Started By
Message
re: SEC Network, the thread
Posted on 7/17/14 at 9:20 pm to tmc94
Posted on 7/17/14 at 9:20 pm to tmc94
quote:
wouldn't go so far. We really don't know the contract details. ESPN could very well be settling in order to gain carriage like Fox did with FS1. I think the mistake they made with LHN was not doing so.
I could see them settling somewhat w/ the initial carriers as a means to pressure the others. But if they're reaching agreements with virtually everyone... what's the point? If these agreements are for any length of time, the SEC would be leaving a ton of money on the table if they settle for a bargain price.
1
Posted on 7/18/14 at 12:14 am to Mirthomatic
I agree with your general premise, but you have several ifs in there that make me skeptical.
except to this point, they haven't. The facts are only ATT, Dish, and Cox have signed on among the real players. And they are all on the smaller side. The rest is merely hearsay.
We don't know this either. I'm pretty sure the Dish deal was longer and more comprehensive since it included all parts of Disney (and online content). But the others are just one-offs that could be any terms.
I'm obviously not privy to the discussions, but a lowball 1-year deal is not abnormal for new channels with the agreement that a good-faith negotiation takes place once ratings/demand are established. Sweetheart deals with early adopters (with several providers) is not a bad idea to put pressure on others by giving consumers options.
Too many assumptions are being taken as fact right now imo
quote:
if they're reaching agreements with virtually everyone
except to this point, they haven't. The facts are only ATT, Dish, and Cox have signed on among the real players. And they are all on the smaller side. The rest is merely hearsay.
quote:
If these agreements are for any length of time
We don't know this either. I'm pretty sure the Dish deal was longer and more comprehensive since it included all parts of Disney (and online content). But the others are just one-offs that could be any terms.
I'm obviously not privy to the discussions, but a lowball 1-year deal is not abnormal for new channels with the agreement that a good-faith negotiation takes place once ratings/demand are established. Sweetheart deals with early adopters (with several providers) is not a bad idea to put pressure on others by giving consumers options.
Too many assumptions are being taken as fact right now imo
Page 1 of 1
Latest Texas A&M News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News