First, good idea Posty to break this thread out from the other. Second, I would imagine that the big factor behind the 'animosity' (might be too strong of a word) associated with the BTN is the cost issue. We rarely see this kind of programming negotiations take place in the public arena. My guess is that if the Food Network had announced last year they would make their network available to Dish, but it would cost subscribers 1.00 each, we would see the same responses. Also, I do think that for most people, changing providers is pretty dramatic (and now with all of the commitments we have, expensive) of an option for people. I was thinking of a parallel. What if we had a poll that asked if Dish doesn't carry Chiller Network in HD come Sept 1st, what would people do. My guess is you could substitute any particular network and find similar (or worse) numbers. Most people are not going to switch providers over one network. Also, I have seen people characterize the BTN as a niche channel. Well, I think most networks are niche channels, with the exceptions being the networks and a few channels that provide multiple programming. Of course, some people might want to note that despite the fact that the BTN covers only one conference, sports programs draw the highest ratings of any non-network programming on cable or satellite. That is why ESPN asks for a ridiculous amount of money. They know they can. Another thing that should be pointed out--while the BTN early schedule is filled with mismatches, as I have stated before, they will have 2nd choice of games on 3 weeks this season, so there will be a few "good" matchups that will not be available. And wait until basketball season...
I will conclude my stream of consciousness post by saying that I, like alot of my fellow posters, wish that the BTN never existed. This is just another troubling trend in chasing the dollar in college sports. However, I have seen what I consider to be a rational business strategy employed by both E* and BTN in these negotiations. The BTN should want to maximize profit by 'forcing' its way into the basic (digital) tier of cable and satellite. E* should want to force them to a sports tier, where the cost is lowest for them and they still provide the service to those customers who want it. I have to admit that I have gotten a chuckle or two from posters who have said that what the BTN is trying to do is "anti-capitalism". I think some of those posters need to recognize that what they mean is that it is anti-competitive, not anti-capitalism. It is soooo consistent with modern corporate capitalism...
