Won't the carriers that have SPEED just keep them?
(08-04-2013 01:44 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]Won't the carriers that have SPEED just keep them?
From the writer in response to that same question in the comments:
Quote:Two reasons, one of which is articulated in the article. First, the new contract is necessary because the carriage agreement is for a motorsports-themed channel. Second, because Fox wants to more than double what it charges people at home to watch the channel.
(08-04-2013 01:48 AM)CommuterBob Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2013 01:44 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]Won't the carriers that have SPEED just keep them?
From the writer in response to that same question in the comments:
Quote:Two reasons, one of which is articulated in the article. First, the new contract is necessary because the carriage agreement is for a motorsports-themed channel. Second, because Fox wants to more than double what it charges people at home to watch the channel.
From the linked SBJ article:
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journ...witter%22}
Quote:Speed costs about 23 cents per subscriber per month. However, Fox is trying to increase that to about 80 cents for FS1’s launch.
And this rather ironic tidbit: FS2 might start out in more homes than FS1:
Quote:This raises the possibility that some distributors may carry FS2 but not FS1 at the beginning. Fox has yet to sign affiliate deals for FS1 with several top distributors, including DirecTV, Dish Network and Time Warner Cable. FS2 is not running into the same distribution problems because Fox does not need to get new affiliate deals to rebrand Fuel because of economics. Fuel costs distributors about 15 cents per subscriber per month, according to data from SNL Kagan. That rate is not expected to change when the channel rebrands to FS2.
Yeah, Fox Sports 1 has deals with Comcast and Cox right now. Hopefully Dish, Direct TV and Time Warner will get on board for the launch.
(08-04-2013 11:39 AM)Jet915 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, Fox Sports 1 has deals with Comcast and Cox right now. Hopefully Dish, Direct TV and Time Warner will get on board for the launch.
Fox is like the Walmart of TV. They make a plan, roll the competition (in this case, ESPN). They are in it to win it. They will start high and meet somewhere in the middle. Seven of the 16 Fox Sprint Cup races under the newly signed agreement are projected to air on FS1, so I think NASCAR may have a lot to say about access to their product.
(08-04-2013 12:46 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]Fox is like the Walmart of TV. They make a plan, roll the competition (in this case, ESPN). They are in it to win it. They will start high and meet somewhere in the middle. Seven of the 16 Fox Sprint Cup races under the newly signed agreement are projected to air on FS1, so I think NASCAR may have a lot to say about access to their product.
Ask CBS about how they tried to roll TWC... they didn't, their existing networks are OFF of TWC in some of the nations largest markets presently; despite having shows FAR more popular and watched than anything under contract of FS1.
I'm not sure Fox will either, I think the era of exploding contracts is ending! Cable subscribers are starting to push back and drop programming. It appears the marketplace is reaching a turning point. Cable companies are now basically saying, subscribers have had enough and we are not going to take the loss on our books; so they aren't going to pay significantly more for channels at each renewal and change.
(08-04-2013 02:05 PM)IceJus10 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2013 12:46 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]Fox is like the Walmart of TV. They make a plan, roll the competition (in this case, ESPN). They are in it to win it. They will start high and meet somewhere in the middle. Seven of the 16 Fox Sprint Cup races under the newly signed agreement are projected to air on FS1, so I think NASCAR may have a lot to say about access to their product.
Ask CBS about how they tried to roll TWC... they didn't, their existing networks are OFF of TWC in some of the nations largest markets presently; despite having shows FAR more popular and watched than anything under contract of FS1.
I'm not sure Fox will either, I think the era of exploding contracts is ending! Cable subscribers are starting to push back and drop programming. It appears the marketplace is reaching a turning point. Cable companies are now basically saying, subscribers have had enough and we are not going to take the loss on our books; so they aren't going to pay significantly more for channels at each renewal and change.
Time Warner Cable is playing with fire with this CBS deal. I agree that subscribers are leaving because cable prices are too high so TWC is refusing to raise their price. However, by refusing to show CBS, subscribers who want to watch CBS will just get an antennae and to watch CBS. Once they realize how good the new totally FREE HD DTV they can get with only a small antennae, they ask why they even have cable at all and cut the cord.
All the cable and satellite carriers are worried about cord-cutters.
The carriers now think they have to be able to offer a cable/satellite package that has popular channels in it while being significantly below $100/month.
The broadcast networks wanting to charge the carriers is an obstacle to that. So are sports networks. Sure, your typical cable package has 50-75 garbage channels that almost no one watches, but those 50-75 channels put together cost the carrier less than ESPN.
