HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

CSN Philadelphia Loophole Closed, CSN to be available on other providers.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2010, 03:13 PM
  #76
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
They aren't necessarily the bad guys, but this loophole was anti-competitive and IMO a factor into why Comcast's services' quality suffered. Too many people stuck with Comcast strictly for the local sports. This is a big win for the consumers... Comcast has never had real competition on an even level. FiOS is changing that, and now Dish can finally be a legitimate alternative.
Oh, it's absolutely a big movement to improve competition. The monopolistic nature of cable providers is a travesty, but they engage in and protect that environment for very understandable reasons.

My only argument here is the presentation of Comcast as bad guys and DirecTV as good guys in this whole thing. Not to mention the comedy of "Comca$t" as if they aren't all out to maximize their profits at every turn.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 03:22 PM
  #77
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
My only argument here is the presentation of Comcast as bad guys and DirecTV as good guys in this whole thing. Not to mention the comedy of "Comca$t" as if they aren't all out to maximize their profits at every turn.
Agreed on that front. Some people are lauding the FCC on this ruling, but I think that's missing the point. This should have been changed a long long time ago. The FCC is just as bad as the cable cos, they are all in each other's pockets. The FCC should be criticized for failing to do their job properly in this case (among many many other failures), not pat on the back

BringBackStevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 03:27 PM
  #78
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
So, what "force" is Comcast using, exactly? Moreover, they're not asking them to nullify the contract ..


Yeah, that's a friggin fantastic deal for everyone else.


they have no force now, thanks to the loophole closing .. but for YEARS they tried to force the breaking of the contract: hear Comcast's words yourself:
DIRECT QUOTE:

"We'll drop this right now if DirecTV [should have said NFL] let us have the Sunday Ticket, too"


listen for yourself:

http://www.filefront.com/15398457/COHEN.mp3/

and the NFL has an exclusive contract with a satellite company ... if they now let Comca$t have what was bought by another company = contract broken. if you can't understand that, it's your problem.

bottom line, you can get NFL ST without DTV. you asked for the LOS solution, that's what the FCC made the NFL some up with.

DTV are not the 'good guys'. Comca$t are the bad guys.

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 03:35 PM
  #79
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
they have no force now, thanks to the loophole closing .. but for YEARS they tried to force the breaking of the contract: hear Comcast's words yourselfIRECT QUOTE:

"We'll drop this right now if DirecTV [should have said NFL] let us have the Sunday Ticket, too"


listen for yourself:
http://www.filefront.com/15398457/COHEN.mp3/
OK, the loophole was not "force." Force is pulling a gun on someone...beating 'em up..."twisting their arm." That's "extortion." Taking advantage of a law that allows you to do X as opposed to Y to your benefit is not "extortion."

In fact, it's not even remotely close to "extortion."

Quote:
and the NFL has an exclusive contract with a satellite company ... if they now let Comca$t have what was bought by another company = contract broken. if you can't understand that, it's your problem.
Which is why they addressed their comment to DirecTV and not the NFL. As said, the NFL doesn't much care what these ***holes are doing, they just want the most money they can get. If DirecTV decides they want to re-open the contract to let Comcast in and the NFL gets the same or more money out of the deal, the NFL owners would sign on the bottom line tomorrow.

If you can't understand that dynamic, then that's your problem. Comcast isn't "forcing" them to break a contract, nor are they even engaging with the NFL about this issue. It's a negotiation/disagreement between two cable providers over content they want on their platform. That's all it is.

Quote:
bottom line, you can get NFL ST without DTV. you asked for the LOS solution, that's what the FCC made the NFL some up with
Yeah, that deal is a stick with a piece of **** on the end of it. And if you got down off the DirecTV is fantastic high your on, you might see that. That deal isn't bringing a nice HDTV feed to the $1500 dollar TV of the dude living on the wrong side of a mountain.

As noted...the FCC blows. That's not a LOS solution, it's a workaround so that DirecTV can maintain their monopoly and use that to attract customers at the expense of other cable providers. As ever, everyone is acting in their own self-interest, as free market capitalism expects them to.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 03:45 PM
  #80
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
you wanted a LOS solution & I provided what they came up with.

figured that wouldn't be 'good enough' for you. of course, having Comca$t bid enough to get the contract doesn't seem like a solution to you. they DID HAVE THE CHANCE & decided not to .... they figured they could extort the NFL through the loophole being held over several companies heads ..... they thought WRONG

------------------------------------------------------

'NFL: break the exclusivity of the contract w/ DTV and we'll let satellites have CSN'

{even though we decided to bid lower on 2 occasions, as little as 10 months ago}

is Comca$t's stand. disgraceful.

