Holy Cow Did Multisport Get Expensive!

[NotMe546]

I love how people get all riled up about paying for sports. For all those that complain about paying for sports channels that you never watch, do you ever think about how sports fans pay for channels you may watch but they don't? Oh of course not. Paying for things you may not get a benefit from is a part of life so deal with it. If Dish did offer RSNs in a market like NY, I'm sure they would pick up quite a few subscribers & maybe they wouldn't have to raise rates as much next time to compensate for the loss of subscribers.

Well it looks like sports is way over 50% of my bill for a few channels. I bet if most people knew how much of the bill it is a big percentage would opted out.
I also bet if they took sports off my bill it would go down. But in turn the price for sport channels would be off the hook. But at least they would be paying their fair share.
As far as NY RSN I don't see how Dish can compete when the local company owns most the local RNS networks.

 

[cosmo_kramer]

Well it looks like sports is way over 50% of my bill for a few channels. I bet if most people knew how much of the bill it is a big percentage would opted out.
I also bet if they took sports off my bill it would go down. But in turn the price for sport channels would be off the hook. But at least they would be paying their fair share.

Ask NY subs who have lost their RSNs if they're paying less now...

 

[NotMe546]

Ask NY subs who have lost their RSNs if they're paying less now...

I'm talking about the Big Fat Rat and the cheese is your money!!!!

"At a 2011 conference, the Wall Street Journal reported, the head of the Starz Network's parent company described ESPN as a "tax on every American household," while Viacom chief Philippe Dauman pointed out that ESPN alone was "double the cost of all our networks combined.""

 

[tomcrown1]

If you understood basic economics, you wouldn't make a claim like that. The NFL is the teams and their high costs can be directly attributed to salaries. Not all of the salaries are players, but most of the multi-million dollar salaries are.

The operational costs of the stadiums and the NFL offices aren't advancing nearly as quickly as the insane player contracts.

You do know that the contract between the players and the league limit the amount an owner can pay.

It is a percentage of the league income. Each team has a hard salary cap thus a player who a team thinks is to expensive can get cut Ie the niners cut the best long snapper in football for a rookie who gets half his salary.

 

[rocatman]

It's funny how folks can argue about player salaries affecting TV contracts. What they imply is that if the costs go down or stay the same (including player salaries) for the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL or the various college football and basketball conferences they would ask for less for the TV rights to their games. This defies economic logic. These sports leagues/conferences will always try to maximize their TV revenue regardless of their costs including player salaries. I would hate to see the bottom line for any business owned/managed by the folks who would argue differently.

 

[Huntr]

Meh...most of those are in AT200 or AT250 already, so unless you are at the bare minimum AT120+, not much of a deal.

I only really watch a few things, mainly sports. Adding those channels to the sport pack lets me save some $$ by dropping down a tier or 2, despite picking up the sport pack year round, and still see what I want.

 

[Katie5]

OP here - I live in the Southwest, but am originally from Illinois and went to the University of Illinois, hence why I would like to get BTN to watch a few football games. So I do need multi-sport to get BTN. I would gladly pay money for JUST the BTN, I don't want to pay $21 more a month when that is all I want, though.

I notice that the OP hasn't responded since this post. If she ever does come back it would be helpful to know what state she lives in. She mentioned that she wants the sports pack for Big Ten Network. I understand that it is quite a price jump to move from AT120 to AT120+ and Multisport but if you live in a Big Ten state you don't need to add Multi-Sport. Here in Michigan BTN is included in AT120+ along with Fox Sports Detroit as the RSNs for my area. If you are a Big Ten football fan there is a good chance that you live in a Big Ten state so you can save the $11 you would have spent on Multi-sport. If you don't live in a Big Ten State you are correct in that it would cost the extra $21 to get BTN. I don't expect the OP to see this because she hasn't posted in this thread since the original post. If you do hopefully this can save you some money and still get your football games.

 

[king3pj]

OP here - I live in the Southwest, but am originally from Illinois and went to the University of Illinois, hence why I would like to get BTN to watch a few football games. So I do need multi-sport to get BTN. I would gladly pay money for JUST the BTN, I don't want to pay $21 more a month when that is all I want, though.

Understood. That is a pretty big price increase if you are only interested in one channel. Unfortunately that's the way it is on Dish. I'm pretty sure Directv includes BTN nationwide without their sports pack. It may or may not be worth switching depending on your needs and if you are under contract with Dish.

 

[AIsmail]

Dish would not pick up many subscribers, that's the exact reason they decided not to carry what is probably the most expensive set of RSN's. There is a reason Sports is being singled out. RSN's, ESPN, soon FOXS and others cost more than most other programming. Taking out just a few sports channels from a package would lower the cost far far more than taking away just a few other channels. It's a problem not just being discussed here, if you don't agree, you can go and argue with Comcast and other carriers who want something to change.

Maybe this will help you and others. (Btw - I do watch some sports, and not casually but I can see how it's costing me much more than other programming)

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/53498716

How do you know that it wouldn't add subscribers? I'm sure Dish lost a whole bunch of subscribers in the NY market when they dropped the RSNs. In the NY market, Dish isn't even in conversation because they don't offer sports and you've got a lot of people with the incomes that could afford it. Furthermore, when Dish dropped all the RSNs in NY, my bill remained the same and then it went up anyway. So in the end, anyone in NY finds themselves paying more and getting less. Do you think for a minute that if Dish dropped ESPN, our bills would be reduced? And to anyone who would argue that sports don't mean much, look at Direct TV. Last time I checked they were #1 and as someone whose parents have Direct TV, I can tell you that they don't pay all that much more then me.

