Does anyone have any informatin as to why the LHN is not being carrried by the providors in Austin? What are the sticking points? Who is the bad guy, or are both sides being stubborn?
Just waking up? Boy, that must have been one heck of a nap you've been taking! Short version? ESPN is asking too much per subscriber for a channel that wouldn't be carried as a premium channel. Time Warner and the other big carrier don't wanna pay it, so they're not carrying the LHN. Unless you have access to Grande, Fios, or one of several smaller regional cable systems, you're s.o.l. at getting the LHN. Now that you know the story, you can go back and take a nap.
Thanks for waking me up Coolhorn. My other question was who is the bad guy in this situraion? You wouild think that some sort of compromise could be reached. This seems like politics where both sides refuse to budge regardless of whether or not it's in the best interest of the people (Longhorn fans in this case).
i dont necessarily know that there is a bad guy in this equation. i think ESPN needs a certain dollar amount to make their investment worth it, and that dollar amount isnt something cable companies are willing to take on.
Got a message from my son the other day. He was sitting on a couch in Jew Jersey, drinking a beer and watching the 2005 Texas-Ohio State game on LHN.
In a way it's being used, then again all new channels are. Whether it's the HGTV networks, ESPN or CNN they all go through this. It's posturing for a bigger battle. It's a battle for future negotiations of new channels coming down the pipeline and also negotiations for channels to be renewed in contracts. If ESPN gives too much the providers could sense weakness and play hard ball more with them in the future. That goes for ESPN, 2, Deportes, you name it. They had a tough time getting Deportes out the door when it first hit. Now it is quite popular. The networks are in the same boat. If ESPN wins too much they lose later in the future on all fronts. I don't blame ESPN nor the networks for trying to get the most for the least given. It's business. Just remember, it's beyond the whiners who cannot get the channel now and think it's the end of the world and that this channel is bigger nationally than it is. It's bigger than those lucky enough to have it. It's a battle ground from companies that make more money than all of us and UT combined. It's unfortunate but it will have an ending. I just hope it's a good one for our fans, even the wussy ones.
You're providing little more than opinion on why you think the LHN WILL be a success but you completely ignore the present. And I doubt you have your facts right when claiming that "all new channels" are like this. Some? Most? All? I doubt all. Will the LHN be a success? Let's hope so.
All new channels go through negotiation. Bank on that. Like this? I don't know but we only have this in common. I do address how this sucks for our more whiny fans. We are all aware of the atrocity at hand, equal to the plague.
The LHN is the grand culmination of everything DeLoss has been shooting for, or has done while AD at UT. Meanwhile.. Goodbye Arkansas, Colorado, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Missouri. Almost goodbye to Oklahoma, but she is giving it one more chance. Hello to West Virginia!! Wow, she is such a catch!! Oh I'm sorry, the LHN sucks. And time for a new face and personality on UT athletics.
I don't like not having the LHN and I don't like people pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining. Fact is, from a viewership standpoint right now, we are WORSE OFF now under the auspices of the LHN than we were before.
I dont think there really is a "bad guy". IMO, this is just an example of ESPN out kicking their coverage. I dont fault Deloss or Texas for taking the deal as I am certain ESPN assured them they would get the network on more platforms (I do think Deloss and UT could have worked for a more reasoned deal that allowed for PPV options if ESPN failed to deliver good platform coverage). ESPN though made a huge bet/gamble and agreed to pay out lots of money to UT and IMG and in up front production costs. As of yet, they haven't recouped much of anything and are likely close to $60M in the whole. Because their deals were so expensive, ESPN must get the LHN on the basic package of providers to have any chance of making any money off of the deal. Offering the LHN locally or on a premium package will not generate adequate return. People can not compare this to other "new" channels. Never has a channel been attempted to gain access to broad programming based on so small a sector of potential fans. No doubt many of those new shows have very specific viewership but they hope to get a small percentage of a massive total number. There is absolutely a finite number of Texas longhorn footbal fans and even smaller number of fans that would watch any programming other than live games. Further, never has a new channel entered into such lucrative up front contracts like ESPN has done with UT and IMG. Most new shows have up front production costs (and these are usually way, way less than what it takes to produce the LHN) but they dont have $2-$3 M dollars in expenses going out the door every month whether there is any revenue coming in or not. ESPN is in a very difficult position right now. They have spent a lot of money already with little to show for it from a revenue side and yet they cant discount the service to gain access and hope to ever make money. Meanwhile some Texas fans dont get to see 2-3 out of a season of 12 games that is the biggest sporting event the university has.
What is the inevitable? The LHN implodes? ESPN ditches it? Somebody clearly didn't do their homework, either at ESPN or UT, on this deal.
There have only been one or two seasons I can think of that we could see every game. There were some, even in our uptick time frame that a game was not ppv. There have been games where due to our opponent (usually) it just wasn't picked up. i remember people clamoring for links to hear Craig Way's call on the radio network. People going hunting that weekend or what not. But the butt hurt don't want any of that nonsense. It's much easier to be disgruntled when you think we have always been on tv as much or more than Notre Dame, who has their own network.
Jack, I've been on this board for a long time and this is the first mention ever that the LHN caused the departure of Arkansas. Thanks for that.
IDE, good points. This is the first time they have been ballsy and wanted to put two games on the LHN. Last year it was one, right? I forget. I wonder how many people up in arms about this have actually contacted their cable provider more than once if at all to tell them what a big deal it is to them. I wonder if those numbers, even if it has happened, are enough to sway them to take it seriously given the preposterous price that ESPN is supposedly asking. In any negotiation there is the high number at one end and low at the other. I think the four letter network is likely so out of the ballpark with their initial numbers the networks are not even taking them serious. Given so much rides on this and other negotiations they may be cutting their nose off to spite their face. I don't know, just speculation. I recall those games being on a local channel for replay in the past. I also recall those times when the stadium was partially full and there were cheap seats available from HEB the day before the game. I think different times were had indeed. There has to be a window that will close on ESPN and their bargaining for distribution. I hope they don't let it close on their fingers. I do think that the Horns performance this year could have major impact. Do really well and at the very least go to or win a BCS game and show we are back in style could propel negotiations.
Since Mack Brown has been the head coach, every football game to my recollection has been on TV or PPV. Vol 4 Life, I think he was blaming Dodds (not LHN) on the Arkansas departure. Personally, I have been calling for the firing of DeLoss since he hired Mackovic. The loss of Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and especially Texas A&M along with the LHN is just icing on the cake.
After rereading his post I acknowledge intention towards DeLoss, however as has been explained extensively several times I don't blame any of those departures on him nor the LHN. As far as OU, they were rejected by the PAC whatever the count is now.
Dodds had nothing to do with the pig people leaving. They (like aggy) had/have penis envy and just wanted out. The culprit in the LHN mess (and it is a mess) is IMG. They have to approve any change to the ESPN pricing model as any change will affect their cut.