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 03:56 PM
  #81
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
you wanted a LOS solution & I provided what they came up with.
Which is a raw deal...and this sheepish response makes me think you realize that.

Quote:
figured that wouldn't be 'good enough' for you. of course, having Comca$t bid enough to get the contract doesn't seem like a solution to you. they DID HAVE THE CHANCE & decided not to .... they figured they could extort the NFL through the loophole being held over several companies heads ..... they thought WRONG
Wait, now Comcast is "extorting" the NFL? How? As noted, the NFL does not care...AT ALL about any of this. They just want their money from whomever. They don't care if it's DirecTV...Comcast...whomever. The reason they sell it as an exclusive right is because the providers are willing to pay a lot more for exclusive rights.

Moreover, at no point have I suggested that I care who gets that deal with the NFL, just that you be honest enough to call a spade a spade. They're all engaged in the same business, with the same motivations, and they would all play their hands exactly the same if they were to switch places. There are no "good guys" and no "bad guys."

Quote:
'NFL: break the exclusivity of the contract w/ DTV and we'll let satellites have CSN'

{even though we decided to bid lower on 2 occasions, as little as 10 months ago}

is Comca$t's stand. disgraceful.
How is that disgraceful? They want the NFL Sunday Ticket for obvious reasons, and they'll use whatever leverage they can to try and get it. DirecTV is using the FCC as leverage to get what it wants--basically, they went and cried to the principal.

And, again, Comcast's position has nothing to do with the NFL breaking the deal. That deal only gets altered if DirecTV agrees to alter it. That's how contract law works...if both parties involved agree to re-open the contact, then they can make changes. If the NFL attempted to give NFL Sunday Ticket to Comcast without DirecTV's consent, they would get sued to holy hell for breach of contract. Comcast was addressing DirecTV with those comments, not the NFL...the NFL doesn't care.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 04:08 PM
  #82
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
you spout 'want the local teams in Philly, get cable', then say the LOS Solution isn't a good one.

too funny.

as you said, why would DTV simply agree to share ... there is no FEDERAL LAW requiring them to do so, unlike the LAW requiring cable companies to lease channels they own to competitors at "reasonable" rates.

Comca$t found a legal loophole for 18 years to escape sharing [that is now closing] & they expect DTV to voluntarily share ????

Yup, that's Comca$$t ... 'don't do what we did for 18 years and soon will be illegal, instead start sharing because we really want you to'


Comca$$t had every chance to win the contract, but bid low. they are punishing DISH NETWORK because the NFL awarded the exclusive contract to the high bidder.

they are trying to extort all parties concerned by demanding the contract be broken, then they'll sell CSN to satellite.

yup, that is disgraceful.

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 04:21 PM
  #83
medicman
 
medicman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Myerstown PA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,144
vCash: 500
Oh to finally be rid of comcash!!!

medicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 04:23 PM
  #84
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
you spout 'want the local teams in Philly, get cable', then say the LOS Solution isn't a good one.

too funny.
Wait, so lemme get this straight. Imagine, for a moment, that you do not have DirecTV, and cannot get it. I know this is hard, because your entire position is biased, but strain yourself.

How stoked are you that your option is to get broadband and watch on your computer? Whereas, if it was offered to your cable provider, you could watch the games (in HD) on your couch.

It's not a LOS solution, it's actually specifically NOT a LOS solution (it doesn't solve the fact that some people cant get DirecTV); it's a LOS workaround.

Quote:
as you said, why would DTV simply agree to share ... there is no FEDERAL LAW requiring them to do so, unlike the LAW requiring cable companies to lease channels they own to competitors at "reasonable" rates.
They're not going to agree to share...but you're being a hypocrite castigating Comcast for operating with the same motivation and logic as DirecTV is.

And the law did not exist...until the loophole was closed.

Quote:
Comca$t found a legal loophole for 18 years to escape sharing [that is now closing] & they expect DTV to voluntarily share ????
Why wouldn't they ask and/or try to get them to...?

