Fox Sports San Diego 2012 for Padres games

[Darth Padre]

---

oufanindallas wrote:

---

Darth Padre wrote:

Here's the latest.  http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/apr/17/cable-impasse-lots-of-losing-will-be-test-for/

Looks like U-Verse isn't interested.  My only hope is that Dish can get it, so I can go back to the crummy service I got from Ygnition cable (they are powered by Dish).  At least Dish is actually in contact with FSSD.

---

It doesn't say they aren't still negotiating, just not very hard.  FSW isn't coming down on price and AT&T isn't willing to fork over the money they are demanding.

Love this quote from the writer though:

"At this plodding rate, then, it’s even money as to whether a compromise can be reached before the Padres are eliminated in the National League West."

The way the Padres are playing that should be sometime around the All-Star break.

---

Well, thanks ATT for negociating, don't hurt yourself trying too hard for your customers. 

I said it earlier in the thread that if they don't come to a deal by opening day it won't happen.  The pressure from fans will not be any greater given the teams current construction.  Taking pot shots at the Padres is nothing new, thanks for your contribution to the thread.

[chris92071]

Padre fans: just remember there is nonTV deal officially as of 7:19 p.m. On April 18. You cannot fault AT&T, TW nor Dish for not making a deal. However, I switched because of equipment and no-Padres. Until MLB approves the deal, from a bidness sense the companies are within their right. It sucks when all sales weasels promise FSSD but fail. I personally bLame Bud Selig and MLB.

[jeffcoindust]

---

chris92071 wrote:
Padre fans: just remember there is nonTV deal officially as of 7:19 p.m. On April 18. You cannot fault AT&T, TW nor Dish for not making a deal. However, I switched because of equipment and no-Padres. Until MLB approves the deal, from a bidness sense the companies are within their right. It sucks when all sales weasels promise FSSD but fail. I personally bLame Bud Selig and MLB.

---

What do you mean there is no tv deal officially? MLB approved the deal on opening day, per an interview mlb.com conducted with John Moores. If they hadn't, FSSD wouldn't be able to broadcast the games, PERIOD. Selig and MLB did their part weeks ago... The blame for this belongs either to FSSD or the cable providers, or a combination of the two.

[chris92071]

I disagree; I work in the media. It has been talked about approval. But there is no, repeat NO deal. In principal it exists but MLB has not signed off. Obviously Fox has permission and the deal exists in principal. But it is not official. John Moore's can talk about that and hs other deals but as of 6:50 pm on April 19. No deal.

[jeffcoindust]

---

chris92071 wrote:
I disagree; I work in the media. It has been talked about approval. But there is no, repeat NO deal. In principal it exists but MLB has not signed off. Obviously Fox has permission and the deal exists in principal. But it is not official. John Moore's can talk about that and hs other deals but as of 6:50 pm on April 19. No deal.

---

Fair enough. The deal is approved in principle, but there has not been a formal announcement. But, to follow up from your previous post, is it really your opinion that all that's stopping AT&T from adding the channel to the lineup is that the formal announcement hasn't come yet? I really don't see how you could blame MLB and Selig for what is clearly an issue between FSSD and AT&T....

[chris92071]

Yes, I do blame MLB and Bud Selig. They fracked San Diego up; but bent over backwards for the Dodgers to close a sale on April 30. Our small town image (two million plus in population) and a now-again-owner ... opps, I'm gonna sale the team again ... really hosed us over. I'm not bitter, but MLB could have been proactive in this. We don't know the terms yet; yet we, the fans, pay the price. Perhaps it is a good thing that nearly 40 percent of the cannot NOT watch this team. 3-11? Is the season over already? Gawd. The deal, while in principal, should be approved. Again, I don't fault any operator for not signing a deal as the final dollar amount is held closer than the secret formula for Coca-Cola. Why sign on when, as TW put it, it is a 400-percent increase PLUS the Clippers and other sporting events on top of that? I'm sure the bean counters and the suits who, obviously, live out of the area, are keeping their signing pen close to their chest. From a bidness sense, it makes perfect reason to hold out. For the fan and the viewer who were promised, it only hurts the same company that sold a bill of goods of having the Padres.  So in closing, MLB, you really suck on what you did to San Diego fans. You need us more than we need you. You are also harming U-verse, TW, and Dish. Cox and DirecTV are "winning" as they are the only place in town. Thanks MLB, you prove once again that the small town is not important -- and we get another dose of Yankees and Boston AGAIN on Saturday Fox Baseball.

[jeffcoindust]

---

chris92071 wrote:

Yes, I do blame MLB and Bud Selig. They fracked San Diego up; but bent over backwards for the Dodgers to close a sale on April 30. Our small town image (two million plus in population) and a now-again-owner ... opps, I'm gonna sale the team again ... really hosed us over. I'm not bitter, but MLB could have been proactive in this. We don't know the terms yet; yet we, the fans, pay the price. Perhaps it is a good thing that nearly 40 percent of the cannot NOT watch this team. 3-11? Is the season over already? Gawd. The deal, while in principal, should be approved. Again, I don't fault any operator for not signing a deal as the final dollar amount is held closer than the secret formula for Coca-Cola. Why sign on when, as TW put it, it is a 400-percent increase PLUS the Clippers and other sporting events on top of that? I'm sure the bean counters and the suits who, obviously, live out of the area, are keeping their signing pen close to their chest. From a bidness sense, it makes perfect reason to hold out. For the fan and the viewer who were promised, it only hurts the same company that sold a bill of goods of having the Padres.  So in closing, MLB, you really suck on what you did to San Diego fans. You need us more than we need you. You are also harming U-verse, TW, and Dish. Cox and DirecTV are "winning" as they are the only place in town. Thanks MLB, you prove once again that the small town is not important -- and we get another dose of Yankees and Boston AGAIN on Saturday Fox Baseball.

---

I totally agree with you on all of this. The bottom line is that, whether it's FSSD's fault, Uverse/TWC/Dish's fault, the Padres' fault, or MLB's fault, the only people getting screwed in this deal are the fans. Rumor is that the O'Malley's are looking to buy the team. While it's a long shot, I think it would do a wonder for SD to have an owner with a proven track record of doing what it takes to win--even if that track record was earned with the Dodgers. Haha.

[chris92071]

Thanks Jeff. Good exchange.

[chris92071]

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/apr/23/fox-says-time-warner-might-not-carry-padres-all-20/

Fox and Time-Warner are drawing lines in the sand for this year. This could be a good opportunity for U-verse to snap eyeballs in TW area.

Knocking on May and no end in sight for the channel on other systems besides DirecTV and Cox. Ironic, isn't it.

For TW and Fox, this is a turf war. In LA, the Lakers are in a deal with a TW for a sports channel and Fox didn't make the cut. Meanwhile the fans are pawns in a war of words and broadcast rights.

MLB, just suck it. Give us the promise you made to make all games accesible to fans.

[mscelfo]

this article says that negotiations with Uverse are still ongoing but no news to report.  I "guess" that's encouraging.  http://www.foxsportssandiego.com/04/23/12/QA-on-Time-WarnerFOX-Sports-SD-deal/landing_padres.html?bl...

[jeffcoindust]

Darren Smith read aloud an e-mail that a listener had forwarded him from a TWC Customer Service rep yesterday afternoon. The e-mail basically said that they were expecting a breakthrough in negotiations with FSSD no later than 4/25. I just find it interesting that TWC reps are telling customers this kind of specific info related to their negotiations, yet the company as a whole is beating the war drums in the media.

Being a U-Verse customer, I'm not sure how I would feel about this. I guess it's encouraging that FSSD says that they are still negotiating with AT&T, but I wish they'd just get a deal done already! Also, I find it interesting that AT&T hasn't released any sort of official statement on any of this. There are three sides to every story (FSSD's, AT&T's and the truth) but all we've heard is FSSD's side. Hopefully AT&T is actually negotiating with FSSD, and the statement from Fox wasn't a lie to gain leverage with TWC...

[jeffcoindust]

Just caught FSSD in a bit of a pickle, using their own tweets against them. It's obvious they gave DirecTV a sweetheart deal and so I called them out on it.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

Interesting.  If all providers were allowed to only carry the Padres games and not all the other programming which is a duplicate of Fox Sports Prime Ticket, I think that the deals would be done!

[jeffcoindust]

Exactly. If DTV is able to defer carrying the entire programming line up, this should be an option offered to all carriers, at least until FSSD is broadcasting original programming most of the time.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

jeffcoindust wrote:

Exactly. If DTV is able to defer carrying the entire programming line up, this should be an option offered to all carriers, at least until FSSD is broadcasting original programming most of the time.

