diversity, jobs, etc. Again, a la carte is nice in theory (for the consumer), but in practice it very well might not be.
Click to expand...

Dude, you still have a rotary phone don't you ? just kidding SD, heard the same thing in the 70's about breaking up Ma Bell, now cable and sate is Ma Bell. The Feds can't stop the net, it's world not National. Just like they cant stop the Cal grad streaming Larry's toy for free from Sri Lanka. Tax it or lose it, which option do you think they take ?
 
Take bundles away and you lost a ton of content. Like you mentioned above, everyone is subsidizing something. Maybe the sports channels greed takes us to the tipping point, maybe not. Having a crystal clear illegal stream does you no good without content. Change? Probably. We'll see. It's not that simple though, ton of angles.

From phone
 
SD I think you have a real grounded view, and I was just like you not that long ago. So please don't take my arguments personal because they are not, I just wanted you to know that. Change will come, it's the one thing that is constant. Simplifying media will continue, from TV antennae, to cable, to satellite, to the web its evolving faster then my 52 yr old brain can keep up with. ESPN already offers ala carte with ESPNGo, Hulu Plus and the others all but eliminates the need for a DVR. There is already movies released in theatre and PPV at the same time. What I am talking about has already happened, from here it gets bigger. Part of the reason CU joined the PAC is its progressive forward thinking attitude. So I believe Larry Scott's #1 priority should be growing his new exciting brand, not limiting it to inside the box thinking. The genie isn't going back in the bottle, he needs to see how she can help him.
 
EddieCrowder said:
So please don't take my arguments personal because they are not, I just wanted you to know that.
Click to expand...

Didn't need to say that, haven't said anything that I could possibly take personal. I understand what you are saying and if there is a way Scott can find a one off a la carte option without having the MSOs drop the network from their basic tier cable package, I would be all for it. Just don't see how that's possible. I do agree the only constant is change, we'll see how it shakes out.
 
SD Buff said:
Take bundles away and you lost a ton of content. Like you mentioned above, everyone is subsidizing something. Maybe the sports channels greed takes us to the tipping point, maybe not. Having a crystal clear illegal stream does you no good without content. Change? Probably. We'll see. It's not that simple though, ton of angles.

From phone
Click to expand...

Yep. A la carte is a wonderful idea. If enough people want to watch everything you want to watch to make it economically viable to produce the programming only for the people who want to watch it. Most channels probably can't survive that way.
 
I'm fine with paying for P12 net separately if that means I can drop the 30 or so channels I never watch, but still have to pay for. DTV is playing both sides of this fence. If they want a la carte, then go a la carte. Don't try to cherry pick which channels are offered that way.
 
EddieCrowder said:
ESPN already offers ala carte with ESPNGo, Hulu Plus and the others all but eliminates the need for a DVR.
Click to expand...

espn is not ala carte. to get this app and hbo go, you have to have an authenticated account with a provider like Comcast or directv. that means you still have to pay the cable guy.

hulu is "windowed" to protect cable and sat.

things are going to crack but it will take a bit more time. as I said, watch the nfl package-- it will be a market leader.
 
and, as others have said, ala carting will destroy a whole bunch of lesser channels. while that's just how the market works (and i suspect leaner, simpler web channels would find their growth accelerating in such an environment), there will be a big economic impact. the market should determine winners and losers, so we should let it play out, but i do wonder about the impact on creativity and risk taking. when big content studios can bundle, they are able to play around with more forward thinking and fringier content. if you think back to pre-cable days, there were 3 networks and they all played it right down the middle, with little risk taking on the creative front, because it was least common denominator programming strategy 101.

here's a nice hand-wringing article on the economic DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM (to certain players) if ala carting becomes the standard:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...ollars-20131204,0,4355658.story#axzz2u5ESoPZm
 
Liver said:
and, as others have said, ala carting will destroy a whole bunch of lesser channels. while that's just how the market works (and i suspect leaner, simpler web channels would find their growth accelerating in such an environment), there will be a big economic impact. the market should determine winners and losers, so we should let it play out, but i do wonder about the impact on creativity and risk taking. when big content studios can bundle, they are able to play around with more forward thinking and fringier content. if you think back to pre-cable days, there were 3 networks and they all played it right down the middle, with little risk taking on the creative front, because it was least common denominator programming strategy 101.

here's a nice hand-wringing article on the economic DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM (to certain players) if ala carting becomes the standard:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...ollars-20131204,0,4355658.story#axzz2u5ESoPZm
Click to expand...

One of the comments to that article says "if Netflix can provide programming for $8 a month, there is no reason cable can't". Of course there is. It's because cable and satellite packages are paying the freight for that programming in the first place. If a la carte cuts into the number of subscribers to those channels by 40-50% (very possible), the shows still cost the same. Either the cost to those channels go up, and subscriber fees accordinly, or the price to after broadcast outlets like Netflix and Hulu goes up to cover the difference. And their fees go up accordingly. More likely, a mixture of both.
 
I think you could hybrid it somehow. It wouldn't be fully a-la-carte, but you could offer blocks of programming. For instance, I may only watch 20 networks with any regularity, but I would have to buy a minimum of 30 networks. So I'd still be paying for stuff I don't watch, but I'd actually get to see what I want and avoid the really crappy stuff like Telemundo and the Shopping network.
 
The real crappy stuff none of us watch costs a couple pennies a month. As Sports fans (and add TBS, TNT, USA, etc.) - we are getting a bargain with bundling. And we already have a hybrid with the Tier's. Basic, basic +, sports +, etc. Apologies for always arguing on this.... I hope there is a workaround that is palatable for all of us sometime soon. Just always side with the careful what you wish for as a Sports fan.
 
sackman said:
I think you could hybrid it somehow. It wouldn't be fully a-la-carte, but you could offer blocks of programming. For instance, I may only watch 20 networks with any regularity, but I would have to buy a minimum of 30 networks. So I'd still be paying for stuff I don't watch, but I'd actually get to see what I want and avoid the really crappy stuff like Telemundo and the Shopping network.
Click to expand...

Or the Super Crap like The Longhorn Network........ Anybody tells my wife I said that I'm dead man walking
 
SD Buff said:
The real crappy stuff none of us watch costs a couple pennies a month. As Sports fans (and add TBS, TNT, USA, etc.) - we are getting a bargain with bundling. And we already have a hybrid with the Tier's. Basic, basic +, sports +, etc. Apologies for always arguing on this.... I hope there is a workaround that is palatable for all of us sometime soon. Just always side with the careful what you wish for as a Sports fan.
Click to expand...


I recently down-sized to the smallest bundle DTV offers. It's very close to not being worth the effort to have service at all. I have a hard time with the idea that I'm getting some kind of bargain.
 
I could see bundling all of these college networks like SEC, Big 10, PAC12 in to a college sports package for $9.95 per month...
 
sackman said:
I have a hard time with the idea that I'm getting some kind of bargain.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I hear you. Sure I said this at least once in the 14 pages, but when I say be careful what we wish for. ESPN is something like $6 a month just by itself. Its on the basic tier for every cable household in America. Their ratings would suggest maybe 1/4 of US households actually watch their programming. It wouldn't be as simple as bringing the carriage fee up to $24 a month, but it would definitely cost more than $6. And that is just ESPN. Then again, maybe I am totally wrong and the free market would figure it all out. Who knows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top