NFL Network Compromise?

[Kirkendall]

Take this for what it's worth. But there might be a big compromise between the NFL Network and Time Warner soon. Goodell is offering an arbitrator to determine worth and tier. As a sign of good faith, Goodell said that he's willing to give the network to Time Warner provided negotiations are initiated.

http://www.cincyjungle.com/story/2007/12/21/123123/44

Or, were they pressured by Congress -- who still thinks that American policy must include the going-ons in professional sports.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/20...414046794_x.htm

[HairOnFire]

As a DirecTV/Sunday Ticket subscriber I have no dog in this fight. However, about a month ago I listened to a debate about this subject on ESPNRadio and the conclusion reached was unanimous. That being, the only arena the NFL may be out of it's depth in regards to lawyers and lawsuits is in a protracted fight with Comcast/TimeWarner.

Quoting Roger Cossack, "The NFL has already found itself in unfamiliar territiory... being completely overmatched."

[Kirkendall]

Same. Though I have TW. Personally, I don't care one way or another. If we get it, we get it. If not, then I'm fine with that too. Now, NFL ticket? I'd blow a load if I found it that was coming... I know, I know. TMI. Whatever.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

I absolutely hate the cable companies, and I like football (obviously). But here's what the NFL is basically saying: we're going to charge you $X/customer for the NFL Network, and you'd better put it on the standard tier or we're going to....what? Sue you? Complain to Congress?

Ridiculous. If the NFL is charging a lot for it's channel (and from what I've read, they are) then the cable companies should be free to charge extra for it. The only other alternative is charging everybody more, which doesn't quite seem fair.

[Lelo34]

I absolutely hate the cable companies, and I like football (obviously). But here's what the NFL is basically saying: we're going to charge you $X/customer for the NFL Network, and you'd better put it on the standard tier or we're going to....what? Sue you? Complain to Congress?

Ridiculous. If the NFL is charging a lot for it's channel (and from what I've read, they are) then the cable companies should be free to charge extra for it. The only other alternative is charging everybody more, which doesn't quite seem fair.

Which is why the arbitration is a good idea. However, I doubt Time Warner will agree to this, puts their butt on the line a little too much

[HairOnFire]

Time Warner Rejects an Arbitration Offer to Carry the NFL Network

By RICHARD SANDOMIR

Published: December 21, 2007

Time Warner on Thursday rejected an offer by the N.F.L. to submit to “baseball-style arbitration” to resolve the impasse that has kept the cable operator from carrying the NFL Network.

It is particularly important for the NFL Network to add subscribers in advance of the Patriots-Giants game Dec. 29, when New England could be headed for an undefeated season. Time Warner has 13.3 million subscribers, including 1.4 million in its New York-New Jersey division.

Commissioner Roger Goodell wrote in a letter to Glenn A. Britt, the president of Time Warner, that the N.F.L. would permit the cable operator to carry the network “immediately upon your written agreement to participate in the arbitration process and to be bound by its result.”

Under his plan, the league would submit one monthly subscriber fee proposal to an arbitrator and Time Warner would submit another. The arbitrator would choose one, and the ruling would be binding. The deal is available to Cablevision and Charter, which also do not carry the network.

Britt’s response did not address Goodell’s proposal other than to say that Time Warner had reached agreements “with hundreds of programming networks without the use of arbitration.”

He cited offers it had made to carry the network or individual games on a pay-per-view basis with the league setting the price and collecting all revenues.

Britt suggested that the league move the Patriots-Giants game to a broadcast network “to ensure the broadest possible distribution of this potentially historic game for fans.” He was referring to NBC, which under that plan, would use its flexible schedule option to swap its Sunday night Chiefs-Jets game with the Patriots-Giants broadcast the night before.

The Connecticut and Rhode Island congressional delegations have written to Goodell seeking expanded viewership of the game in their areas. League rules require that its cable games on ESPN and the NFL Network be simulcast on local broadcast stations in primary markets like New York and Boston but not to secondary markets with strong fan bases like Providence.

Twenty-one Congressmen and senators have asked the Federal Communications Commission to resolve the long-running dispute.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/sports/f...amp;oref=slogin

[Kirkendall]

If they weren't already, they just went instantaneously bad guys.

"Hey, my dick is bigger than yours."

[Jet23]

I absolutely hate the cable companies, and I like football (obviously). But here's what the NFL is basically saying: we're going to charge you $X/customer for the NFL Network, and you'd better put it on the standard tier or we're going to....what? Sue you? Complain to Congress?

Ridiculous. If the NFL is charging a lot for it's channel (and from what I've read, they are) then the cable companies should be free to charge extra for it. The only other alternative is charging everybody more, which doesn't quite seem fair.

As much as I hate Time Warner, I have to agree. The Big 10 Network is trying similar pressure. I would love to have the NFL Network (and the Big 10 Network for that matter), but how can I expect other subscribers to pay for something they care nothing about. Let's face it, TW will not eat the charge. If it is provided on basic cable, they will simply raise their rates.

