I hate you NFLN!!! - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Game Commentary, Cheering & Venting

I hate you NFLN!!!

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby dgan » Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:20 pm

AdvRider wrote:
BGbootha wrote:well there you go....how about we move those games to ESPN.....ohhh wait, ESPN is not part of basic cable where I live, in fact my grandfather had to purchase a larger cable package when monday night football moved to ESPN. But that economic 'extortion' is OK with you.


The NFL Network is available in about 40 million homes.

ESPN is available in about 92 million homes.

According to the NFL itself. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9879136

Let me know if you need assistance doing the math.


For someone with 13 posts, you sure have no problem logging in and insulting someone you don't even know on a board you have not contributed to. For this reason alone, you discredit your own argument.

The fact is that the NFL Network WANTS the cable companies to carry it. They want the fans to see it. It is the cable companies like mine who won't pony up the dough - THEY are the ones that are greedy.

My cable company has been making money hand over fist, has an astronomical profit margin, is a monopoly in the area, makes me pay for tons of channels I don't watch, but when something comes along that is going to be 10 times more popular than the other crap they are forcing down my throats, they balk because NFL Network is "asking too much". HUH? They know it is popular, will bring in more viewers, more subscribers, and more advertising (including local!) and are simply asking for what they think they're worth.

Tell me, when you apply for a job, do you accept 60% of what you think your worth just so that you don't appear greedy? No. You ask for what you think you're worth, and the employer better come close or you'll take your 'product' elsewhere. That's what the NFL Network is doing. They know how much value they will bring to the cable companies, and they want to be compensated for it -- not just have the cable companies pocket a ton more revenue while paying a discounted price for the product bringing it in. So the cable companies have to decide if they are willing to lose thousands of customers or hand over the extra jack to keep their customers happy. It's called "supply and demand" and "competing marketplace".

Yes, that is capitalism. If you don't like it, move to a socialistic country and live happily ever after not bitching at me. Of course, seeing you live in San Fran, I shouldn't be surprised that you despise capitalism.

Log on, post a handful of insulting remarks about a respected member of this forum, don't back up your argument with anything but spite, and then declare anyone wrong who disagrees with you. Yeah. Excellent plan.
Image
dgan
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Eagle Eye
Posts: 2941
Joined: 19 Aug 2006
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The frozen tundra of Lambeau Field

Postby Munboy » Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:27 pm

AdvRider wrote:
BGbootha wrote:OK i will talk a little slower and use smaller words.

1. It is not the NFL's fault or NFL networks fault. It is yours, I mean your 'friends' cable providers fault. They are the ones not providing your 'friends' with NFLNetwork.

2. It is not like they took this game away from you. If the NFL network wasn't carrying the game.....guess what....YOU STILL WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO WATCH IT. Because it would still NOT be on.

You logic is well simply non-existant. It simply boils down to a jealous girlfriend trying to kill an exboyfriend "If I can't have him no one will!!!"

You are right, the fact it is only $4 to me doesn't matter if you would have to pay to switch cable providers. But one more time, lets say you get your little petitions signed and somehow get NFL network to drop these games. Then guess what you are doing on Thursday night.........NOTHING yet again.


Your logic (rather the utter lack thereof) perplexes me.

Don’t get me wrong. I have no problem with NFL Network per se – only with the NFL’s decision to air games on it. They can air talk shows and highlight reels and classic games and coaches’ news conferences all they want and that’s cool and if people want to pay for that kind of gravy via digital cable or satellite they will.

NFL fans should NOT have to pay for the meat – the games themselves.

If you think they should then you’re … well, I guess you think economic extortion and brutal bare-knuckle capitalism at the expense of the ordinary consumer are good things. Is that right?

How about the Super Bowl as a pay per view event? Your pied piper NFL Network is leading us towards that slippery slope.

As for as a Thursday nite game not being broadcast at all if not broadcast on NFL Network – say what? Huh? Put the game on ESPN! Put it on Fox! I’m saying this from a big picture perspective without heed to the labyrinth of NFL broadcasting rules & regs, which is all BS driven by one factor – MONEY.

