Who's to blame? NFLN or the cable companies?

[cpk1994]

It doesnt even matter what we're blaming them for. Charter cable is the worst company I've ever had to deal with.

I have had no problem with Charter and have been with them for over 10 years, so I guess its case by case on that.

That said, there should be a choice for both, becuase they are both acting like children. Charter had the NFLN on the sports tier for one year a couple of years ago and there wasn't a problem and Charter didn't "jack up" the price as many say they will do.

[Jerry Tagge]

Cable companies want to run local commercials. Nothing wrong with that.

[BooHoo]

I have Dish so I get all the NFLN games. It would be good if they settle this issue this year.

[Zool]

It doesnt even matter what we're blaming them for. Charter cable is the worst company I've ever had to deal with.

I have had no problem with Charter and have been with them for over 10 years, so I guess its case by case on that.

That said, there should be a choice for both, becuase they are both acting like children. Charter had the NFLN on the sports tier for one year a couple of years ago and there wasn't a problem and Charter didn't "jack up" the price as many say they will do.

My cable bill has climbed by $10minimum every year for 4 years in a row. They are to my neighborhood at least monthly fixing a line issue that apparently is recurring. I've not had good luck.

[cpk1994]

How many home jewelry shopping channels do you have??

I've got at least a half dozen Spanish Language channels and 2 Oriental channels where the language varies.

A sports tier group of channels means having to buy a bunch of sports channels that combined do not have the popularity of the NFL. How does the golf channel escape being in the tier?

I would like a la carte channel selection. I only watch 12 regularly and up to 20 on occaision. Why should I have to pay for Lifetime, Food Network, and BET????

I blame cable for forcing "packages" on people. With today's computing capacities they can handle a la carte channel selection.

Oh really, then why haven't DirectTV and Dish started al a carte? Can't they handle it too? I guess its just easier to blame something you hate.

[The Leaper]

I've got at least a half dozen Spanish Language channels and 2 Oriental channels where the language varies.

Check those channels out...you might not understand a word they are saying, but they probably have some hot babes wearing next to nothing getting caught in a rainstorm while wearing white cotton outfits.

[RashanGary]

I want the NFLN to get on basic cable because then I'll never have a reason to turn on ESPN again and with the NFLN on basic cable, many people who might not have paid for the sports tier might be lured in to their NFL channel out of curiousity and bam, a new fan is born.


I want the NFL to flourish and getting it's own network broadcast across the entire nation would give them the ability to cut the other networks out of the prime time loop (which includes sinking ESPN on some level)

[digitaldean]

Both the cable and satellite firms can do an ala carte deal if they WANTED too.

I too don't want EWTN, Lifetime, QVC, ShopNBC, Oxygen, CourtTV, etc.

I realize there's expense involved for all the hardware costs for broadband and CATV access, but the cable companies have wonderful little monopoly here in WI.

Until that gets broken up and there is TRUE competition, then we are going to be stuck with the same old crap.

If I could "accidentally" cut down the tree across the street that's blocking my dish's reception, I'd cut the cable for TV and go with DISH.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Re: Who's to blame? NFLN or the cable companies?

I think we should all be rooting for the NFLN because it gives us what we want for cheaper. Both sides have a case, but the NFL's interest is closer to mine, so I'm siding with them.

The NFL Network thinks you should get to watch the games for free, they should extract high fees from cable, and the cable companis should just make-up their losses some other way.

Guess that sounds appealing.

[Bretsky]

Re: Who's to blame? NFLN or the cable companies?

I think we should all be rooting for the NFLN because it gives us what we want for cheaper. Both sides have a case, but the NFL's interest is closer to mine, so I'm siding with them.

The NFL Network thinks you should get to watch the games for free, they should extract high fees from cable, and the cable companis should just make-up their losses some other way.

Guess that sounds appealing.

.70 cents per customer; to me that is a nice deal the NFL is offering those pathetic excuse for cablecrap companies

[Partial]

Why do you feel that way Bretsky when other channels get 5 to 10 cents for a superior product?!?

[Bretsky]

Why do you feel that way Bretsky when other channels get 5 to 10 cents for a superior product?!?

Can you give me some examples ? I don't watch 80% of the crap offered by cable. I'm curious as to what product you are thinking of

[Partial]

I'm not sure of the exact cable prices but my understanding is most channels like CNN or MTV or Comedy Central are very inexpensive (10-20 cents) where as ESPN and other greedy networks know they will have viewers so they charge the big bucks (I believe ESPN is like 3 bucks or so). I blame both parties for being greedy. If the NFL network was say 30 cents cheaper or so it'd be on basic cable.

[RashanGary]

$0.70 seems pretty cheap compared to $3.00


What bothers me is that the cable companies want me to pay $6.00 to get only one channel that I really want, NFLN.

[MJZiggy]

If ESPN is $3 and NFLN is .70. then maybe they should put ESPN on the sports tier instead...