[Lelo34]

If they weren't already, they just went instantaneously bad guys.

"Hey, my dick is bigger than yours."

I really freaking hate Time Warner. But since I live in an apartment, I have no choice but to use them

[Jet23]

I absolutely hate the cable companies, and I like football (obviously). But here's what the NFL is basically saying: we're going to charge you $X/customer for the NFL Network, and you'd better put it on the standard tier or we're going to....what? Sue you? Complain to Congress?

Ridiculous. If the NFL is charging a lot for it's channel (and from what I've read, they are) then the cable companies should be free to charge extra for it. The only other alternative is charging everybody more, which doesn't quite seem fair.

As much as I hate Time Warner, I have to agree. The Big 10 Network is trying similar pressure. I would love to have the NFL Network (and the Big 10 Network for that matter), but how can I expect other subscribers to pay for something they care nothing about. Let's face it, TW will not eat the charge. If it is provided on basic cable, they will simply raise their rates.

Oh yeah, one more thing. Somehow this is Mike Brown's fault.........Merry Christmas Hair.

[HairOnFire]

However, I doubt Time Warner will agree to this, puts their butt on the line a little too much

My take is a little different. I think the NFL is attempting to make an 11th hour deal because they know whatever bargaining leverage they might currently have evaporates on December 29th. After that the regular season ends, all playoff games are broadcast on the networks, and the threat of fans missing games disappears until midseason of next year.

In short, I think the NFL just made an offer they knew would be rejected, but in the process they gained a few public relationship points by appearing willing to compromise. By comparison, Time Warner will now be seen by some as unwilling or even afraid to put it's fate in the hands of arbitration, but in reality all they're doing is continuing to play the same version of hardball they've been playing from day one.

[COB]

I live in Licking County, Time Warner owns this area, so the local paper covers the goings on with this company. TW is the Bengal organization in the cable world. They have a darn near monopoly and still can't figure out how to do anything right. But in this case, they're using their near monopoly wisely. Not many cable customers will bail to the dish for one channel. The Big Ten Network already tried that blackmail and it didn't work.

TW is laughing at Goodell because the reason he's trying so hard now to get on their system (other than the underlying goal to get on basic and get paid for every subscriber TW already has) is the upcoming Saturday night, Dec. 29th Giants-Patriots game. It will be of historical proportions what with the favored Patriots about to make history. On the NFL Network. Which TimeWarner does not carry in a bunch of east coast markets like Providence, etc. NFL network games go on local TV in the markets the teams are from. But those two teams, and particularly that game, have market and demand all over the east coast. Goodell has essentially said, "just agree to negotiate with us and we'll give you the channel for free for the time being." That offer is all about that game. TW said no thanks. TW is just waiting and laughing, painting the NFL as the greedy party. Goodell thought this game would provide the leverage to coerce Time Warner into putting NFL Network on a basic tier. Instead I think he'll blink and try to flex that game onto network.

Funny how the team he seems to have treated with kid gloves is now involved in a game that, at least in the business world, is resulting in Goodell getting publicly bent over. Something about instant karma's gonna get you.

[BengalszoneBilly]

I live in Licking County.

The home of countless happy women no doubt!

...sorry. I've been in the spiked Egg Nog and simply couldn't help myself!

[COB]

I live in Licking County.

The home of countless happy women no doubt!

...sorry. I've been in the spiked Egg Nog and simply couldn't help myself!

No offense taken! It was quite a relief to me when the state of Ohio quit making us put our county name across the lower part of our license plate. We all drove around with "Licking" on our plate. Mostly, it was being laughed at by carloads of 16-year-old boys that got real old. EDIT - Our county is named after the mighty Licking River that runs through it. Just wanted to clear that up once and for all.

[redsbengalsbucks]

I absolutely hate the cable companies, and I like football (obviously). But here's what the NFL is basically saying: we're going to charge you $X/customer for the NFL Network, and you'd better put it on the standard tier or we're going to....what? Sue you? Complain to Congress?

Ridiculous. If the NFL is charging a lot for it's channel (and from what I've read, they are) then the cable companies should be free to charge extra for it. The only other alternative is charging everybody more, which doesn't quite seem fair.

As much as I hate Time Warner, I have to agree. The Big 10 Network is trying similar pressure. I would love to have the NFL Network (and the Big 10 Network for that matter), but how can I expect other subscribers to pay for something they care nothing about. Let's face it, TW will not eat the charge. If it is provided on basic cable, they will simply raise their rates.

This is a really sad commentary on the cable companies, I have both the NFL and BIG 10 networks on DirecTV and the prices for regular subscription have not increased. Cable companies are just too greedy to allow such popular channels to become basic programming, but that is exactly what they are on satellite TV. I hope that both these networks continue to fight for free/ basic programming of their products.