_2.gif "Time.com 50 Best Websites 2008")
The National Football League faced a huge problem in December 2007, as the New England Patriots continued to win games without losing and as their season-ending contest against the New York Giants was due to be aired on the league-owned television channel without coverage on any of the broadcast networks.
The league wisely caved to public and political pressure, allowing the game that also, in hindsight, served as Bryant Gumbel’s NFLN swan song to be aired on NBC and CBS.
But what about the cable operators, who were paying the league 70 cents per subscriber for the ability to televise eight “exclusive” regular-season games? According to SportsBusiness Journal, the NFL is refusing to provide cash refunds.
Instead, the league has offered to set up marketing funds that the cable operators would use to promote NFLN.
The cable operators want 1/8th of the subscriber fee refunded, since they bargained for eight regular-season games but got only seven.
We’ll acknowledge that we’ve got a bias here, given that we currently have NFL.com ads on the site and previously have featured advertisements for NFL Network. But, frankly, we think it’s only fair for the league to make a partial refund to the cable operators. They paid for eight exclusive games; they got seven.
The league picked up a ton of P.R. and political capital by deciding to export the Pats-Giants game to bigger platforms — and at the same time avoided a major problem both in Washington, D.C. and along Main Street America. We love the NFL and value our relationship with the league, but it seems to us that it’s only fair for the cable operators who lost exclusive dibs on one of the biggest regular-season games in NFL history to receive some type of meaningful and appropriate compensation.
April 21st, 2008 at 9:27 am
I disagree. Did they not get the NFLNetwork programming for the entire week?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 21st, 2008 at 9:30 am
Are those same cable companies going to refund their customers 1/8 of the cost they charge every subscriber.
I don’t think that will happen. Expect Arlen Specter to rear his head again about Spygate because the cable companies feel they are getting ripped off.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:32 am
The league could actually settle the playground fight over NFL network with comcast and time warner so the more people would have access to it but thatd be far to easy. They’d rather get sued over this
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:35 am
Maybe it’s just me ,but, I’m having a hard time shedding a tear for the poor old cable companies that have been screwing me for years. Here’s a thought, give us fans the true financial break instead of the NFL and the Comcast cartels making out all the time!
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:41 am
If they networks don’t like it they’re more than welcome to go cover soccer.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:42 am
Typically, a distribution deal with a cable or satellite provider factors exclusive programming into the rate per subscriber. In this case, the 70 cent rate reflects 8 games along with the weekly programming. If the games are not included, the rate would have been much lower — probably by at least 50%.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:45 am
I agree, provided that Comcast provides me a refund for the amount of money I paid to have NFLN in my house for that one game.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:49 am
I think it’s going to be hard to prove that people elected NOT to purchase a subscription to NFLN because of the last-minute deal to broadcast the game on other networks. I just don’t see how the cable or satellite companies lost out on this. Technically, Florio is right in that they didn’t get precisely what they had negotiated in terms of exclusivity. If NFLN was an independent network, they would obviously have the right to be pissed. Advertisers who forked over $$$ to NFLN w/ the understanding that it would be the exclusive way to watch would have a beef, too. But you’d have to find out how many people HAD NFLN and watched the game on another network to show any real damage, wouldn’t you?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:54 am
If you were Randy Moss you’d have to fine yourself for “verbal abuse of a corporate sponsor.” Troublemaker.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 9:54 am
Let cable sell the Sunday Ticket and all of this will go away.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 10:16 am
This game is the same ‘Nail in the Coffin’ that caused satalite carriers (ie Dish Network) drop the NFLN from their basic programming. This is one mess the NFL needs to clean up…
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 10:21 am
Hmmm, I just woke up so maybe I am not completely awake, but why would a cable provider get a refund on something they carried anyway (just on a different channel they carry)? I can maybe see the sat companies getting bent a little. This is coming from a person that has Cablevision & doesn’t have the NFL Network so I am a bit fed up with the whole situation anyway. In my opinion the only one that was hurt by this was the NFLN itself. That is where the exclusive went out the window, but they own it so……
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 10:31 am
what about the local advertisers who purchased airtime on the nfln via the local cable system? shouldn’t they get some sort of reimbursement since less eyeballs were tuned in to the nfln?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 10:39 am
eeyore, a Cheerleader, says:
“what about the local advertisers who purchased airtime on the nfln via the local cable system? shouldn’t they get some sort of reimbursement since less eyeballs were tuned in to the nfln?”
Ahhhh excellent point. I knew I should have waited until I had my coffee.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 10:48 am
The bigger issue here is when am I and every other American going to get the right to buy ONLY what we want? Why are packages filled with channels we don’t ever use forced down our throats so we can get the one or two channels that we DO want? Cable and satellite should be pay as you go. Buy what you want. We hear politicians (yeah, talking about you Specter!) champion the wonders of a free marketplace when it comes to mortgages and the airlines. Then, when cable and satellite (and all their campaign contributions!) come up for a hearing, they get a free pass to continue to rob us blind. I still have to pony up for crap channels that NO ONE watches (when was the last time more than ten people watched Lifetime?). Force cable and satellite to offer a la carte service and all this crap goes away. I would be happy to pay up for the NFLN providing I can dump WE, Lifetime and Oxygen. Make them offer all channels and charge for each one. The the consumer gets what they want and the NFLN would be in 40 million homes. That is how a “free market” is supposed to work.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 11:15 am
If it is “fair” doesn’t matter. If the NFL made an agreement to pay them back then they should, but if they didn’t they are is no obligation to refund the cable companies. The NFL is very business savvy, so it is very likely that the NFL put in a opt-out clause or something of that nature that allowed them to broadcast the game nationally without owing the cable companies.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 11:44 am
Boo freakin hoo. One huge corp gets screwed by another huge corp. That’s going to keep me awake at night.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm
You say “fair.” The NFL hears “money.” (As in money, money, money, lots of money, money, money, etc.) Where do the priorities of the NoFairLeague lie, pray tell? A hint - the owners don’t keep score with units of fairness. You don’t get an NFL franchise by accumlating lots of fairness and transferring it to the disposing owner. Nope. Not surprising. Nor should it be to you - in all fairness.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated