Big 10 schools losing patience with BTN

jDub · 02-12-2008, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by hawkeye_t

There is no void with ESPN. ESPN and the Big Ten signed a huge (I think 20 year contract). ESPN/ABC still has the rights to pick the Big Ten games to air. The only difference now is the ESPN+ and Gameplan games are now on the BTN.

As far as where the BTN should be placed, I see it very similar to Fox Sports Net. When I lived in Des Moines and Ames that was on expanded basic with Mediacom, the same tier that the BTN should be on.

I think that was/is the crux of the argument. By placing it on expanded basic, the cable companies are going to have to pass the cost on to every consumer of expanded basic. Fox Sports Net can get away with it because it's part of a package deal (part of an overall FOX package) that offers Mediacom better value. I'm not willing to pay an extra $2-$5 a month for this extra channel.

cyclonepower · 02-12-2008, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by isuno1fan

For those of us that have it (DirecTV here), the BTN has been a welcome addition. I can understand the frustration for those that don't receive it.

I, too, look forward to a B12 network.

Agreed...I love their HD

ce1 · 02-12-2008, 05:53 PM

I pay 99 dollars/year for the ESPN Full Court package. For that, i'll get every Big 12 game that ISU plays, except one, on TV this year. And every Saturday game in the Big 12, and most of the weekday games as well.

As primarily a ISU/Big12 basketball fan, this is almost as good as it gets. Whatever the B12 network finally is, if i somehow get screwed out of what i have now on Full Court for a cable vs. Big12 dispute, i'll be pretty ticked.

We've got it pretty good now, with Full Court. 15 years ago i'd drive from Minneapolis to Owatonna, MN (near the Iowa border) just to see games on the Iowa TV stations that would bleed over the border. A lot less driving today :)

Oldgeezer · 02-13-2008, 04:18 PM

A few points: Last fall, I tried to point out that the BTN was in trouble because they didn't have any advertisers. Ads pay the bills in magazines and newspapers, subscriptions pay the postage. Ads pay the bills in every other TV area, not cable subscriptions. My statement was pooh-poohed last fall. Dish agreed to run the BTN on their basic package for a trial period, that ends soon, and the BTN will have no leverage on that subject again until football season. Dish offers their sports networks for $5.95/ month after you get a minimum basic, 100 channel package. Altitude Sports out of Denver, part of this package has carried several Big12/ ISU events, but not the entire ISU schedule.

SouthernHawk · 02-13-2008, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by jDub

I think that was/is the crux of the argument. By placing it on expanded basic, the cable companies are going to have to pass the cost on to every consumer of expanded basic. Fox Sports Net can get away with it because it's part of a package deal (part of an overall FOX package) that offers Mediacom better value. I'm not willing to pay an extra $2-$5 a month for this extra channel.

How would it make a difference? Mediacom just raised their prices again recently anyway.

CycloneErik · 02-13-2008, 04:38 PM

On the Big XII network, we wouldn't have to have Stacey King butcher people's names again, would we?

jDub · 02-13-2008, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by SouthernHawk

How would it make a difference? Mediacom just raised their prices again recently anyway.

Oh, I dont' know, they would have raised them even more?

Bottom line - No cable company is going to take it in the shorts if they're not absolutely confident that it will pay off for them in the long run. In order to meet their margins/revenue targets they will continue to raise their prices when expenses (mostly programming fees) go up.

CTTB78 · 02-13-2008, 05:40 PM

Shouldn't Cedar Rapids and Quad Cities also be on the Big 12 list?