Quote:
Yup, that's Comca$$t ... 'don't do what we did for 18 years and soon will be illegal, instead start sharing because we really want you to'
Despicable! I mean, really, this has you up in arms?

Quote:
Comca$$t had every chance to win the contract, but bid low. they are punishing DISH NETWORK because the NFL awarded the exclusive contract to the high bidder.

they are trying to extort all parties concerned by demanding the contract be broken, then they'll sell CSN to satellite.

yup, that is disgraceful.
I laugh every time you misuse "extort."

They're in direct competition with all of these folks. Of course they're not playing "nice" with 'em. They're not demanding that a contract be broken, they're asking that it be re-opened so they can have NFL Sunday Ticket on their platform. I mean, God forbid they want that!

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 04:31 PM
  #85
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Wait, so lemme get this straight. Imagine, for a moment, that you do not have DirecTV, and cannot get it. I know this is hard, because your entire position is biased, but strain yourself.

How stoked are you that your option is to get broadband and watch on your computer? Whereas, if it was offered to your cable provider, you could watch the games (in HD) on your couch.

It's not a LOS solution, it's actually specifically NOT a LOS solution (it doesn't solve the fact that some people cant get DirecTV); it's a LOS workaround.



They're not going to agree to share...but you're being a hypocrite castigating Comcast for operating with the same motivation and logic as DirecTV is.

And the law did not exist...until the loophole was closed.



Why wouldn't they ask and/or try to get them to...?



Despicable! I mean, really, this has you up in arms?



I laugh every time you misuse "extort."

They're in direct competition with all of these folks. Of course they're not playing "nice" with 'em. They're not demanding that a contract be broken, they're asking that it be re-opened so they can have NFL Sunday Ticket on their platform. I mean, God forbid they want that!
workaround, solution ... mince your words if you like ...at least there is a way to get the content ... something the NFL is providing [maybe DTV, too] WITHOUT having to be taken to court.


Comca$$$t are the hypocrites for saying 'don't do what we did for 18 years and soon will be illegal, instead start sharing because we really want you to'

that's Comca$$$t: despicable money ******.

forget extort, Comca$$$t is trying to EFF Over anybody they can to make more money, even by skirting the FEDERAL LAW with a legal loophole.

glad FINALLY they are getting EFFED themselves !!

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 04:36 PM
  #86
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Hey, at least your rational when you analyze Comcast. Gotta give you that.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 04:48 PM
  #87
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
just calling a spade a spade.


there is a reason it was called a 'loophole' - "an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded"

the response here in Philly has been overwhelmingly positive that the loophole is closing. I hope that Cable gets the Sunday Ticket & the NFL makes the contract non-exclusive. that would be better for consumers.

that is an NFL decision, when the next contract comes up though.

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 04:58 PM
  #88
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
just calling a spade a spade.


there is a reason it was called a 'loophole' - "an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded"
The law was the law, and the regulations were the regulations. Just as is the case with the NHL CBA. *****ing about the "loophole" was crying over spilled milk. Until it was cleaned up, that was the way it was and it was perfectly understandable to take advantage of it on Comcast's part. Now that it is gone, Comcast will react to the new regulations and operate accordingly (or be fined by the FCC).

Quote:
the response here in Philly has been overwhelmingly positive that the loophole is closing. I hope that Cable gets the Sunday Ticket & the NFL makes the contract non-exclusive. that would be better for consumers.

that is an NFL decision, when the next contract comes up though.
As the response should be to this, it's a nice thing for DirecTV customers. But the lambasting of Comcast here has displayed a strong bit of irrational dislike for them as well as a strong dose of either naivete or a simple blind spot with regard to DirecTV and every other cable provider. They're all the same.

As to the NFL and NFL Sunday Ticket, there is almost no way the NFL will sell the rights as a non-exclusive contract without the government stepping in and telling them not to. The move from exclusive to non-exclusive will likely lead to a significant loss in revenue for the NFL, as the non-exclusive rights are significantly less valuable to the providers. This is the very same reason MLB wanted to sell Extra Innings as an exclusive deal to DirecTV.

