Comcast is full of B.S.

[ALP]

so, if i get this straight, warner isnt allowed by the NFL to have the NFLN on the basic channels, and Comcast is ALLOWED, but doesnt want to...for the following excuse:

"An NFL official said the league did not make a similar offer to Comcast because the league's deal with Comcast already allows the company to carry the NFL Network on a basic or digital basic package if it chooses. The league wants the channel carried on basic or digital basic cable, while the cable companies have maintained their customers don't want that and the channel should be on a sports tier with an additional fee for interested customers."

yea, rit, owwwww, comcast, go to hell

 

[emoney_33]

so, if i get this straight, warner isnt allowed by the NFL to have the NFLN on the basic channels, and Comcast is ALLOWED, but doesnt want to...for the following excuse:

"An NFL official said the league did not make a similar offer to Comcast because the league's deal with Comcast already allows the company to carry the NFL Network on a basic or digital basic package if it chooses. The league wants the channel carried on basic or digital basic cable, while the cable companies have maintained their customers don't want that and the channel should be on a sports tier with an additional fee for interested customers."

yea, rit, owwwww, comcast, go to hell

Verizon Fios :rocker:

Thankfully Our 1 year special 99.99 deal with comcast expired this year and they refused to give us anything except $150/mo. for phone/cable/internet. Go to the BETTER 99.99 2 year deal with Verizon (which by the way the picture quality is so much better) and we have NFLN.

 

[Amnorix]

It's a money battle between cable and the NFL. That's all.

NFL says "put my channel on basic, so I can get 30 cents or whatever from EVERY cable subscriber you have"

Cable says "no, only 10% (or whatever) of our customers give a rat's ass about the NFL network, so instead we'll put you on a separate tier and make those who want them pay $5.00 extra per month to see NFL network and ESPN42. That way 90% (or whatever) of our customers aren't paying for something they don't want."

NFL says: "F you"

Cable: "No, F YOU!"

rinse and repeat. Nobody is right or wrong.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

I like football, but if the NFLN is demanding $10 a year per customer, it belongs on a sport package and not basic cable.

The entire world is not football fans, either NFLN should lower the price that of the cooking network or the golf station or be a tiered product like ESPN full court.

 

[dhamz]

The idea that cable companies are trying to protect their customers for paying for programming they don't want is laughable. The very foundation of cable is forcing people to pay for stations they don't want.

What Comcast knows is that it will charge the same fees for its digital package (NFLN or no NFLN). There is no $ in them putting it on that tier. By putting it on a premium tier and charging, they now make extra revenue from football fans.

 

[mgteich]

Why is it right for everyone to pay a bit more so that football fans can get NFLN in their basic package? Personally, I have no problem paying the extra $8 for COMCAST's Sport and Entertainment tier. It is no way fair for everyone to pay $.50 instead.

And, of course, if Verizon has a better deal, then sign up with them, or with Direct TV. Comcast has a certin percentage who stay with them even after the huge increase. I would guess that many will end up alternating, getting Comcasts and Verizon's deal one year at a time.

It's a money battle between cable and the NFL. That's all.

NFL says "put my channel on basic, so I can get 30 cents or whatever from EVERY cable subscriber you have"

Cable says "no, only 10% (or whatever) of our customers give a rat's ass about the NFL network, so instead we'll put you on a separate tier and make those who want them pay $5.00 extra per month to see NFL network and ESPN42. That way 90% (or whatever) of our customers aren't paying for something they don't want."

NFL says: "F you"

Cable: "No, F YOU!"

rinse and repeat. Nobody is right or wrong.

 

[Bigdogx]

************ can we stop complaining about having to spend a whole 7.99 a month for a sports package, either not pay it and shut your cheap trap up or pay it and watch the games, im sure the double cheesburger and small fry's that cost the same will not be missed 1 time a month!

 

[Wretch]

I like football, but if the NFLN is demanding $10 a year per customer, it belongs on a sport package and not basic cable.

The entire world is not football fans, either NFLN should lower the price that of the cooking network or the golf station or be a tiered product like ESPN full court.

Are you sure about the $10 figure? I have seen published numbers much lower than that?

 

[sieglo]

************ can we stop complaining about having to spend a whole 7.99 a month for a sports package, either not pay it and shut your cheap trap up or pay it and watch the games, im sure the double cheesburger and small fry's that cost the same will not be missed 1 time a month!

Yeah, I just signed up for the Comcast sports package. It's a few bucks a month -- BUT IT'S ONLY FOR ONE MONTH! I will cancel it immediately after the Giants game.

People need to stop blaming Comcast. The issue is with the NFL primarily. They are trying to bootstrap the development of the NFL Channel by using their monopoly power.

 

[signbabybrady]

Why is it right for everyone to pay a bit more so that football fans can get NFLN in their basic package? Personally, I have no problem paying the extra $8 for COMCAST's Sport and Entertainment tier. It is no way fair for everyone to pay $.50 instead.

What about all the channels that I already pay for that I dont need to watch.

Lifetime, comedy channel, and the one that I think is good for this argument Spike. Spike is a channell that is supposed to be marketed to men but I believe if you are a women purchasing cable they don't offer your money back.

Everyone pays for stations they don't watch.

Seems to me like Both the NFL and the Cable companies are walking away from making X amount of dollars because they each want X amount plus and only one side can get the plus. Instead both sides are making less.

 

[ALP]

What about all the channels that I already pay for that I dont need to watch.

Lifetime, comedy channel, and the one that I think is good for this argument Spike. Spike is a channell that is supposed to be marketed to men but I believe if you are a women purchasing cable they don't offer your money back.

Everyone pays for stations they don't watch.