Let everyone enjoy the game – the rich, the poor, the fanatic, and your ex-girlfriend.



Um...research dude. The NFL wants cable companies to carry the NFLN on their basic package so people don't have to pay extra. Its greedy cable companies who want extra money from their customers to get the channel. It's the cable companies who are greedy, not the NFL. Get it right before you start argueing with people, ok? ;-D
Image
Feel small yet?
Munboy
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1934
Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby BGbootha » Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:06 am

Thanks for the back-up boys.
Image
BGbootha
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 3830
Joined: 18 Feb 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Teaching is the Greatest Job in the World!!! (during the Summer)

Postby AdvRider » Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:08 pm

dgan wrote:
AdvRider wrote:
BGbootha wrote:well there you go....how about we move those games to ESPN.....ohhh wait, ESPN is not part of basic cable where I live, in fact my grandfather had to purchase a larger cable package when monday night football moved to ESPN. But that economic 'extortion' is OK with you.


The NFL Network is available in about 40 million homes.

ESPN is available in about 92 million homes.

According to the NFL itself. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9879136

Let me know if you need assistance doing the math.


For someone with 13 posts, you sure have no problem logging in and insulting someone you don't even know on a board you have not contributed to. For this reason alone, you discredit your own argument.

The fact is that the NFL Network WANTS the cable companies to carry it. They want the fans to see it. It is the cable companies like mine who won't pony up the dough - THEY are the ones that are greedy.

My cable company has been making money hand over fist, has an astronomical profit margin, is a monopoly in the area, makes me pay for tons of channels I don't watch, but when something comes along that is going to be 10 times more popular than the other crap they are forcing down my throats, they balk because NFL Network is "asking too much". HUH? They know it is popular, will bring in more viewers, more subscribers, and more advertising (including local!) and are simply asking for what they think they're worth.

Tell me, when you apply for a job, do you accept 60% of what you think your worth just so that you don't appear greedy? No. You ask for what you think you're worth, and the employer better come close or you'll take your 'product' elsewhere. That's what the NFL Network is doing. They know how much value they will bring to the cable companies, and they want to be compensated for it -- not just have the cable companies pocket a ton more revenue while paying a discounted price for the product bringing it in. So the cable companies have to decide if they are willing to lose thousands of customers or hand over the extra jack to keep their customers happy. It's called "supply and demand" and "competing marketplace".

Yes, that is capitalism. If you don't like it, move to a socialistic country and live happily ever after not bitching at me. Of course, seeing you live in San Fran, I shouldn't be surprised that you despise capitalism.

Log on, post a handful of insulting remarks about a respected member of this forum, don't back up your argument with anything but spite, and then declare anyone wrong who disagrees with you. Yeah. Excellent plan.


Wow. You boys really have this bass ackwards.

Number one, I didn’t start this dust-up. I posted an observation critical of NFLN and got slapped up side the head by a hostile post condemning my viewpoint as “ridiculous.” I don’t pick fights with individuals. But I don’t back down from them, either.

Number two, the cable companies didn’t start the battle over NFLN. The NFL did. Why did the NFL launch NFL Network in the first place? The answer, obviously, is to make more money.

And of course the NFL WANTS cable companies to carry the NFL Network. The NFL also requires that cable companies pay for the right to do so. Naturally, a cable company is going to pass those costs along to the consumer.

And naturally a cable company is going to exploit the opportunity to grow its own profits. If NFLN costs a cable company $1, they’re going to charge the fan $1.25.

The NFL’s villanizing of cable companies as the culprits in this mess is utterly specious. NFL execs knew, or should have foreseen if they took economics 101, that the middleman (the cable company) was going to take the biggest cut of the pie that he can. From the fans. Duh.

I’m not at all defending cable companies. This is not a bad guy/good guy debate. But it should surprise nor outrage no one that cable companies are fighting to maximize their revenues from this deal.

What SHOULD outrage everyone, IMHO, is the NFL’s cynical profiteering by in effect charging fans to view what had for decades been essentially “free” broadcast of games. It’s a manipulative and divisive gouging of a loyal fan base -- IMHO.

