Non-Key Tweets

[JayRU09]

Jay, I have a question you might be able to answer. Why did RU get NYC tier 1 cable access? I could see the 3 million or so in North Jersey but why NYC?

It's how the cable system works from what I've gathered. It's not broken up along state lines but along the metro areas. To get the North Jersey people you had to include NYC because it's in the metro area for the cable companies.

If that's not completely correct then another theory still utilizes those metro areas. The highest rated NYC metro games for ESPN networks are RU games, and there's no real way to break up that rating to study it. So even if those ratings are driven by North Jersey households, you as a cable company just see it as the NYC rating.

The last idea is that cable companies see the writing on the wall and know that they need live programming to keep customers. So anything that is live is going to get easy access as that's what the cable companies need now more than ever.

 

[upstater]

It's how the cable system works from what I've gathered. It's not broken up along state lines but along the metro areas. To get the North Jersey people you had to include NYC because it's in the metro area for the cable companies.

If that's not completely correct then another theory still utilizes those metro areas. The highest rated NYC metro games for ESPN networks are RU games, and there's no real way to break up that rating to study it. So even if those ratings are driven by North Jersey households, you as a cable company just see it as the NYC rating.

The last idea is that cable companies see the writing on the wall and know that they need live programming to keep customers. So anything that is live is going to get easy access as that's what the cable companies need now more than ever.

It's not correct because there are many different cable systems that all negotiate separately. Can you link to an article that tells us specific details? Everything I've read has been general with no specifics. On a B1G site, a prominent poster said the negotiations ranged from a disappointment to having a foot in the door for future rises. Which is what happened in Eastern PA with Penn State. It took awhile to colonize that region.

 

[JayRU09]

Never once heard it was a disappointment. In fact everything I've heard was that everything went smoothly.

 

[upstater]

Never once heard it was a disappointment. In fact everything I've heard was that everything went smoothly.

Someone broke it down with actual numbers on a B1G board. The post was linked to one of the bbs sites. But again, it was only message board stuff, no details in any news report or press release.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Someone broke it down with actual numbers on a B1G board. The post was linked to one of the bbs sites. But again, it was only message board stuff, no details in any news report or press release.

Occam's Razor may apply here.

If the negotiations were "disappointing" you wouldn't have them completed in June or whenever it was. Traditionally these battles continue until the 11th hour if not later. Settling on a number with months to spare suggests to me that both sides (BTN and carriers) found a mutually satisfactory figure. Someone should be beaten with a broom handle if they settled on a disappointing number 90 days premature.

 

[UConn9604]

Occam's Razor may apply here.

If the negotiations were "disappointing" you wouldn't have them completed in June or whenever it was. Traditionally these battles continue until the 11th hour if not later. Settling on a number with months to spare suggests to me that both sides (BTN and carriers) found a mutually satisfactory figure. Someone should be beaten with a broom handle if they settled on a disappointing number 90 days premature.

Be careful -- we may not be talking about the sharpest knives in the drawer here. After all, the Big Ten saw fit to add Rutgers and not us.

 

[upstater]

Occam's Razor may apply here.

If the negotiations were "disappointing" you wouldn't have them completed in June or whenever it was. Traditionally these battles continue until the 11th hour if not later. Settling on a number with months to spare suggests to me that both sides (BTN and carriers) found a mutually satisfactory figure. Someone should be beaten with a broom handle if they settled on a disappointing number 90 days premature.

Don't forget what BTN settled for without battling in Eastern PA. It was very low. The strategy is to make yourself indispensable. It's the same thinking that the BE used with ESPN. Exposure is most important. You have a product to sell. So start low and sell it to the most customers. BTN did exactly that in Eastern PA.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Be careful -- we may not be talking about the sharpest knives in the drawer here. After all, the Big Ten saw fit to add Rutgers and not us.

You probably thought that was A-material as you wrote it.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Don't forget what BTN settled for without battling in Eastern PA. It was very low. The strategy is to make yourself indispensable. It's the same thinking that the BE used with ESPN. Exposure is most important. You have a product to sell. So start low and sell it to the most customers. BTN did exactly that in Eastern PA.

Two things:

1. How do you know there was not a battle in Eastern Pa?

2. I have brought products to market and set pricing for products, I don't ever recall a "start low and sell it to the most customers" strategy being a strong consideration.

 

[clmssun]

Two things:

2. I have brought products to market and set pricing for products, I don't ever recall a "start low and sell it to the most customers" strategy being a strong consideration.

Not to be too flippant, but don't drug dealers like a "start low and get people hooked" philosophy?

 

[UConnJim]

2. I have brought products to market and set pricing for products, I don't ever recall a "start low and sell it to the most customers" strategy being a strong consideration.

Happens all the time, especially in the internet era. Give it away or start the price low to get to as many customers as you can and then raise prices over time. Or, find an alternative way to get paid. Seems like the strategy that Amazon, Google (with Android), Facebook, Twitter, etc are using.

With new cable networks, getting carriage is more important than price. Once they have carriage and develop ratings and loyal customers, they can raise price. Cable sports nets is one of the few industries in recent years that has had pricing power. Look at ESPN's steady price increases over the years.

 

[Fishy]

2. I have brought products to market and set pricing for products, I don't ever recall a "start low and sell it to the most customers" strategy being a strong consideration.

This is why Jeff Bezos has a gabazillion dollars and you're on a UConn message board on a Wednesday afternoon.

 

[kyleslamb]

Happens all the time, especially in the internet era. Give it away or start the price low to get to as many customers as you can and then raise prices over time. Or, find an alternative way to get paid. Seems like the strategy that Amazon, Google (with Android), Facebook, Twitter, etc are using.

With new cable networks, getting carriage is more important than price. Once they have carriage and develop ratings and loyal customers, they can raise price. Cable sports nets is one of the few industries in recent years that has had pricing power. Look at ESPN's steady price increases over the years.

Very true. Wal Mart started out with ridiculously low prices and put Hearts and K-Mart out of business and has gradually raised prices since as there has been far less competition.

To quote Walter White, 'corner the market and raise the price.'

 

[ArizonaKnight]

This is why Jeff Bezos has a gabazillion dollars and you're on a UConn message board on a Wednesday afternoon.

You figured it out. There were probably a gabazillion eCommerce sites that popped up after the Supreme Court ruling on internet sales tax and I'm sure some thought that attractive pricing was a good idea. What separated Amazon from the rest?

Also, why hasn't DC put the BTN on basic yet? Wouldn't BTN just set the bar low enough that the providers would provide carriage?

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Very true. Wal Mart started out with ridiculously low prices and put Hearts and K-Mart out of business and has gradually raised prices since as there has been far less competition.

To quote Walter White, 'corner the market and raise the price.'

Didn't John Paul Getty do this 100 years ago by opening gas stations across from competitors and selling gas at a loss. This is not a new strategy nor is it bulletproof. For every Walmart there are probably 1,000,000 start ups that failed at that strategy from a cash flow perspective.

Walmart is also a notorious ball buster with its vendors. You present your product and they will dictate everything including how your product is produced before it ever sees a Walmart shelf.

 

[CAHUSKY]

Also, why hasn't DC put the BTN on basic yet? Wouldn't BTN just set the bar low enough that the providers would provide carriage?

Perhaps there was no bar low enough? They simply don't want it for even a penny per month?

 

[Bill Sussman]

Very true. Wal Mart started out with ridiculously low prices and put Hearts and K-Mart out of business and has gradually raised prices since as there has been far less competition.

To quote Walter White, 'corner the market and raise the price.'

Or look at loss leaders...... or subscription services that give you a "free trial" and then automatically charge your credit card afterwords.

 

[businesslawyer]

You figured it out. There were probably a gabazillion eCommerce sites that popped up after the Supreme Court ruling on internet sales tax and I'm sure some thought that attractive pricing was a good idea. What separated Amazon from the rest?

Also, why hasn't DC put the BTN on basic yet? Wouldn't BTN just set the bar low enough that the providers would provide carriage?

First rule of holes my friend: when in one, stop digging.

It is illegal under our antitrust laws to sell product or services at a loss to harm competition. Guess what -- if no one was doing it, there wouldn't be a law against it. You think it's just coincidence that the Ten Commandments don't forbid insider trading?

 

[pj]

It is illegal under our antitrust laws to sell product or services at a loss to harm competition. Guess what -- if no one was doing it, there wouldn't be a law against it. You think it's just coincidence that the Ten Commandments don't forbid insider trading?

Wasn't Aaron secretly cornering the gold market even as the tablets were being written? Maybe the tablets were just too small to get to that.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

First rule of holes my friend: when in one, stop digging.

It is illegal under our antitrust laws to sell product or services at a loss to harm competition. Guess what -- if no one was doing it, there wouldn't be a law against it. You think it's just coincidence that the Ten Commandments don't forbid insider trading?

OK, let's forget about Amazon and anti-trust laws for a second and circle back to the original question. What advantage would the BTN negotiators have in settling on a "disappointing" number several months in advance of the 2014 season?

 

[businesslawyer]

OK, let's forget about Amazon and anti-trust laws for a second and circle back to the original question. What advantage would the BTN negotiators have in settling on a "disappointing" number several months in advance of the 2014 season?

I didn't say that. Until we know the details of what the Big Ten agreed to, why would I waste my breath speculating on whether they got a good deal or a not so good deal? My guess, regardless of whether the deal was "good" or "bad," is that the Ten had a pretty good idea of what they were going to get when they offered RU.

 

[SixRings]

OK, let's forget about Amazon and anti-trust laws for a second and circle back to the original question. What advantage would the BTN negotiators have in settling on a "disappointing" number several months in advance of the 2014 season?

Market share. Take a hit on your margins but grow your numbers and hopefully some brand loyalty (RU). Then, as everyone has pointed out, steadily raise your prices and get your margins.

 

[UConnJim]

You can assume ND football content will be on the ACC Channel either original ESPN content or licensed from NBC Sports. And yes there will be ND basketball and Olympic Sports too.

So, NBC is going to license Notre Dame football games to a sports net run by a rival network? I don't think so. ESPN could take an ND football game from ABC/ESPN and put it on an ACC Network, but they would probably take an economic hit to do it so I don't know why they would do it. Even if they did put one ND game per year against some weak ACC opponent (which is what the conference sports networks have been doing) would anyone really care?

What about ND hockey? Well they are in Hockey East which has a TV deal and ND hockey has their own TV deal with NBC Sports Network. (Yes, the Irish have screwed over Hockey East!)

So, that leaves ND men's and women's basketball, baseball, softball... for a potential ACC Network. That's not real attractive content and it certainly wouldn't drive getting carriage around the country.

ESPN already has the ACC media rights locked up and they run the risk of losing more college sports content in the future as the Big 1G TV contract comes up for bid. They have to be careful about losing content as they continue to raise sub rates to customers.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

I didn't say that. Until we know the details of what the Big Ten agreed to, why would I waste my breath speculating on whether they got a good deal or a not so good deal? My guess, regardless of whether the deal was "good" or "bad," is that the Ten had a pretty good idea of what they were going to get when they offered RU.

Fair enough. I wasn't intending to put words in your mouth.

I would tend to agree with your assessment that the B1G had a pretty good idea of what they would get in NYC which makes me even less inclined to think they were "disappointed" with the result.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Market share. Take a hit on your margins but grow your numbers and hopefully some brand loyalty (RU). Then, as everyone has pointed out, steadily raise your prices and get your margins.

Maybe I'm not making my point clearly. The B1G did not need to "cave" in June. I live in TX and the Long Horn Network negotiations got ugly in late August. NFL Network negotiations with carriers got ugly as the season loomed closer and closer. No one has provided a reason why the B1G would settle on a "disappointing" rate, three months or so before the start of the season. There was no deadline, real or otherwise, in June. At least not that I'm aware of.