But the entire system sucks for end users, and DirecTV and the rest are just as complicit in that as Comcast, because they're all taking advantage of it to make money.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 05:16 PM
  #89
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
and a loophole was found to evade the law. not Comca$$t's fault, but now they are getting the loophole closed and consumers are rightly rejoicing because their 'Because we can' attitude is getting squashed this time.

how did they get away with the rate increases, poor service and bad customer service for so long ??
'Because we can' .. there was no competition until recently .... the Chickens have come to roost



Dish Network, ATT Uverse, DTV, and several cable companies that had HD channels witheld by CableVision NY are all happy. this goes WAY beyond DTV, but Comca$t is only focusing on the NFL / DTV contract that they were outbid for.

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-22-2010, 09:16 PM
  #90
Guffaw26
 
Guffaw26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Central Pa.
Country: United States
Posts: 112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands77 View Post
Now, if this goes through, does it mean Center Ice could sometimes actually have the Flyers feed?
Center Ice already does have the Flyers feed "sometimes"....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
anybody catch Cohen on WIP today ?

"Comcast will gladly allow CSN on DirecTV, as long as they give us NFL Sunday ticket"
Yeah...that's not gonna happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
The interesting thing will be how much Comcast decides to charge DTV and Dish for CSN Philly....and then how much the rates will go up for DTV and Dish for all the cable networks currently owned by NBC/Universal.

Think Comcast won't charge through the nose for those channels now? NFL did with NFL network. The DTV providers already balk at the cost of Versus, and that's a national channel. CSN-Philly is only a local one.
Absolutely 100% right...it will be a duplicate of the Verus situation. Comcast will say, "hey we have no problem allowing satellite to carry the channel...they just don't want to meet our price." Which is essentially creating another loophole. They own it and can charge what they like. The only sticking point is that they'd most likely have to charge the same fee to all carriers be they satellite or fiber.

Guffaw26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-22-2010, 09:56 PM
  #91
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guffaw26 View Post
The only sticking point is that they'd most likely have to charge the same fee to all carriers be they satellite or fiber.
which means they cannot demand a ransom from Dish Network, ATT Uverse, DTV, and several cable companies

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-22-2010, 10:12 PM
  #92
Guffaw26
 
Guffaw26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Central Pa.
Country: United States
Posts: 112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
which means they cannot demand a ransom from Dish Network, ATT Uverse, DTV, and several cable companies
why not, assuming it applied to everyone?

Guffaw26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-22-2010, 10:22 PM
  #93
Crescent Street
Saturday Nite Hockey
 
Crescent Street's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,495
vCash: 500
Out of market DTV CI subscribers get CSN-Philly probably 5 times a year. Never in HD though - only in SD. With the loophole being closed does this mean DTV will have access to the HD feed as well? Or will that be another 5 year battle?

Crescent Street is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:03 AM
  #94
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guffaw26 View Post
why not, assuming it applied to everyone?
because i'm sure that they have signed contracts on their existing deals. they can't just rip them up and say 'price increase' because they want to screw Dish Network, ATT Uverse, DTV, and several cable companies and charge them a much higher price.

i'm sure they'll need to charge around the going rates of the current contracts

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:22 AM
  #95
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guffaw26 View Post

Absolutely 100% right...it will be a duplicate of the Verus situation. Comcast will say, "hey we have no problem allowing satellite to carry the channel...they just don't want to meet our price." Which is essentially creating another loophole. They own it and can charge what they like. The only sticking point is that they'd most likely have to charge the same fee to all carriers be they satellite or fiber.
The law, very ambiguously, states that the price has to be "reasonable" though I wonder what would happen if Comcast decided to spread the Flyers games across several channels in a more equitable manner. That would force other companies to purchase the rights to several channels in order to show all Flyers games, would it not?

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:35 AM
  #96
CavemanLawyer
Registered User
 
CavemanLawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ocean City, MD
Posts: 1,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingPhish View Post
its been a long road since ya had to pay for prism
Off topic, but...

I was out golfing with my brothers and some friends over the summer, and one guy was about to go up to tee off but before he turned everyone and said 'Hey guys, check what I found in my garage today... Whens the last time you saw THIS logo!" and he ended up pulling out 3 PRISM golf balls, a PRISM ball marker and some other golf related tool with PRISM designs all over it. Was quite interesting. We all just stared at it for a few seconds them promptly told him to the tee the **** off.

CavemanLawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 08:27 AM
  #97
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
The law, very ambiguously, states that the price has to be "reasonable" though I wonder what would happen if Comcast decided to spread the Flyers games across several channels in a more equitable manner. That would force other companies to purchase the rights to several channels in order to show all Flyers games, would it not?
several channels ??

CSN says they are the home of the Flyers / Sixers / Phillies .... doubt they want those games on any other channels.

and the FCC would surely notice that type of game playing & stop it.

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 10:39 AM
  #98
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
several channels ??

CSN says they are the home of the Flyers / Sixers / Phillies .... doubt they want those games on any other channels.

and the FCC would surely notice that type of game playing & stop it.
Well, they've already been putting them on "The Comcast Network" formally CN8, and one of the Sixers/Flyers/Phillies ends up there whenever there is a broadcast conflict (and sometimes even when there isn't). What's the FCC going to say, "you have to put the Flyers on CSN!"

FIOS customers get CSN, but don't get CN8.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 10:48 AM
  #99
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Parent 1974 View Post
and a loophole was found to evade the law.
No, the loophole was a loophole in the law, making what Comcast was doing legal. There's no evasion...those were the rules and they were playing by them to their own benefit. Just as anyone else would do. Everyone knew what they were doing...everyone knew why they were doing what they were doing...just as everyone knew why DirecTV (and everyone else) was complaining about what they were doing.

Quote:
not Comca$$t's fault, but now they are getting the loophole closed and consumers are rightly rejoicing because their 'Because we can' attitude is getting squashed this time.
It would be easier to take your argument seriously if you stopped using Comca$$t. Just saying.

The ruling is certainly a benefit to customers, never said differently. Nor do I particularly care personally about Comcast taking a business hit (I don't work for them). However, I also appreciate that they were operating by the fundamental principles of business in America...and I'm not a commie. They were getting theirs to the best of their ability.

Quote:
how did they get away with the rate increases, poor service and bad customer service for so long ??
'Because we can' .. there was no competition until recently .... the Chickens have come to roost
...because the FCC is a ****ing joke, and the rules and regulations that govern cable in this country do an egregious disservice to customers. Something DirecTV and everyone else take full advantage of to take your cash and pocket it. As said constantly, Comcast, DirecTV, DISH, etc. are all the friggin same dude. Your desire to separate them is an argument built almost entirely on naivete on everyone's motivation here.

Quote:
Dish Network, ATT Uverse, DTV, and several cable companies that had HD channels witheld by CableVision NY are all happy. this goes WAY beyond DTV, but Comca$t is only focusing on the NFL / DTV contract that they were outbid for.
Of course they are...that's a BIG ****ING DEAL! Why is that some sin? I mean, seriously, imagine you work for Comcast and the situation you're looking at is the erosion of a serious competitive advantage in Philadelphia, and you're dealing with another company that has a monopoly on broadcasting the most popular televised sport in America. Wouldn't you try to get your hands on that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crescent Street View Post
Out of market DTV CI subscribers get CSN-Philly probably 5 times a year. Never in HD though - only in SD. With the loophole being closed does this mean DTV will have access to the HD feed as well? Or will that be another 5 year battle?
The issue with Center Ice was that a satellite feed for CSN does not normally exist, and they do everything via satellite. When there was no other English language feed, Comcast would put up a satellite feed for Center Ice, but other than that they just got the feed from whomever else.

So, I would imagine the feed will begin to show up regularly on Center Ice if they're putting up a satellite feed.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 11:33 AM
  #100
Bernie Parent 1974
Registered User
 
Bernie Parent 1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Of course they are...that's a BIG ****ING DEAL! Why is that some sin? I mean, seriously, imagine you work for Comcast and the situation you're looking at is the erosion of a serious competitive advantage in Philadelphia, and you're dealing with another company that has a monopoly on broadcasting the most popular televised sport in America. Wouldn't you try to get your hands on that?
then Comca$$$$t should have bid higher for it on the TWO chances it had to win the contract.

that contract has ZERO to do with with Dish Network, ATT Uverse, and several cable companies that have had channels witheld

loophole : "an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded"


yup, the response here in Philly has been overwhelmingly positive that the loophole is closing.

Bernie Parent 1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:52 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.