Maybe I’m an idealist, but I like to think that organizations such as the NFL operating in a high profile arena in part for the public good (through entertainment, escape from everyday concerns, and camaraderie and good-natured competitiveness among fans, all of which contribute to the well-being of society) ought to temper its instinct to maximize profitability.

They should share the wealth and comport themselves in a spirit of noblesse oblige. The public good that NFL provided in the wake of 9/11 is long, loooooong forgotten… Now you might argue that cable companies bear the same social responsibility. It would be nice if they did, but I don’t think that’s a reasonable expectation.

On the other hand, the contribution that public sport makes to a healthy society dates back at least to ancient Greece. It exerts a unique and profound influence on public well-being, and those in charge of it should recognize that.

I mean, if I was the head of the NFL, I would say, Boys, the NFL Network is a bad idea. We’re already making millions and millions of dollars a year. It’s gonna cost Joe Six-Pack another $## a year to see the games. Joe’s been good to us for decades. Scrap it.

Now if the NFL was losing money and needed a new revenue stream, I could see it. But it’s not. The NFL is a money-making juggernaut, and it probably will continue to be so for many years to come.

And I AM a capitalist, BTW. Your snide comment about San Francisco is ignorant and petty. What I resent, strongly, is companies that gouge customers with little gimmicks and gotchas. Like the wireless providers that deliberately complicate their message-retrieval systems with unnecessarily lengthy recorded instructions to drive up the number of minutes billable to the cell phone user. Like broadcasting games on NFLN, it’s a stab in the back.

Again with the idealism – if you wouldn’t do something to your mother or father or brother or sister, then don’t do it to your customer or the guy down the street. Conduct your business honestly and forthrightly and make a comfortable profit without being greedy and you will be happier and more fulfilled when your life is winding down.

What I would like explained by NFL Network apologists is this – how does broadcasting games on NFLN at all benefit the fan? That aspect has been conspicuously absent from your posts.

What mystifies me is why an ordinary fan would ever back the NFL in this business of broadcasting games on NFL Network -- when clearly it’s going to cost him or her and everyone else more money, and deprive people of the opportunity to view games.
AdvRider
Cheerleader
Cheerleader

User avatar

Posts: 16
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: San Francisco

Postby Munboy » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:36 pm

AdvRider wrote:What SHOULD outrage everyone, IMHO, is the NFL’s cynical profiteering by in effect charging fans to view what had for decades been essentially “free” broadcast of games. It’s a manipulative and divisive gouging of a loyal fan base -- IMHO.



AGAIN, the NFL does NOT want to charge fans extra. The NFL wants cable companies to put the NFLN in their BASIC package. It is the cable companies who want to charge extra for it but putting it in special "sports" packages along with other crap that most peolpe don't want like golf channel. If cable companies did that, it wouldn't be any different than games on ESPN which has been around for awhile. You have to pay for ESPN, don't you? When you send the cable company a check, you're paying for ESPN. Do you use bunny ears to get your local channels? I doubt it, so when you send your cable company a check, you're pay for locals...which means you've probably been paying for the "free" brodcasts you were talking about. The NFL network just wants the NFLN stuck in that package that you already PAY for. The cable companies see that they can milk more money out of you because of the games on the NFLN, so that's the REAL problem.


And trust me, I'm not the "average" fan when it comes to this. My wife works in the tv business and gets this kind of information. Anyways, you can believe what you want to...a long with everyone else who "hates the nfln", but you're anger and hate is directed in the wrong direction. ;-D
Image
Feel small yet?
Munboy
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1934
Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby AdvRider » Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:20 pm

Munboy wrote:
AdvRider wrote:What SHOULD outrage everyone, IMHO, is the NFL’s cynical profiteering by in effect charging fans to view what had for decades been essentially “free” broadcast of games. It’s a manipulative and divisive gouging of a loyal fan base -- IMHO.



