Page 21 of 24 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 235
  1. #201
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    You aren't kidding. You really do have a beef.
    Sometimes it is hard to read you.

    Not gonna defend them, but I will say that I watch it alot of course I contribute to 7, 10 and 16 as well.
    You can keep the rest.
    Part of my programing on the satty.

    ;D
    My biggest beef is the irrational belief that EVERYONE wants NFLN.
    We are all huge football fans here, so it's a given that we believe NFLN to be good.

    However, I have lots of relatives and friends - as I'm sure you do - who just don't care.
    Forcing them to pay for it (which is the position of the NFL) just isn't right.
    That's what gets me going - the arrogance of the NFL.
    My wife doesn't watch Discovery or the History channel.
    Why should she have to pay for it as part of the basic package?
    Why should I have to pay for TLC.

    What about Oxygen - the self advertised Women's Channel?
    You don't think that that has a smaller viewer base than NFLN.

    The NFLN isn't saying that EVERYONE wants to watch it.
    It is saying that the most economical way for the average consumer to have access to it is by putting it on the basic package.
    The cable companies see it as an opportunity to pad their sagging profits.
    Ah, yes, NP!
    I was waiting here for you!

    The PRICE of any of those other channels you mention is miniscule compared to what NFLN wishes to charge.
    Those channels price themselves so that they are on the basic tier, unlike the NFLN, who wishes to charge a PREMIUM price for BASIC service.

    Sorry that you perceive my standing up for the CONSUMER as support for the cable companies.
    I just happen to agree that their stance is the one which is the in the interests of the MAJORITY of cable subscribers.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  2. #202
    jessejames09's Avatar
    jessejames09 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,231

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    I don't think my tv goes off NFLN for more than 10 minutes at a time. Even when other shows go to commercial I see whats going on.

    And their ticker was my god when I had a trojan during the first day of FA.


  3. #203
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    Weird that the two satellite tv providers didn't think that the price was too high...
    Oh yeah, and they didn't jack the price to get it either, so people who don't watch it don't have to pay for it anymore than I have to pay for the home shopping network.

    Marr- yes, Z has always had a beef with NFLN.
    He thinks that the cable companies are the victims in the standoff.
    In reality, the consumers are the victims.
    The cable companies aren't looking out for the average consumer - they are trying to find a way to maximize their profit, just like the NFLN is.


    I think that they could both afford to give a little, but Comcast and TW have made it clear that in their eyes cable channels depend on the cable providers, and not the other way around.
    I don't agree with that at all.
    LOL!
    DirecTV is owned by Ruper Murdoch.
    What else does he own....hmmmm....FOX?
    Think it's in his best interests to have the channel there, regardless of the price?

    As to the DISH Network, well, they're fed up with the NFL, too.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Network

    Dish Network
    On February 20, 2008 Dish Network moved the NFL Network from its "America's Top 100" package the higher "America's Top 200" package. Dish Network notified customers that the NFL Network was "moving out of Free Preview into America's Top 200 package" on February 20, 2008. The move cost the network four million subscribers.[16] On February 27, 2008 the NFL Network announced it would file suit against Dish Network for moving the network to "America's Top 200". The move stems from the NFL Network's decision to simulcast the 2007 New England Patriots-New York Giants game on CBS and NBC in addition to the game being shown on the NFL Network.[8] As of March 3, 2008 the NFL no longer encourages customers to switch to Dish Network on the site IWantMyNFL.com instead the network only encourages customers to switch to DirecTV, Verizon FiOS or AT&T U-verse if their provider doesn't carry the network or has placed the network on a higher priced tier.
    I don't believe the Cable companies are the victims.
    I am the victim, since my cable company doesn't carry NFLN (if not having a niche cable network allows me to proclaim myself a "victim").

    But, as reiterated MANY times here, the Cable companies are the ones whose position is most closely aligned with my own beliefs.

    I so wish most folks could differentiate between what THEY want for their own selfish reasons and what is TRULY good for all.


    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  4. #204
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    I don't really blame either the cable companies or the NFL. They are both just looking out for their own interests. I don't feel bad for anyone that gets stuck paying for NFL network even if they don't watch, they can switch cable companies or drop cable all together, there is no trickery to it.
    No, they cannot switch cable companies.
    Each municipality in the USA has an exclusive coverage agreement with a particular cable provider.
    I'm not aware of ANY place you can just "switch cable companies" without moving.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  5. #205
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    You aren't kidding. You really do have a beef.
    Sometimes it is hard to read you.

    Not gonna defend them, but I will say that I watch it alot of course I contribute to 7, 10 and 16 as well.
    You can keep the rest.
    Part of my programing on the satty.
    ;D
    My biggest beef is the irrational belief that EVERYONE wants NFLN.
    We are all huge football fans here, so it's a given that we believe NFLN to be good.