 

[AIsmail]

Ask NY subs who have lost their RSNs if they're paying less now...

Didn't even go down a penny and ironically my bill went up because everything else went up. I'd love to see all the sports channels go away and all those people who are expecting dramatic decreases in their bills come to find the programming replaced with garbage they would never watch and no price decrease what so ever.

 

[Scherrman]

Didn't even go down a penny and ironically my bill went up because everything else went up. I'd love to see all the sports channels go away and all those people who are expecting dramatic decreases in their bills come to find the programming replaced with garbage they would never watch and no price decrease what so ever.

That's most likely what would happen. You would get less and pay the same.

 

[Laddyboy]

That's most likely what would happen. You would get less and pay the same.

Dish would have to lower their rates to reflect the loss of sports or would be wholly uncompetitive with Direct and the other providers. Also to reply to AI's other point about increasing subs, I'm pretty sure Dish gamed this out because if they thought they could make money by adding the NY RSNs, they would. Direct is adding surcharges to some markets because the RSNs are so pricey. If I recall correctly, Ergen said way back on a chat the NY RSNs would add something like $3 to the package prices. They really should give a rate rebate back to subs in the NY markets without RSNs. Or better yet, NY subs that want their RSNs should probably be Direct or cable subs as I don't think Dish is likely to have them again unless they adopt Direct's approach and assess surcharges.

 

[navychop]

Dish would have to lower their rates to reflect the loss of sports or would be wholly uncompetitive with Direct and the other providers. Also to reply to AI's other point about increasing subs, I'm pretty sure Dish gamed this out because if they thought they could make money by adding the NY RSNs, they would. Direct is adding surcharges to some markets because the RSNs are so pricey. If I recall correctly, Ergen said way back on a chat the NY RSNs would add something like $3 to the package prices. They really should give a rate rebate back to subs in the NY markets without RSNs. Or better yet, NY subs that want their RSNs should probably be Direct or cable subs as I don't think Dish is likely to have them again unless they adopt Direct's approach and assess surcharges.

Agreed. And I couldn't blame them for doing so.

 

[Gobucks]

I would gladly pay $11 for Redzone channel only. When I was with Direct I would have had to have Sunday Ticket for just that channel. I had called and asked about just paying for that channel and I was told it could not be done. I had the ticket years before but found when Redzone came out I watched it 95% of the time. I got the whole package for $5.50. That is a hell of a deal. Especially with Pac12 in there

The good thing about muliti sport and AT120+ is the fact that its pay as you go. If you don't want it drop it.

 

[hazmat626]

I agree. $5.50 per month is a great deal if you like Football. Can't wait for Sunday.

 

[Bobby]

And, yesterday The Pac12 Channel, a channel that is part of Multisport didn't exist, not even on the alternates. I had to watch the E. Washington-Oegon State game on my iPad using the Pac12 App. As I recall, the same thing happened on the first week of college football last year as well....

I just put my Dufas hat on! I was in Favorites and 406-01 (Hopper channel) wasn't part of it. Fixed now!

 

[EatMyVolts]

And, yesterday The Pac12 Channel, a channel that is part of Multisport didn't exist, not even on the alternates. I had to watch the E. Washington-Oegon State game on my iPad using the Pac12 App. As I recall, the same thing happened on the first week of college football last year as well....

In Portland we got that game, :mmph: there's always next year.

 

[harshness]

You do know that the contract between the players and the league limit the amount an owner can pay.

It is a percentage of the league income. Each team has a hard salary cap thus a player who a team thinks is to expensive can get cut Ie the niners cut the best long snapper in football for a rookie who gets half his salary.

You must also know that the salary caps go up each year. As an example, the NFL was capped at 73 million in 2003 and is now capped at 123 million. That's an increase of 68% over ten years.

 

[empiretc]

I agree. It's a big increase to go from the AT120 to the AT120 plus with Multi Sports package. What I would do if I were you is just get the AT200 and then add the Multi Sports pack for half off or see if they offer it free. The AT200 may be $5 more yet but at least you are getting a lot of other channels with it and if you get the Multi Sports pack at half price it will actually be a wash. You'll get a lot more programming for the money than with the AT120 plus.

That was the conclusion here. Great post!

 

[AIsmail]

If I recall correctly, Ergen said way back on a chat the NY RSNs would add something like $3 to the package prices. They really should give a rate rebate back to subs in the NY markets without RSNs.

So for a lousy $3, no sports. Thank god Ergen saved his subscribers from that. I guess that coupled with the increase in fees would of really broke the subscribers wallet. Equipment fees only go up and what do we get for that? Absolutely nothing. I do love how if I buy a receiver outright, I still have to pay a leasing fee. The cost of my equipment is more then my programming so the notion that the lack of sports is keeping our bills down is preposterous.

I'd wager with sports, Dish would land more subscribers & then be able to negotiate better deals with content providers. Then I could see us possibly saving some money.