AGAIN, the NFL does NOT want to charge fans extra. The NFL wants cable companies to put the NFLN in their BASIC package. It is the cable companies who want to charge extra for it but putting it in special "sports" packages along with other crap that most peolpe don't want like golf channel. If cable companies did that, it wouldn't be any different than games on ESPN which has been around for awhile. You have to pay for ESPN, don't you? When you send the cable company a check, you're paying for ESPN. Do you use bunny ears to get your local channels? I doubt it, so when you send your cable company a check, you're pay for locals...which means you've probably been paying for the "free" brodcasts you were talking about. The NFL network just wants the NFLN stuck in that package that you already PAY for. The cable companies see that they can milk more money out of you because of the games on the NFLN, so that's the REAL problem.


And trust me, I'm not the "average" fan when it comes to this. My wife works in the tv business and gets this kind of information. Anyways, you can believe what you want to...a long with everyone else who "hates the nfln", but you're anger and hate is directed in the wrong direction. ;-D


So the “NFL does not want to charge the fans extra.” That’s a convenient claim for the NFL to make. It’s also perfectly disingenuous.

The NFL requires cable companies pay for NFL Network.

The NFL knew full well what the subsequent cause and effect would be -- cable companies would pass along that cost to the fans.

Which is exactly what is happening.

What, you think the NFL really expected the cable companies to just offer NFLN as part of basic cable?

Without cable companies recouping their costs from fans? While forsaking the opportunity to profit by bundling an attractive offering into a higher priced tiered offering at another $35 or whatever a month?

Believe me, the economic cause and effect triggered by broadcasting games on NFL Network – that the fan would ultimately pay more -- was perfectly well understood by every NFL exec involved in that decision.

Which is why it sucks.
AdvRider
Cheerleader
Cheerleader

User avatar

Posts: 16
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: San Francisco

Postby portisfan24 » Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:33 pm

Are you serious? Let me see if I can reiterate the point that three previous posters have made... IF IT WASN'T ON NFL NETWORK, IT WOULD NOT BE ON AT ALL. How many games do you get on Sunday's with basic cable? Maybe 4 if both CBS and Fox run doubleheaders. Why aren't you complaining about all those other games you can't see?
Image
portisfan24
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6196
Joined: 4 May 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Canada

Postby BGbootha » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:39 pm

Well boys I give up.....My granddaddy used to tell me "Never argue with an __________, you just end up on thier level, and they will beat you with experience."
Image
BGbootha
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 3830
Joined: 18 Feb 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Teaching is the Greatest Job in the World!!! (during the Summer)

Postby Munboy » Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:47 pm

AdvRider wrote:The NFL requires cable companies pay for NFL Network.



Yeah, because the NFLN is the very first cable network to charge cable companies to carry it. :-?


Look, plain and simple. Cable companies carry the NFLN on their basic package WHICH IS WHAT THE NFL WANTS, you pay absolutely nothing extra. Cable companies carry the NFLN on a special sports package, WHICH IS WHAT THE NFL DOES NOT WANT, you pay extra. So, who's to blame for this mess? The NFL for sticking up for fans and wanting them to not pay extra for the NFLN or cable companies who want extra money to provide the NFLN for you? If the NFL gets what they want, you get the NFLN for no extra cost. If cable companies get what they want, you get the NFLN....for a little extra $$$ of course. :-b


But yeah, I'm with BGbootha. I'm done banging my head against a brick wall. :-D
Image
Feel small yet?
Munboy
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1934
Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Metroid » Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:41 pm

Munboy wrote:I'm done banging my head against a brick wall. :-D


Yeah that doesnt feel good at all. :-B

I dont give a crap why I cant see the games, I just dont like that I cant. It blows that I have to get satalite TV to get NFLN, I understand why that is but I dont have to like it. :-?

Screw the cable providers, screw NFLN, screw me for not having satalite. :-b
Image
Metroid
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicCafe RankerGraphics ExpertEagle Eye
Posts: 22544
Joined: 9 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Bringing the funk in P-Town!

PreviousNext

Return to Game Commentary, Cheering & Venting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 5:26 hours
(and 42 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact