Big Ten Network (BTN)

[buckeyefool]

ESPN has been charging high rates for a while now. Yes, we are in agreement that it took time. My point is that this taking time is appropriate. I don't care if they started in 1909. You gotta have a reason to charge a high rate...and that reason is high viewership. It just seems to me that they should be willing to work to get there and that they should consider this being in a sports tier...which I'd be more than willing to pay for. Sheesh, I just stopped paying for Gameplan, so it's no big deal to start paying for something else.

But what if ESPN had always been on a "sports tier" would they have been able to get that veiwership? Would people have been willing to pay extra for ESPN for years as they only showed luberjack competitions and softball all day? Would you pay for ESPN today if it was on a "sports tier" ?

What if I only want Big Ten Network? Will they offer that only as a choice? and will it only cost 1.10 which is what I now know is what the BTN charges.

 

[Thump]

Care enough? Of course!! I will even whine if I want... this is absurd. As BKB mentioned, our backyard, while large enough, doesn't have a good unobstructed view of the southern sky... we live in a part of town that has laws and regulations on what you are able to put in your front yard so... unless the neighbor is willing to cut down his mature walnut trees and the city lifts their ban on dishes in fronts yards our hands are tied.

My dish is on my roof and not in the yard.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

My dish is on my roof and not in the yard.

That's great. Putting the Dish on our roof would, however, not remedy the tree issue.

 

[matcar]

But what if ESPN had always been on a "sports tier" would they have been able to get that veiwership? Would people have been willing to pay extra for ESPN for years as they only showed luberjack competitions and softball all day? Would you pay for ESPN today if it was on a "sports tier" ?

What if I only want Big Ten Network? Will they offer that only as a choice? and will it only cost 1.10 which is what I now know is what the BTN charges.

This may come as a surprise to many, but ESPN wasn't always available on the cheapest cable package...not even close where I lived. They EARNED that right. Then ESPN2 earned that right. ESPNU and Classic are working towards it. Why shouldn't BTN?

What you ask for is a BTN only choice...in essence ala carte programming. I too, wish that could happen. Not sure why this is so difficult to acheive, but there's more to it than simple unwillingness of cable/sat providers to do so.

 

[buckeyefool]

This may come as a surprise to many, but ESPN wasn't always available on the cheapest cable package...not even close where I lived. They EARNED that right. Then ESPN2 earned that right. ESPNU and Classic are working towards it. Why shouldn't BTN?

What you ask for is a BTN only choice...in essence ala carte programming. I too, wish that could happen. Not sure why this is so difficult to acheive, but there's more to it than simple unwillingness of cable/sat providers to do so.

Earned it how...and when has ESPN not been on just regular cable?

This may come as a surprise to you...but as recently as 5 years ago, cable companies were trying to move ESPN to a pay service...so really in cable companies eyes they haven't earned shit. The truth is cable companies just want to move new channels to pay options so they can continue to charge you a basic fee for shitty channels while not allowing people to see new.popular channels for the same cost. Would it not make sense for a cable company to let the BTN be on the basic tier, and then either a charge you extra on your bill in general, or two later once you have all these people hooked on it, move it to a higher tier?

ESPN's great-rate debate Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, The - Find Articles

Cable operators aren't walking away from the fight. Some cable executives ratcheted up the pressure on ESPN, arguing at a U.S. Senate hearing last week that maybe it's time to offer ESPN to cable customers as a kind of electronic a la carte service

 

[CleveBucks]

This may come as a surprise to many, but ESPN wasn't always available on the cheapest cable package...not even close where I lived. They EARNED that right. Then ESPN2 earned that right. ESPNU and Classic are working towards it. Why shouldn't BTN?

What you ask for is a BTN only choice...in essence ala carte programming. I too, wish that could happen. Not sure why this is so difficult to acheive, but there's more to it than simple unwillingness of cable/sat providers to do so.

SportsTime Ohio had no problem getting right on to basic cable in Columbus. Why should the Big Ten Network not have the same opportunity? What are there more of in Columbus - Ohio State fans or Indians fans?

 

[buck1973]

Care enough? Of course!! I will even whine if I want... this is absurd. As BKB mentioned, our backyard, while large enough, doesn't have a good unobstructed view of the southern sky... we live in a part of town that has laws and regulations on what you are able to put in your front yard so... unless the neighbor is willing to cut down his mature walnut trees and the city lifts their ban on dishes in fronts yards our hands are tied.

That's great. Putting the Dish on our roof would, however, not remedy the tree issue.

Do you live in a historic district? If not, and you couldn't get acceptable reception elsewhere on your property, federal law would preempt the city ban.