    However, I have lots of relatives and friends - as I'm sure you do - who just don't care.
    Forcing them to pay for it (which is the position of the NFL) just isn't right.
    That's what gets me going - the arrogance of the NFL.
    My wife doesn't watch Discovery or the History channel.
    Why should she have to pay for it as part of the basic package?
    Why should I have to pay for TLC.

    What about Oxygen - the self advertised Women's Channel?
    You don't think that that has a smaller viewer base than NFLN.

    The NFLN isn't saying that EVERYONE wants to watch it.
    It is saying that the most economical way for the average consumer to have access to it is by putting it on the basic package.
    The cable companies see it as an opportunity to pad their sagging profits.
    Ah, yes, NP!
    I was waiting here for you!

    The PRICE of any of those other channels you mention is miniscule compared to what NFLN wishes to charge.
    Those channels price themselves so that they are on the basic tier, unlike the NFLN, who wishes to charge a PREMIUM price for BASIC service.

    Sorry that you perceive my standing up for the CONSUMER as support for the cable companies.
    I just happen to agree that their stance is the one which is the in the interests of the MAJORITY of cable subscribers.

    =Z=


    We've been round and round about this before, so I know I won't convince you otherwise.
    I personally think that the cable companies are looking out more for their own interests than the interests of their cable subscribers.
    In a situation where both parties are being selfish, I see the cable companies as more selfish because when given a choice between providing a great programming option to everybody for a minimal profit and not providing it at all, they are choosing to not provide it at all.
    Either they make a substantial profit, or they want to create policy that results in NOBODY getting it.

    The cable companies stand to make more of a profit per investment by putting a highly sought after channel in a sports tier.
    The NFLN stands to make more of a profit per investment if the channel is on the basic package.
    Both would still profit either way, which is whay bugs me.
    I wish they would work toward a compromise, and neither side is willing to go there.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  6. #206
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "BloodyHorns82" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    You aren't kidding. You really do have a beef.
    Sometimes it is hard to read you.

    Not gonna defend them, but I will say that I watch it alot of course I contribute to 7, 10 and 16 as well.
    You can keep the rest.
    Part of my programing on the satty.

    ;D
    My biggest beef is the irrational belief that EVERYONE wants NFLN.
    We are all huge football fans here, so it's a given that we believe NFLN to be good.

    However, I have lots of relatives and friends - as I'm sure you do - who just don't care.
    Forcing them to pay for it (which is the position of the NFL) just isn't right.
    That's what gets me going - the arrogance of the NFL.
    That is the cable companies fault.

    I don't pay anything extra for NFL network.
    On DishNetwork, it comes included on the most basic package you can buy.
    Which is right where it should be. As far as I know,
    they didn't increase the prices with the addition of NFLN years back, but I could be mistaken.
    Yeah.
    About that Dish network thing - ummmm - they changed it.
    It's not on the most basic package any longer.
    See the blurb I posted just a few minutes ago.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  7. #207
    BloodyHorns82's Avatar
    BloodyHorns82 is offline Jersey Retired Feed The Frog Champion
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    9,691

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    Found this kind of interesting, although somewhat dated.

    You may ask then, if the cost is so unusually high and prohibits making a profit, why would satellite offer it.
    Isn't is just as expensive for them?
    It is-- however, the satellite networks are approaching the NFL as a "loss leader."
    That means they are willing to forego making a profit on NFLN with the hope that the NFLN will lure more customers overall.
    (This is the same as when department stores like Wal-Mart sell a few special items at less than cost just to bring customers in the store.)
    DirecTV is trying its best to expand and is willing to take a risk.
    The cable companies already have a strong market base and have no motivation to take a loss-- it's not like they would gain any new customers by offering it as a loss leader.
    .

    My question would be are they really "taking a loss"?
    Regardless, no company should be EXPECTED to provide a service without profiting from it...which I think many of us feel the cable companies should do.


    Why is it that NFLN charges twice what ESPN does?
    ???

    EDIT:
    Another thought...
    I keep reading (around the internet) that the big beef the cable companies have is they can't meet their profit margins with networks like NFLN.
    My question would be what exactly are their expected margins, and are they reasonable?
    30%? 40%?

  8. #208
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "BloodyHorns82" wrote:
    Why is it that NFLN charges twice what ESPN does?
    ???
    My answer?
    Arrogance.
    WE are the NFL, so WE can charge whateve WE want for our niche programming.