Seems to me like Both the NFL and the Cable companies are walking away from making X amount of dollars because they each want X amount plus and only one side can get the plus. Instead both sides are making less.

exactly, i can give u 10 chennels taht i NEVER watch, but other people watch, why should i pay for them? heck, ill trade those 10 for NFLN anyday....

also, i doubt NFLN is asking for $10 from each person....htat is ALOT, and b/c comcaast at least only chargers like 7 or 8 it means that NFLN is asking for very much less then that

 

[Patstopia]

Why is it right for everyone to pay a bit more so that football fans can get NFLN in their basic package? Personally, I have no problem paying the extra $8 for COMCAST's Sport and Entertainment tier. It is no way fair for everyone to pay $.50 instead.

And, of course, if Verizon has a better deal, then sign up with them, or with Direct TV. Comcast has a certin percentage who stay with them even after the huge increase. I would guess that many will end up alternating, getting Comcasts and Verizon's deal one year at a time.

The only problem I have with this logic is that I get lots and lots of channels I never watch that are part of my package. Why should I have to pay for them? We should be able to pick our channels individually.
That being said, screw 'em all. It's a battle of the gigantic Corporations, and in the end, I know who will get screwed!

 

[cardiak]

It is 9.48 a year which is 79 cents per month. Anyways I think it should be offered on a sports package, because thats exactly what it is. You dont see nba or nhl network on a basic package..

 

[theONLYJerseypatsfan]

Verizon Fios :rocker:

Thankfully Our 1 year special 99.99 deal with comcast expired this year and they refused to give us anything except $150/mo. for phone/cable/internet. Go to the BETTER 99.99 2 year deal with Verizon (which by the way the picture quality is so much better) and we have NFLN.

I just went through the same thing.....just bought my first house and the area has fios so I canceled my comcast at my former apartment and got fios for the house...couldnt be happier, the HD is so much better than comcast, and its so nice to watch the nfl network and know that I dont have to pay extra for it, and I got a free tv...merry christmas to me

 

[jimmyjames]

I think Comcast is taking this stand in an attempt to get the NFL to get rid of the monopoly the DirecTV has on the Sunday Ticket package. If Sunday Ticket was offered to all cable providers you woudl see NFLN offered fro free on every basic cable package. The NFL can't have it both ways.

 

[godef]

so, if i get this straight, warner isnt allowed by the NFL to have the NFLN on the basic channels, and Comcast is ALLOWED, but doesnt want to...for the following excuse:

"An NFL official said the league did not make a similar offer to Comcast because the league's deal with Comcast already allows the company to carry the NFL Network on a basic or digital basic package if it chooses. The league wants the channel carried on basic or digital basic cable, while the cable companies have maintained their customers don't want that and the channel should be on a sports tier with an additional fee for interested customers."

yea, rit, owwwww, comcast, go to hell

You forget one little detail. The league does want NFLN on basic cable, but they also want to charge at least double the highest amount charged by any other channel that's on basic. Meaning the cable company would eat the cost, or else pass it along in the form of eventual higher base cable fees. In any case, the consumer will pay.

Don't be confused. The NFL is the bad guy here.

 

[spacecrime]

so, if i get this straight, warner isnt allowed by the NFL to have the NFLN on the basic channels, and Comcast is ALLOWED, but doesnt want to...for the following excuse:

"An NFL official said the league did not make a similar offer to Comcast because the league's deal with Comcast already allows the company to carry the NFL Network on a basic or digital basic package if it chooses. The league wants the channel carried on basic or digital basic cable, while the cable companies have maintained their customers don't want that and the channel should be on a sports tier with an additional fee for interested customers."

yea, rit, owwwww, comcast, go to hell

You realize, of course, that most cable customers don't give a rat's patootie about the NFL network, and would prefer not to pay the buck a month a person NFL Network charges.

Sports programs are expensive for cable to buy, and that is why the people who watch sports ought to pay for it.

The idea that cable companies are trying to protect their customers for paying for programming they don't want is laughable.

Really? Care to calculate what you monthly bill would be if cable companies put every premium channel in their basic service?

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

exactly, i can give u 10 chennels taht i NEVER watch, but other people watch, why should i pay for them? heck, ill trade those 10 for NFLN anyday....

also, i doubt NFLN is asking for $10 from each person....htat is ALOT, and b/c comcaast at least only chargers like 7 or 8 it means that NFLN is asking for very much less then that

That was $10 per year not per month. But compare that with other stations you don't watch that cost 50 cent to a buck a year. NFLN is way too expensive for a niche component station to be in the in basic. It is priced at a level that it belongs in a sports package or stand alone item to buy. Or if it want to be part of basic it needs to come down in price.

 

[upstater1]

What about all the channels that I already pay for that I dont need to watch.

Lifetime, comedy channel, and the one that I think is good for this argument Spike. Spike is a channell that is supposed to be marketed to men but I believe if you are a women purchasing cable they don't offer your money back.

Everyone pays for stations they don't watch.

Seems to me like Both the NFL and the Cable companies are walking away from making X amount of dollars because they each want X amount plus and only one side can get the plus. Instead both sides are making less.

You get those channels on basic cable? I don't. All I have is basic. It includes ESPN, TBS, etc., but nothing like Spike or Comedy Channel.

Basic is barebones, network TV, news stations like CNN and Fox, a few "superstation" networks like TBS and TNT, and ESPN. It sounds like most people here who are getting channels they have no use for are actually on a tier above Basic. NFL wants TBS and ESPN status.

 

[dhamz]

Really? Care to calculate what you monthly bill would be if cable companies put every premium channel in their basic service?

Care to calculate my cable bill if they made it so you only recieved and only paid for channels you wanted?

The entire premise of cable is based on charging you enormous fees for channels you don't want and then adding additional fees for channels you do.