ESPN is entrenched and subscribers would be ticked if a grandstanding carrier dropped ESPN in the middle of a re-negotiation. Fox Sports 1? They don't have that kind of leverage. The only thing Fox could do is up the ante by threatening to pull their other networks if a carrier doesn't pay for FS1. But they won't do that.
The irony is that Fox is actually going to wind up with one fewer sports network as Fox Soccer is becoming FXX. I'm not sure what FXX is asking for, but the approximately $0.66 per month raise that Fox wants for FS1 likely is more than the carriage fees for Fox Soccer (FXX), Fuel (Fox Sports 2), and Fox Soccer Plus (Fox Sports 3) combined.
is there a list of which cable companies fox will be on?
(08-04-2013 03:01 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]All the cable and satellite carriers are worried about cord-cutters.
The carriers now think they have to be able to offer a cable/satellite package that has popular channels in it while being significantly below $100/month.
The broadcast networks wanting to charge the carriers is an obstacle to that. So are sports networks. Sure, your typical cable package has 50-75 garbage channels that almost no one watches, but those 50-75 channels put together cost the carrier less than ESPN.
ESPN is entrenched and subscribers would be ticked if a grandstanding carrier dropped ESPN in the middle of a re-negotiation. Fox Sports 1? They don't have that kind of leverage. The only thing Fox could do is up the ante by threatening to pull their other networks if a carrier doesn't pay for FS1. But they won't do that.
Please try to remember when Fox was a film company, and how fast they have risen. If I were ESPN I would be afraid. No one is laughing at Fox. My satellite programming is not that much, but the HD package, extra boxes, insurance, etc. cost about as much as the darned programming. If they want to keep costs down, why not let us borrow the equipment for free in return for buying their programming. My bill would be $85 instead of $132 each month.
Dish carries Fox, Fox News and Business is in HD. The Fox Sports alternatives are pretty much SD except for some local Fox sports programming and one HD game being shown on an alternative station. As far as the ABC network, ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, are in HD. It seems that you will be able to get this programming, but will not get this in HD. There have been many stoppages, but come up able to get the package at the end, with most in standard definition. The day is coming that packages are going away, then we will see which stations will make it or not, sports or otherwise.
As far as this moment, I am covered until the contracts come up again.
The timing couldn’t be worse for Fox Sports 1. With Time Warner Cable dropping CBS in cities like New York, Dallas, and LA I think they are serious about containing costs.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/busi...n/2613667/
Subscribers are tired of rate increases for channels they don’t necessarily want, and with the push to eliminate cable all together with things like Roku, Apple TV, Netflix, Hulu and Google TV I think the cable and satellite providers are not afraid to play hardball.
(08-04-2013 04:37 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote: [ -> ]The timing couldn’t be worse for Fox Sports 1. With Time Warner Cable dropping CBS in cities like New York, Dallas, and LA I think they are serious about containing costs.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/busi...n/2613667/
Subscribers are tired of rate increases for channels they don’t necessarily want, and with the push to eliminate cable all together with things like Roku, Apple TV, Netflix, Hulu and Google TV I think the cable and satellite providers are not afraid to play hardball.
With a cheap TV antennae, Roku, and the right service provider, you get 10+ free HD channels, free crackle on Ruku for movies, and ESPN3 to watch sports not on CBS/Fox/ABC/NBC from the antennae. Stream the ESPN3 games to your bigscreen TV. Then spend $2.50 per month for phone service from Nettalk Duo.
Total bill of $35 per month.
You don't even need a DVR because all the shows are now available on-line:
http://www.wheretowatch.org/
.
(08-04-2013 04:19 PM)sierrajip Wrote: [ -> ]Dish carries Fox, Fox News and Business is in HD. The Fox Sports alternatives are pretty much SD except for some local Fox sports programming and one HD game being shown on an alternative station. As far as the ABC network, ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, are in HD. It seems that you will be able to get this programming, but will not get this in HD. There have been many stoppages, but come up able to get the package at the end, with most in standard definition. The day is coming that packages are going away, then we will see which stations will make it or not, sports or otherwise.
As far as this moment, I am covered until the contracts come up again.
In Biloxi/Gulfport, DISH carries the local network channels in SD. Direct carries three local networks in HD, with the exception of NBC. I have an antenna and get all four in HD, so I am OK too.
I'm always amazed at the number of people who will spend 30-60$ a week on lunch break because they are to lazy to go to Walmart and buy food to make lunch. But can't afford cable.
It's a good day to have Comcast.
(08-05-2013 02:47 PM)LSUtah Wrote: [ -> ]It's a good day to have Comcast.
89.99 a month for internet and cable. I could care less about the cable until football season. I value the internet as being worth 50$ a month by itself.