---

I had wondered why DirecT was only carrying the Padres games on that channel, but not the other programming.

[Darth Padre]

---

chris92071 wrote:
I disagree; I work in the media. It has been talked about approval. But there is no, repeat NO deal. In principal it exists but MLB has not signed off. Obviously Fox has permission and the deal exists in principal. But it is not official. John Moore's can talk about that and hs other deals but as of 6:50 pm on April 19. No deal.

---

Clearly, if this was the reason ATT hasn't signed on, they would publicly state that it's their policy not to sign up until an official deal is announced.  Try again.

[Darth Padre]

---

chris92071 wrote:

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/apr/23/fox-says-time-warner-might-not-carry-padres-all-20/

Fox and Time-Warner are drawing lines in the sand for this year. This could be a good opportunity for U-verse to snap eyeballs in TW area.

MLB, just suck it. Give us the promise you made to make all games accesible to fans.

---

Exactly, why ATT should have immediately signed on.  Obviously, they know the value of the Padres in the area to the point that they spent money to take Cox to court.

Don't you mean "ATT, just suck it. Give us the promise you made to make Padre games accesible to fans."?

[Darth Padre]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

Interesting.  If all providers were allowed to only carry the Padres games and not all the other programming which is a duplicate of Fox Sports Prime Ticket, I think that the deals would be done!

---

To be fair, in an article linked earlier on this board, FSSD claimed they gave a reduced rate to those carrying FSPT.  The carrier simply stops carrying FSPT and carries FSSD in its entirety.  6 to one, half dozen to the other.  However, if DirecTV is getting something that has not been offered to other carriers, that is a problem.

[jeffcoindust]

---

Darth Padre wrote:

---

texasguy37 wrote:

Interesting.  If all providers were allowed to only carry the Padres games and not all the other programming which is a duplicate of Fox Sports Prime Ticket, I think that the deals would be done!

---

To be fair, in an article linked earlier on this board, FSSD claimed they gave a reduced rate to those carrying FSPT.  The carrier simply stops carrying FSPT and carries FSSD in its entirety.  6 to one, half dozen to the other.  However, if DirecTV is getting something that has not been offered to other carriers, that is a problem.

---

I don't think it is 6 to one, half dozen to the other. FSSD will eventually carry completely different programming than FSPT. For example, an SDSU basketball game in lieu of a UCLA basketball game or, in September, a Padres game in lieu of a USC football game. My guess is that AT&T doesn't want to just drop FSPT because it will lose that programming, and then when customers complain, they will have to renegotiate with Fox to carry it again, probably at a higher price than what they are paying now.

If FSSD gave them the option of only carrying Padres games, like they have for DirecTV, and then were able to put in a clause to aid in negotiating for full channel pickup once FSSD had more than just Padres games, I think the deal would get done a lot faster.

[chris92071]

No, Darth, MLB should suck it up. No public release on "FSSD is the broadcast team for XX years" and we give the Padres ONE BILLION dollars While agreed in principal, this deal should be done. MLB and Selig should . AT&T, Dish and others don't know what the bottom line is. Notice that Cox is a prime sponsor? Notice that U-verse is a prime sponsor of the Los Angeles Magical Dodgers. Notice U-verse in San Diego is not on board? I cannot blame AT&T, nor TW or Dish (and the Julian cable system, too). MLB  this deal up from day one and it's nearly a month into the season. However, there's a lot of eyeballs out there in TW territory that would drop service for FSSD. I'd call AT&T at 1.800.ATT but that  computer is hideous and pathetic.

{edited to comply with guidelines}

[chris92071]

I know you had to change my post Shaun, but this is really getting pathetic about the FSSD. I don't blame U-verse nor the other carriers for not being on board as the bottom line is not known. I was at the game last night and talked to one of the Padre front office people (I'm a season ticket holder) and told them my angst with MLB, the Padres, and FSSD. He too, agreed, that MLB and Mr. Selig has fracked this up. You can sale the Dodgers in 45-days and get that storied franchise out of hot water, but a simple television deal remains cloudy in San Diego.

[mscelfo]

I'm glad that Bud Selig isn't concerned.  Of course not, why should he be?

"The club is thoroughly frustrated with the impasse but has no choice but to sit on the sidelines and wait. "  Bull.  the Padres own 20% of FSSD so they have some say in the matter.  so sick of this crap.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/18845223/ownership-limbo-awful-start-tv-oblivion-yep-situation-no...

[jeffcoindust]

Here's an article from today's North County Times that is a little more along the lines of what I was hoping Tim Sullivan would write in his column last week. The gist of the article--FSSD and TWC/AT&T need to stop whining and get a deal done, and the Padres should be infuriated that 42% of the county can't see them.

http://www.nctimes.com/sports/columnists/maffei/maffei-time-for-fox-tw-to-reach-deal-on-padres/artic...

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

"It's time for officials from Fox Sports San Diego, the Padres ---- who own 20 percent of the network ---- Time Warner Cable and satellite providers AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS and Dish Network . . "

Huh?  I think he's a bit confused.

[jeffcoindust]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

"It's time for officials from Fox Sports San Diego, the Padres ---- who own 20 percent of the network ---- Time Warner Cable and satellite providers AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS and Dish Network . . "

Huh?  I think he's a bit confused.

---

Whatever. I agree 100% with his sentiments.

[oufanindallas]

"I don't care about a 400 percent cost increase. I don't care about Fox's semantics about Time Warner not responding to "our" latest proposal."

Now that's someone who really cares for the fans.  He mentions people not being able to switch to Direct TV due to price, but he doesn't care about a 400% increase in price from other channels.  And right now it's JUST the Padres and no other San Diego team.  Where does he think the extra money is going to come from to pay for that ONE channel with ONE team is going to come from, the fans who have to have their cable bills raised to cover the cost.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

oufanindallas wrote:

"I don't care about a 400 percent cost increase. I don't care about Fox's semantics about Time Warner not responding to "our" latest proposal."

Now that's someone who really cares for the fans.  He mentions people not being able to switch to Direct TV due to price, but he doesn't care about a 400% increase in price from other channels.  And right now it's JUST the Padres and no other San Diego team.  Where does he think the extra money is going to come from to pay for that ONE channel with ONE team is going to come from, the fans who have to have their cable bills raised to cover the cost.

---

He a sportswriter and sports fan.  Like all diehard sports fans, he leads with emotion rather than facts or logic.

[jeffcoindust]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

---

oufanindallas wrote:

"I don't care about a 400 percent cost increase. I don't care about Fox's semantics about Time Warner not responding to "our" latest proposal."

Now that's someone who really cares for the fans.  He mentions people not being able to switch to Direct TV due to price, but he doesn't care about a 400% increase in price from other channels.  And right now it's JUST the Padres and no other San Diego team.  Where does he think the extra money is going to come from to pay for that ONE channel with ONE team is going to come from, the fans who have to have their cable bills raised to cover the cost.

---

He a sportswriter and sports fan.  Like all diehard sports fans, he leads with emotion rather than facts or logic.

---

I think he really hits the nail on the head with this one though:

I don't care that FSSD is promoting a "new network" filled with coverage of Los Angeles-based sports: Clippers, Ducks, UCLA and Chivas USA. That's all fine.

Until FSSD actually has contracts with teams in San Diego other than the Padres ---- San Diego State, USD, UC San Diego, Cal State San Marcos, the CIF and maybe even the Chargers ---- there really isn't a San Diego sports network. There is the Padres and programming to fill the hours when the Padres aren't on.

The reason I like this article so much is that he acknowledges the gripes that both sides have with eachother and says "So what? Put the fans first". It was these kind of articles from the local media that got the deal done between TWC and the Knicks during the Linsanity craze, and it's going to be these type of articles that ultimately get a deal done between FSSD and the rest of the TV providers here in SD. I hope the UT catches on and publishes something similar in the upcoming days.

[CTEL08]

i' m not an insider or anything, but i can see why MLB hasnt gotten past the agreement in prinicple phase, and not put the official stamp on the FSSD deal. they're probably not interested in a repeat of the cox situation again, where access to the games was  limited.

one of the principles is most likely that FSSD be widely available b4 its gets official approval. if FSSD plays cant or wont come to an agreement with providers within a certain timeframe, well then the prinicples werent met and the agreement would be no mas and move on to "Plan B"

again, not saying thats how it is at all, just a common sense view of what could be going on. 

[reltips]

Is there any update on the Padres and U-Verse?

{post merged}