Concast says Dish/Direct TV/ Charter do not want to carry CSNW

Meh, I don't really care anymore.

Something gratifying about watching the games on illegally streamed websites. Kinda has a little bit of a criminal element to it.

 

lol, now thats some funny shit. Not Brandon Roy at all.

 

i have never heard of Concast. Is it a new company? hahah.

 

Ya, he's comparing apples to oranges. Yes local carriers are willing to pay because the Blazers are a local team and there is other local sports on it, but a national provider isn't going to pay as much because most of their viewers could care less about the Blazers. Tell me how many national providers Comcast has made deals with, not a single one and that is because they are charging way to much. I mean come on if they were asking a reasonable price at least one national provider would pick the channel up. Offer the same price that the rest of comcast channels that Directv is already carrying and I'm sure Directv would pick the channel up just like they have for so many other comcast local channels.

Btw, from what I read Comcast won't allow Directv to put the channel in the sports package where you have to pay extra to get. They want it on the basic platform so more can view it, but to me I would be more than willing to pay extra for the sports package to get the channel.

Anyway I think it's complete BS when they point to all the local providers that carry the channel, sure, but just show me one national provider!

 

I'm about to move into a place that is less than 2 miles from the company's corporaye headquarters. Trust me. It's Concast.

 

Wow. Fuck that Comcast exec for trying to spin this so deceptively.

He is not telling the full story in a way that an average person could decide the fairness of his position. He is LYING by purposefully witholding essential facts.

Fuck him.

And for those that support Comcast in this long sordid tale, his attitude, his footloose with the facts, his bullshit, THAT is at the core of the problem with Comcast. Comcast is a company run by executives who when they have the power, will do what they want.

Normally, that would be of interest to only some people. In this instance, Comcast's sleazy business practices affect many, many people because they are granted government issued franchises to be a monopoly provider of a service.

Government has failed (yet again) to keep these fuckers in check.

 

All their statement really says is some companies fell for their pricing, and they are using that to justify the pricing. It's the old "Well somebody paid that much for it, so it must be worth that much." It's kind of like when people sell comic books. It is only worth that much to some people. To the rest, it is not.

 

I totally agree with what you're saying, but why should Comcast charge Direct TV what Direct TV thinks its worth?

If Nordstroms is the only carrier of SmartCare shirts, and they decide to price them at $60, that's their right. If enough people buy them at $60, they'll keep the price at $60, they're not going to lower it to $40 because a fraction of the market thinks $60 is too much. I know that's not the best analogy, and I hate Comcast, but to think the Blazers aren't at fault or the Dish companies aren't trying to strong arm Comcast into a lower price seems a bit naive.

 

I used to truly be disgusted with what Comcast was doing to not work out some middle-ground at the expense of the customers. But then when Dish Network gave ABC the boot for hiking up their prices and spent a year showing some loop feed of a couple of incredibly slimy guys trying to explain how ABC is the devil and trying to bring down society with their outrageous prices, I lost all credibility in Dish Network. Those guys are obviously rich, slimy bastards that don't really care about anything but their own estates. So now I'm not so sure to "cast the first stone" at Comcast as I think it is a two-way street with slimy execs on both ends having their pissing match at the expense of the citizens.

 

I agree and see nothing wrong with Comcast trying to get as much as possible. I also do think there is nothing wrong with Dish/Directv or any other major Cable company trying to get CSNW at as low as price as possible. I do also agree it is the Blazers and Comcast fault. I see no fault with Dish/Directv/Charter or any buddy else that doesn't want to carry CSNW at the price Comcast is asking. Like I said in a earlier post if it was even close to a fair deal for these companies especially Charter would be carrying CSNW. I know with the heat the Blazers have taken Paul Allen would want his own company Charter to carry CSNW. Dish/Directv/Charter and most if not all the major cable company's carry almost all the rest of Comcast sportsnets and would carry CSNW with a similar deal maybe even a small increase but not what Comcast is asking for. They just can't let Comcast force them into placing CSNW in a lower tier(more subscribers) then other sportsnets. That would cost them a lot more money and most of the subscribers wouldn't even want CSNW. Plus once other sportsnets contract would be up then they would want to be in the same tier as CSNW. It would really mess them up business wise and almost bankrupt them with trying to raise costs when people have so many choices now for content. You can blame Dish/Directv/Charter all you want but this problem is Comcasts and if CSNW were a more popular channel with Dish/Directv customers they would choose to go to arbitration with the FCC and probably win but don't want to spend the money or a small chance that Comcast might win.

 

I doubt it and here is why. American history. Companies with that have a monopoly on a market abuse it, and I cannot think of a single exception to that rule.

 

I guess it depends on how you define abuse. Maximizing profit?

 

do you understand what a monopoly is?

 

Absolutely.

If I remember correctly its exclusive possession/control of a good.

Still doesn't answer my question.

 

When government granted, that monopoly is supposed to come at a price. The price is not supposed to be, "I get to charge the most I can get away with to maximise my profits".

Where is the trade-off?

Historically, government granted monopolies were either obviously corruption, or supposed to be a trade-off of guaranteed, but low and steady profits, in excange for exclusive rights.

That has been lost here. Now its assumed that Comcast can do whatever the fuck it wants? Because it is a business? In the business to make FAT profits? When did that start? How did the propoganda take hold? When did America lose its way so badly that down is up and up is down?

 

I'm asking this question in all seriousness:

What price would be fair? Obviously people don't think Comcast should be allowed the right to pick the own price of their product, which I understand. To me, allowing Direct TV to pick their own price that is significantly cheaper than other outlets got doesn't seem so fair either. Do you think Comcast owes the outlets whom they've already struck a deal with a pro-rated discount for whatever Direct TV decides the price should be?

I think it's a little trickier of a situation than the extreme anti-Comcast people think.