Poll: Who is right in the NFL Network / Comcast battle?
By Richard Lawler 
posted Apr 18th 2009 12:00PM
posted Apr 18th 2009 12:00PM
posted Apr 18th 2009 12:00PM
The percentage of returned gadgets that have nothing wrong with them.
Of the $13.8 billion worth of returned products in 2007, only 5 percent were because gadgets were actually broken, according to a 2008 study.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Honestly, I couldn't care much less. I don't like the NFL enough to want NFL Network, and I am not--nor will I ever be--a Comcast subscriber (though I was at one point long ago).
Comparing NFL Network's demand of $0.70 per subscriber to Versus' and Golf's $0.25 per subscriber is ridiculous. Let NFL Network accept $0.25 per subscriber if they want to be on the basic tier.
The NFL owns NFL Network. They should be bale to decide how much they want to sell it for, just like your local grocery store decides how much to charge you for a Snickers bar.
The NFL network can ask and charge however much they want, but it doesn't mean Comcast HAS to accept their Prices and have them on Comcast's Own Network either. Hey, if you price your self out of the markerplace, that's your own fault. I could care less about it. Hell I would care less if ESPN and ESPN2 were gone also. Put all these Sports Channels into a Package. If you want it, it's $5-$10 more a month while everyone elses rates go down. That is what I would like to see.
None of these channels should be on basic. And Xyzzy, NFL is deciding how much they want to sell it for, the problem is they're fighting over whether it's placed in the checkout lanes or some obscure shelf in the back of the store.
"And Xyzzy, NFL is deciding how much they want to sell it for, the problem is they're fighting over whether it's placed in the checkout lanes or some obscure shelf in the back of the store."
That happens in the grocery stores as well -- if the company pays more money, it gets the good shelf space. If it doesn't pay the store as much, it gets the crappy shelf space. Look up "slotting fees":
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20030420/ai_n11396717/
If Comcast doesn't like the price and the terms, they don't have to carry it. NFL says 70 cents and basic tier, Comcast says 70 cents and sports tier, NFL says hell no, Comcast doesn't carry the channel. It's the NFL's channel, they get to dictate the terms.
And if the FCC says Comcast is allowed to put the channel in the sports tier, the NFL is just going to let the contract expire on April 30th and call it a day. Comcast is not going to be able to keep the channel in the sports tier even if they win this battle, so it's incredibly pointless.
The critical difference is that if the Grocery Store thinks Snickers is charging too much and elects not to carry Snickers, Snickers can not use the Government to force the grocery store to carry Snickers.
At .70 per month for what amounts to 12 hours of Live Football per Season (not counting preseason). NFL network is just plain out asking too much.
Golf Network, NHL Network, NBA TV, and the new MLB Network provide that much programming each in one week let alone an entire season.
I get NFL Network with my Sports Pak for Comcast. I totally understand why Comcast (and others) don't have it on the Basic Tier.
Comcast produces sports programming of its own. It's a blatant conflict of interest for a content provider with a financial stake in the market for sports programming to also be able to regulate subscribers' access to the competition. The deregulation of this industry, just like with other (eg, financial) industries, has led to this out of control situation where nobody advocates for the public interest.
In Philadelphia you have Comcast's exclusivity with the local pro sports franchises used as a weapon against Verizon and the satellite companies. So obviously Comcast is happy to take whichever side of the argument suits them at the moment. They can do this because there's nobody to stop them.
I don't care who is at fault. Like I told TW multiple times, just fix it. They didn't and now I'm a happy DirecTV subscriber.
It is interesting that today some fat-ass, probably barely literate, offensive lineman signed a $53 million, 4-year contract extension. He will earn $60 million over the next six seasons, including $25 million in guaranteed money.
Do you know why this happens?
1. Rich people are allowed to buy luxury suites, club seats, and court side seats and then claim them as a "business expense". Who ends up paying the cost - you guessed it - the average common working man taxpayer. Closing this loophole would solve this problem.
2. ESPN charges 5$ a month for all their channels whether people want them or not. One question that is never answered is this: Why should people have to pay for channels they don't want??? My mother has to pay ESPN each month in extortion money. A la carte programming would solve this problem.
3. This is probably the only country in the world where taxpayers pay for billionaires stadiums. Make a law saying that stadiums will no longer be financed by taxpayer dollars.
Fixing these 3 things would return sports in this country to its proper balance.
A la carte programming would result in no more than a dozen channels remaining on the air.
I agree. The NFL is a bunch of thugs, with a government sponsored monopoly. They hold cities hostage with threats of moving the franchise if they don't get a new stadium, paid for by taxpayers and dubious "naming rights." Meanwhile they get millions of dollars from exclusive contracts and television fees.
Of course, Comcast does the same thing.
Something else: DirecTV. NFL on basic tier, as well as MLB-HD, something Comcast STILL doesn' thave.
It's hard for me to side with Comcast because I absolutely hate the company. I live in the Philadelphia media market and have Dish Network. The only thing I don't like about Dish Network is that Comcast doesn't broadcast on their system. This means the only Philadelphia Phillies game I get to watch are on myPHL17. I also don't get to watch any of the post game shows for the Philadelphia Eagles.
Anyway, Comcast has a right to decide what networks they want on each of their packages. The NFL Network is a niche demographic which is actually supposed to be geared to me, the football and I only watch it on Thursday nights after Thanksgiving when they broadcast games. I don't watch any of their regular broadcasting.
Just remove this channel, geez Comcast should just in public intrest add a widely requested/worthy HD channel in Nfl's place.
NFL N is correct. No reason to put this on a high tier.
I dont think anybody realizes that Comcast Corp. actually owns both Versus and the Golf Channel...
This is just stupid. No matter what it should be up to Comcast. And if the NFL doesn't like it, well either they need to negotiate with Comcast or just leave if they can't. And they also coudl take it to the people and get the people behind it. But it should be up to Comcast to do what Comcast wants to do. They own the cable lines. It's like telling Ford they need to put both XM and Sirrus in a car. And I mean that before XM and Sirrus became one company. Ford has a right to do one or the other or both.
So much for a free market. This is why I'll never subscribe to either.