_2.gif "Time.com 50 Best Websites 2008")
In the same week that Comcast struck a deal with the Big Ten Network to put the channel on the Comcast expanded basic programming package, Comcast fired back at the NFL’s complaint to the FCC regarding the cable giant’s treatment of the league-owned cable network.
“The complaint is a blatant example of regulatory gamesmanship,” Comcast said. “It is an attempt to repudiate agreements that were freely entered into by two sophisticated parties, one of which is the most lucrative and powerful professional sports enterprise in the world.”
The problem is that NFLN is on a sports tier that viewers must choose, and for which they must pay extra. The NFL wants the network to be on Comcast’s basic service level, which guarantees that it will be in more homes — and that more money will be generated by the endeavor.
The NFL has alleged that Comcast is discriminating against NFLN because Comcast carries its own sports channels on the basic tier.
Some think that the Big Ten-Comcast deal could pave the way for an agreement with the NFL, too. However, we’re hearing that, in order to make the agreement happen, the Big Ten had to drop its demand of more than $1 per subscriber per month to something in the range of 60 cents. If the NFL would make a similar reduction in its per-home expectations, NFLN most likely would land on basic cable, too.
Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that ESPN and the NFL are in discussions regarding a potential partnership between ESPN and NFLN.
June 21st, 2008 at 1:56 pm
This is free enterprise. Comcast can run the company the way that they see is best. If people understood how much the NFLN wants to charge the cable company, they would understand why it is being regulated to a sports tier. Comcast, like most companies, has to make tough decisions that might upset customers.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 2 / 5 with 5 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 2:02 pm
“the most powerful and lucrative sport in the world”
wrong,wrong,wrong…by far and away formula 1 racing
earns a lot more money than football.formula 1 racing
generates obscene amounts of cash.
comcast is typical of the majority of cable companies,
they want every last nickel and dime the customer can
scape up.
in comcast’s case they have arlen spector doing their
bidding,he’s their inside man in congress.
and you wonder why the electorate is turned off to the
political process.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 4 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 2:08 pm
I always thought it was a way for cable (Comcast) to get back at the NFL for “NFL Sunday Ticket” being exclusive to Directv (which I am a customer) Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems Cable has lost alot of subscribers due to the fact that the ticket isn’t available on their service. It always seems that they are trying to come up with “bells and whistles” to lure back viewers. I know people personally that had signed up with comcast and especially Dish network that had not exactly been ” lied to” but mislead about their ability to recieve out of market football games if they subscribed to their services. I have had phone calls personally from them (Dish network) trying to sell me there services, and after they tell you why their service is better than Directv, I would ask them flat out ..”Do you carry NFL Sunday Ticket”? (knowing full well that they don’t) And the sales person will go into a 20 min routine of fast, double talk trying to make you believe they do, without ever specifically answering the question. I’m just saying that if the NFL made sunday ticket available to cable , I bet you then they would have no problem putting NFLN on the basic package. But maybe that’s obvious. Just another thought: God please don’t let ESPN get involed with NFLN ! They will ruin that like they ruin everything else.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Crap like this is one reason I’ll never subscribe to Comcast. DirecTV has been great about this stuff.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4 / 5 with 4 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 2:34 pm
That would be one way to try to backdoor Comcast into putting NFLN on a free tier. That’s another reason I switched to Verizon Fios. Got sick and tired of every 3 months wondering why NFLN suddenly kept getting blacked out. Call to ask Comcast and they would say well NFLN is on a new package now that costs a dollar more. Verizon Fios carries it on their basic cable package. Don’t pay a dime for the NFL Network anymore and don’t have to call either. Praise the Lord!
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4.5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Either way they choose to present it to the public it still by the way I’m reading it will cost the customer more by month to watch.
The NFL argues that the public as it stands doesn’t have to pay extra through analog TV but after 2/09/2009 that won’t be a choice either unless the customer buys receiver to continue to receiver it.
As it stands regardless what the public is going to pay for any type of TV reception be it sports or what was know as free TV stations which use to be received by a antenna
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4.5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Let me get this straight. Comcast is trying to tell us that the Big Ten Network has more mass appeal than the NFL Network? And that the Big Ten Network, at a cost of 60 cents per subscriber can fit in to their budget for the basic tier, but including the NFL Network, at a cost of 70 cents per subscriber, would cause them to have to raise their rates five dollars?
Pehaps it has nothing to do with the subscriber fee and putting the NFLN on the basic tier, but is actually a power play by Comcast to get the NFL to let Comcast offer the NFL Sunday Ticket to their customers.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Only a retard could think this is an example of free enterprise. Neither of these two parties operate in a true free enterprise environment. For one thing, the NFL has an antitrust exemption. For another thing, cable is a regulated monopoly. If you want cable, you’re stuck with whoever the cable provider is for your area. Also, if you live in a more remote area, you can’t get cable at all.