The rule (47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000) has been in effect since October 1996, and it prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming. The rule applies to video antennas including direct-to-home satellite dishes that are less than one meter (39.37") in diameter (or of any size in Alaska), TV antennas, and wireless cable antennas. The rule prohibits most restrictions that: (1) unreasonably delay or prevent installation, maintenance or use; (2) unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance or use; or (3) preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal.

FCC Fact Sheet on Placement of Antennas

As far as I can tell, the only exceptions the FCC has are for safety issues and historical preservation.

 

[matcar]

Earned it how...and when has ESPN not been on just regular cable?

This may come as a surprise to you...but as recently as 5 years ago, cable companies were trying to move ESPN to a pay service...so really in cable companies eyes they haven't earned shit. The truth is cable companies just want to move new channels to pay options so they can continue to charge you a basic fee for shitty channels while not allowing people to see new.popular channels for the same cost. Would it not make sense for a cable company to let the BTN be on the basic tier, and then either a charge you extra on your bill in general, or two later once you have all these people hooked on it, move it to a higher tier?

ESPN's great-rate debate Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, The - Find Articles

Cable operators aren't walking away from the fight. Some cable executives ratcheted up the pressure on ESPN, arguing at a U.S. Senate hearing last week that maybe it's time to offer ESPN to cable customers as a kind of electronic a la carte service

They earned it through viewership. And yeah, if you go back to the early years, I can tell you I paid extra to get the channel, it wasn't basic cable. Neither was ESPN2...this isn't up for debate, this is long ago history.

The reason why cable companies like the thought of ESPN being a paid service is because ESPN commands such a large premium. But, they haven't done it yet for various reasons.

 

[matcar]

Do you live in a historic district? If not, and you couldn't get acceptable reception elsewhere on your property, federal law would preempt the city ban.

FCC Fact Sheet on Placement of Antennas

As far as I can tell, the only exceptions the FCC has are for safety issues and historical preservation.

Unfortunately, when signing agreements to live in apartment complexes, it isn't that simple since they make it clear that you are not to have dishes. Now, that's not to say you can't just put one up, but then you get into a fight with the complex, and lets face it, that's not an even remotely desirable position for most people. Only the litigious kind enjoy that kind of cage rattling

 

[BB73]

A few years? Espn launched on September 7, 1979, that is over 20 years ago. Can you name more than a handful of people you know who had cable in 1979?

My family got cable in 1968. I caught grief from the kids at school prior to that, who all had cable.

It was a Toledo thing. Cable added channels from Detroit and Cleveland.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

A few years? Espn launched on September 7, 1979, that is over 20 years ago.

Try "nearly 30 years ago"...

 

[buckeyefool]

They earned it through viewership. And yeah, if you go back to the early years, I can tell you I paid extra to get the channel, it wasn't basic cable. Neither was ESPN2...this isn't up for debate, this is long ago history.

The reason why cable companies like the thought of ESPN being a paid service is because ESPN commands such a large premium. But, they haven't done it yet for various reasons.

Well where I grew up ESPN was on basic cable from day 1, not paying extra for it. So don't act like just because you had one thing everyone else did to.

Any way lets hear your various reason as to why they haven't moved ESPN to a pay tier yet. I noticed you avoided the question about STO

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Well where I grew up ESPN was on basic cable from day 1, know paying extra for it. So don't act like just because you had one thing everyone else did to.

Any lets here your various reason as to why they haven;t moved ESPN to a pay teir yet. I noticed to avoided the question about STO

 

[matcar]

Well where I grew up ESPN was on basic cable from day 1, not paying extra for it. So don't act like just because you had one thing everyone else did to.

Any way lets hear your various reason as to why they haven't moved ESPN to a pay tier yet. I noticed you avoided the question about STO

ESPN was not a basic cable option in its inception. Period. If you got on the bandwagon late, then I'm happy for you.

I'm not avoiding the question at all as I PERSONALLY DON'T CARE IF ESPN IS ON ITS OWN TIER. ESPN hasn't been moved to it's own tier because they have the leverage to suggest otherwise, and because cable operators, while wanting to charge extra for it, probably sense that not offering it as a basic service, would cut their nose off to spite their face. (BTN doesn't have that kind of leverage yet do they...) So, the cable companies clamor about it, but nothing happens. And on a larger scale, we still don't have much in the way of ala carte, which is what we're really talking about here. And the lack of ala carte would seem to have as much to do with technology constraints and political constraints as anything else.

 

[UpNorthBuckeye]

...and then there are people like me who has a big antenna, refuses to pay $1500 a year for cable TV and so if it's not on broadcast TV forget about it... or we'll go down to the sports bar to watch it. Our local basic cable does not include ESPN, ESPN2, TNT, none of it.

Sports programming is shooting itself in the foot IMHO. Or killing the golden goose, pick your metaphor.

BTN? who cares?