    The cost of ESPN, BTW, also includes (I believe) the Deuce, ESPNU, ESPNNews, ESPNClassic, ESPN Deportes (or whatever) and the Ocho!
    So for the price of ESPN, you get:

    * NFL

    * MLB

    * NBA

    * NASCAR

    * College hoops

    * College football

    * And tons of coverage of Other sports

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  9. #209
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "Zeus" wrote:
    As to the DISH Network, well, they're fed up with the NFL, too.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Network

    Dish Network
    On February 20, 2008 Dish Network moved the NFL Network from its "America's Top 100" package the higher "America's Top 200" package. Dish Network notified customers that the NFL Network was "moving out of Free Preview into America's Top 200 package" on February 20, 2008. The move cost the network four million subscribers.[16] On February 27, 2008 the NFL Network announced it would file suit against Dish Network for moving the network to "America's Top 200". The move stems from the NFL Network's decision to simulcast the 2007 New England Patriots-New York Giants game on CBS and NBC in addition to the game being shown on the NFL Network.[8] As of March 3, 2008 the NFL no longer encourages customers to switch to Dish Network on the site IWantMyNFL.com instead the network only encourages customers to switch to DirecTV, Verizon FiOS or AT&T U-verse if their provider doesn't carry the network or has placed the network on a higher priced tier.
    I don't believe the Cable companies are the victims.
    I am the victim, since my cable company doesn't carry NFLN (if not having a niche cable network allows me to proclaim myself a "victim").

    But, as reiterated MANY times here, the Cable companies are the ones whose position is most closely aligned with my own beliefs.

    I so wish most folks could differentiate between what THEY want for their own selfish reasons and what is TRULY good for all.


    =Z=
    I am a Dish subscriber, I do NOT have the America top 200, yet I still have NFLN.
    How does that work?
    I also don't think I ever got a programming change notification, so I am a little skeptical of the information from wikipedia at this point...

    BTW, I agree with your last statement.
    However, calling my beliefs selfish is hardly needed.
    I am not even a cable subscriber, so how am I being selfish by wanting basic cable to include the NFLN?

    I look at the history of cable companies, and how they have hand selected basic programming channels but kept popular channels on more expensive tiers.
    There are very few people who simply subscribe to the most basic package in any provider anymore.
    Why?
    Because the basic packages suck.
    If you want any decent content, you have to pay extra $$$ to the cable companies to get it.
    This is just another example of the cables companies trying to force up the average price that consumers spend on cable, and I do NOT believe in any way, shape or form that that is "truly good for all".
    In fact, I think it is the worst possible thing that we can allow to happen.

    You said it your self in an earlier post - cable companies work in a virtual monopoly.
    You cannot simply change cable companies because you feel like it.
    Satellite is not an option everywhere either.
    So because they know that they have a captive consumer base, they charge whatever the hell they want for whatever channel they want - regardless of what it costs the cable company.

    I am glad to see a highly sought after channel like the NFLN taking on the cable companies.
    To be honest, few organizations have the power or resources the NFL has to make a successful attack on the cable monopolies.

    Some people look at the short term effects of 70 cents per subscriber increases, but don't look at the long term effects of allowing the providers, not the channel itself, to dictate what level of programming their channel is offered at.
    I look at the long term effects, and see the consumer getting screwed if the NFLN loses.

    Hardly selfish at all.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  10. #210
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Home Game Arrangements - Best Time?

    "BloodyHorns82" wrote:
    Found this kind of interesting, although somewhat dated.

    You may ask then, if the cost is so unusually high and prohibits making a profit, why would satellite offer it.
    Isn't is just as expensive for them?
    It is-- however, the satellite networks are approaching the NFL as a "loss leader."
    That means they are willing to forego making a profit on NFLN with the hope that the NFLN will lure more customers overall.
    (This is the same as when department stores like Wal-Mart sell a few special items at less than cost just to bring customers in the store.)
    DirecTV is trying its best to expand and is willing to take a risk.
    The cable companies already have a strong market base and have no motivation to take a loss-- it's not like they would gain any new customers by offering it as a loss leader.
    .

    My question would be are they really "taking a loss"?
    Regardless, no company should be EXPECTED to provide a service without profiting from it...which I think many of us feel the cable companies should do.


    Why is it that NFLN charges twice what ESPN does?
    ???

    EDIT:
    Another thought...
    I keep reading (around the internet) that the big beef the cable companies have is they can't meet their profit margins with networks like NFLN.
    My question would be what exactly are their expected margins, and are they reasonable?
    30%? 40%?
    Cable companies have lower initial costs but higher infrastructure and maintenance costs.
    Laying cable and connecting it to houses is more expensive than just putting a dish on the roof.
    This is why satellite companies are so much more profitable than cable right now.
    It is also why they are able to offer better programming for cheaper.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

Page 21 of 24 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 1st time back home in 9+ yrs............
    By ForceOfNorse in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-04-2010, 09:32 AM
  2. September 28th Tenn Titans LP Field Game Arrangements
    By Marrdro in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 250
    Last Post: 09-23-2008, 10:23 PM
  3. 2008 Home Game Arrangements
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 05-02-2008, 05:56 AM
  4. Woman, 75, gets phone call about her funeral arrangements
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-01-2008, 04:11 PM
  5. No home games in prime time
    By smoot2boot in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-15-2005, 08:09 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •