[TV orNotTV] Re: It's 1, 2, 3 strikes you're... moved?
In Detroit, it was Fox that feared the three teams creating their own network that backed up the dump trucks of money. Yeah, that seems to be the current state of the business. I'd have to do a little research to see how many of the 90 teams have no OTA affiliates. I mean, I don't expect half the schedule to go OTA, but to go off your idea, even a Friday or Saturday night package would surely beat the networks. In odd numbered years, the only time you'd be able to see the Tigers OTA would be their up to nine Saturday appearances and the World Series. Pittsburgh's the same situation; the cable sports channel is currently ROOT. A couple of exhibition hockey games that conflicted with the Pirates made their way onto the CW station, but the only regular or postseason games that are free to air are the network broadcasts. -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[TV orNotTV] Re: It's 1, 2, 3 strikes you're... moved?
The other huge difference between the US and UK is the additional complexity of individual team rights (with the exception of the NFL regular season). In Detroit, for example, all games not picked up nationally (either OTA or cable) air on Fox Sports Detroit. This means unless you have cable, your only chance to see the Tigers, Pistons, or Red Wings is if Fox, ABC, or NBC/CBC carries the game respectively. This migration to local cable outlets is pretty widespread. I think network affiliation contracts had a role, when the networks made it harder for local stations to pre-empt them. (It seems to me that a local team's games should clobber Saturday night reruns on other networks, but what do I know?) -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[TV orNotTV] Re: It's 1, 2, 3 strikes you're... moved?
The idea that MLB would now only allow the World Series to appear OTA depresses me to my very core. Every other pro sport in the US airs at least some portion of their playoffs on OTA. I was struck that this year was the first time since television that postseason Pirate games didn't appear on broadcast TV. The optimist says there's no way MLB lets this happen. The optimist isn't right that often. If so much of the postseason is already unavailable OTA, I doubt MLB will have a problem with putting more on cable. Unless Congress is willing to act (the NFL's blackout rules for sold-out home games are a direct result of Congressional pressure in the '70s), more and more sporting events will end up on less available channels. But if there's any truth to yesterday's Wall Street Journal's story that the NFL is considering a Thursday night doubleheader, the extra games would come out of the Fox/CBS Sunday afternoon allotment, and FS1 could very well be the winning bidder for that package, thus effectively moving some of Fox's NFL games to FS1. It's easy to imagine that Fox's desire to put NFL games on FS1 is what's driving the whole second Thursday game movement. (And I agree with everyone that no Thursday games is better than one Thursday game is better than two Thursday games.) -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: It's 1, 2, 3 strikes you're... moved?
I've always been quite jealous that in the US, you do seem to get most of your key sport on free-to-air broadcast channels. That's not the case for the most part in Europe. In the UK for example, there is no live Premier League football on broadcast channels (free to air in UK parlance). The live rights are split between Sky Sports and a new entrant this year - BT Sport. The BBC only gets to broadcast highlights of football. There is no live cricket on broadcast television. The BBC does carry some rugby, but most competitions are split between BT Sport and Sky Sports. And the difference between the TV ecosystems is that while we don't have a la carte cable as has been talked about a lot in the US, sports channels are a separate buy. So while ESPN might be a basic cable channel (and in reality sucking $5 a month from everyone's cable bills whether they watch sports or not), in the UK, it's an additional purchase. And hence it costs £22 a month - $35 - to get Sky Sports for example. BT Sport is more on top of that, although free if you take their broadband service. That does lead to reality that Sky, and now BT, can almost always outbid the broadcast channels like the BBC (with its fixed income based around a licence fee) or the advertiser funded ITV. So we actually have a list of events that by law are not allowed to be sold to anyone who doesn't make them widely available as a result - The Olympics, the World Cup, the FA Cup final, Wimbledon etc. They're considered culturally important enough that they should be available to all. That means that these do get broadcast on the BBC, ITV or both. Because sports TV packages are so pricey, not all satellite/cable subscribers take channels Sky Sports. Exactly what that proportion is tends to be confidential, but of something like 25m homes in the UK, it's estimated that only around 7-8m pay for sports (out of 13m who pay at all for TV - the rest rely on broadcast only). So if you move your event to cable/satellite, you get more for your rights, but at the cost of viewers. Are advertisers and sponsors of those sports happy with their reduced reach? It's a tough balance for networks, sports rights owners and the viewing public to get right... Adam -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: It's 1, 2, 3 strikes you're... moved?
I have always assumed that in the US, making baseball (and by analogy football and basketball and some others) easily accessible to as much of the public as possible is part of the public service the networks owe the people in exchange for their use of the public airwaves to make tons of money. That model has basically broken down here in practice - but is there a similar understanding in the UK - at least in history? On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 3:53 AM, Adam Bowie a...@adambowie.co.uk wrote: I've always been quite jealous that in the US, you do seem to get most of your key sport on free-to-air broadcast channels. That's not the case for the most part in Europe. In the UK for example, there is no live Premier League football on broadcast channels (free to air in UK parlance). The live rights are split between Sky Sports and a new entrant this year - BT Sport. The BBC only gets to broadcast highlights of football. There is no live cricket on broadcast television. The BBC does carry some rugby, but most competitions are split between BT Sport and Sky Sports. And the difference between the TV ecosystems is that while we don't have a la carte cable as has been talked about a lot in the US, sports channels are a separate buy. So while ESPN might be a basic cable channel (and in reality sucking $5 a month from everyone's cable bills whether they watch sports or not), in the UK, it's an additional purchase. And hence it costs £22 a month - $35 - to get Sky Sports for example. BT Sport is more on top of that, although free if you take their broadband service. That does lead to reality that Sky, and now BT, can almost always outbid the broadcast channels like the BBC (with its fixed income based around a licence fee) or the advertiser funded ITV. So we actually have a list of events that by law are not allowed to be sold to anyone who doesn't make them widely available as a result - The Olympics, the World Cup, the FA Cup final, Wimbledon etc. They're considered culturally important enough that they should be available to all. That means that these do get broadcast on the BBC, ITV or both. Because sports TV packages are so pricey, not all satellite/cable subscribers take channels Sky Sports. Exactly what that proportion is tends to be confidential, but of something like 25m homes in the UK, it's estimated that only around 7-8m pay for sports (out of 13m who pay at all for TV - the rest rely on broadcast only). So if you move your event to cable/satellite, you get more for your rights, but at the cost of viewers. Are advertisers and sponsors of those sports happy with their reduced reach? It's a tough balance for networks, sports rights owners and the viewing public to get right... Adam -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: It's 1, 2, 3 strikes you're... moved?
PGage, to Adam Bowie: I have always assumed that in the US, making baseball (and by analogy football and basketball and some others) easily accessible to as much of the public as possible is part of the public service the networks owe the people in exchange for their use of the public airwaves to make tons of money. That model has basically broken down here in practice - but is there a similar understanding in the UK - at least in history? While some degree of sports may have been considered part of what was basically in the public interest back in the pre-satellite years, there's never been any mention of them in the applicable regulations... they talk about things like promoting diversity, but things like sports events are left to the discretion of the license holders... B -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[TV orNotTV] Re: It's 1, 2, 3 strikes you're... moved?
I'd love to find gently-used QAM-compatible TVs and recorders for my family and I to watch the increasing number of cable channels, of which FS1 is the highest profile, that would otherwise be box-only-despite-full-basic. B -- -- TV or Not TV The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TV or Not TV group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TVorNotTV group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