Bottom line is that both the NFL and the cable companies are rich because our government has given them special privileges in the marketplace. If they can’t work it out, then it’s time for the government to hammer both of them so we can watch our football.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4.4 / 5 with 5 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 4:21 pm
I hate Comcast. Not simply because of the NFLN thing, but rather because Comcast is a constantly reducing the value it provides. They do it because they’ve been able to get away with it and because at this point they’re almost a utilty. They’re always doing sneaky BS like taking away basic channels, putting them in separate premium packages and plugging spanish channels into their place. GRRRRRRR!!!! They’re always manipulating the crap out of their programing to force the viewer to shell out more and more $$$$$ and never stop with the price increases. It’s going to catch up with them as more and more people switch to alternatives like satelite TV. Competition will eventually straighten these jerks out.
I went with satelite TV years ago and it’s the best thing I ever did.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 4:33 pm
While many want to blame Comcast, it was the NFL, who negotiated a bad deal; if they wanted NFLN on basic cable, then, they should have insisted that the agreement include explicit language on what package NFLN would be listed. By foregoing this clause, the NFL lost leverage, which Comcast is now exploiting.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Where I live (Northern Nevada) Basic cable is pointless to purchase. Extended basic is what customers have to pay for to get anything worth watching, no matter what the individual tastes. This includes ESPN and ESPN II. So to have NFLN on basic makes no sense here. But on extended basic would be cool(and seems realistic). It sounds like the wheels are being greased. Sirius NFL radio is still the place to get very good objective commentary though. I have never been able to justify purchasing satellite just to get NFLN no matter how big a fan I am.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Actually, it’s just time for the government to remove special privileges and antitrust laws–both of which are incompatible with a free market.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 8:24 pm
It is time for NFLN to let the Sunday Ticket be sold on multiple platforms.
Don’t blame Comcast. They are just doing what they can to get us the Ticket.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1.25 / 5 with 4 rating(s)
June 21st, 2008 at 8:37 pm
at any given moment,a cable company will stick it to you.
that’s why i hate them so much.on long island new york,
we have cablevision,talk about getting reamed.any way
that cablevision can screw a customer,they’ll do it.
oh..by the way,did i tell you that cablevision owns the
new york knickerbockers,that should explain everything.
a while ago i switched over to the competition,verizon’s
fios.what a difference,and you get the nfl package also.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4.65 / 5 with 3 rating(s)
June 22nd, 2008 at 12:00 am
this will only be good for the corporate stuffed shirts, not for the fans
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 22nd, 2008 at 5:33 am
eeyore: “Comcast can run the company the way that they see is best. If people understood how much the NFLN wants to charge the cable”
–Are you kidding? No way will I side with a company that forces me to pay an outrageous fee every month for only three watchable channels [the other 100+ are totally useless and unwatchable channels – but, they force me to pay for them if I want my three channels]. If Comcast wanted to be “fair” they should start with their customers first.
Forest Ranger: “While many want to blame Comcast, it was the NFL, who negotiated a bad deal; if they wanted NFLN on basic cable, then, they should have insisted that the agreement include explicit language on what package NFLN would be listed. By foregoing this clause, the NFL lost leverage, which Comcast is now exploiting.”
–You admit that Comcast is exploiting the NFL, yet you say the NFL is at fault? The NFL entered into that agreement in order to prove to Comcast that they have viewers outside of the networks [FOX, CBS, etc.] – the idea was to prove to Comcast that the NFL Network was not just a ‘niche’ channel which would enjoy only limited viewership, but a bona-fide sports channel which would enjoy large viewership.
Clearly, the NFL was right or else this would not be such a problem for Comcast – however, Comcast, in their arrogance, is trying to squeeze the NFL’s mass audience [us] to pay more.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 4 rating(s)
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:34 am
Lets get this right its
about the money. Ive had
comcast for 5yrs and until live nfl games
came on. It was apart of
basic cable. So comcast is like
most companys if there is
a way to make money they do it.
But comcast lies about
reasons why.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4.5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 22nd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
I’m stuck with Comcast and have to shell out $10 a month for the sports package to view NFLN. It’s the only channel in the package worth watching. There is a reason Comcast ranks dead last in customer satifaction…
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Let’s have everybody on this one,”Comcast Sucks, Comcast Sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:22 am
I live outside of Philly. Does that mean I will get Big10 network now without paying more (please please please)?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:52 am
I’m of the opinion if someone wants NFL network, like me, then it should be extra. It’s not fair to burden everyone with the additional cost. In fact I believe the best approach to channels selection is an a la carte line up. The technology is foreseeable if not already available to make it happen. It would result in generally lower cable / satellite bills because customers would only get and pay for what they want to watch.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated