Big Ten Network on DISH Network!

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:08 pm

SWEEEEEEET!

http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.s ... greem.html

Sorry if this was posted before, but I"M FREAKING PUMPED!!!!

bgmaggot00 · Post by **bgmaggot00** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:48 pm

This saves me about $20 in wings and drinks from BW3's this weekend!

bobio · Post by **bobio** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:01 pm

Didn't know about this when I signed up for Dish yesterday. unfortunately, they aren't hooking me up until Monday.

UK Peregrine · Post by **UK Peregrine** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:37 pm

Thanks for the info TG. Pretty pumped about this as well.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:46 pm

UK Peregrine wrote:Thanks for the info TG. Pretty pumped about this as well.

Gladly!!! I'm glad my decision to go with Dish Network paid off so soon (and not NEXT week!). Perhaps I can even catch a replay of the Minnesota game before the weekend gets here.

Now if we can just get the Big East to start a network before Oct. 8....

bgbill · Post by **bgbill** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:21 pm

The article didn't mention BG at MSU.

EDIT: found it.....channel 440

Bleeding Orange · Post by **Bleeding Orange** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:24 pm

After watching the non-game programming and the actual game coverage that the BTN provides last weekend, I honestly don't know why anyone would be willing to pay anything but monopoly money for that channel. I mean, in all seriousness, I have seen better production and talent on Cable Access. The only thing different between the two is somewhat shinier graphics.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:46 am

Bleeding Orange wrote:After watching the non-game programming and the actual game coverage that the BTN provides last weekend, I honestly don't know why anyone would be willing to pay anything but monopoly money for that channel.

Because I live in Indianapolis and have to work Saturday. Dick.

Bleeding Orange · Post by **Bleeding Orange** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:06 am

TG1996 wrote:
Bleeding Orange wrote:After watching the non-game programming and the actual game coverage that the BTN provides last weekend, I honestly don't know why anyone would be willing to pay anything but monopoly money for that channel.
Because I live in Indianapolis and have to work Saturday. Dick.

Well, there's always that, I suppose.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I in no way fault TW or any other cable company for the current "holdout." In fact, outside of my desire to see a couple of BG games this year, I am glad that TW is standing up to these idiots and not forcing me to contribute to the regional monopoly that is the Big 11 by simply subscribing to basic cable. As far as I am concerned, this is blackmail on the part of the Big 11. Nothing more, nothing less.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:38 am

I think cable TV as a whole is an increasing amount of a bullshit scam, personally. They're going to squabble of a dollar a subscriber for this (I'm sure it's much deeper, but that's the theme I keep seeing.), yet cable bills are already stupid high and full of 8 home shopping channels, 4 channels of the mom from Family Ties struggling with menopause, and enough "news" channels to choke a gaggle of horses.

Dick.

footballguy51 · Post by **footballguy51** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:29 am

I still think we should be allowed to pick the channels we want for cable. I mean, I don't watch the Home Shopping Network, or that church channel on 32, or Univision. They could drop one of those channels and pick up BTN. Hey, they could even drop all 3, along with the Style channel, and pick up BTN. Of course, I would expect a credit on my bill for at least a dollar or two since we're losing channels.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:42 am

TG1996 wrote:I think cable TV as a whole is an increasing amount of a bullshit scam, personally. They're going to squabble of a dollar a subscriber for this (I'm sure it's much deeper, but that's the theme I keep seeing.),

That's it. The Big Ten network wants $1.12 per subscriber per month within the conference footprint, which is a ton of money.

A birdie tells me Time Warner got ESPN-U for about 12 cents per subscriber per month.

Is the Big Ten network really worth 900 percent more than ESPN-U?

Redwingtom · Post by **Redwingtom** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:06 am

Do you guys know if you need to have the multi-sports pack to get Channel 440? Or is it in our basic local FSN coverage?

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 9:18 am

Schadenfreude wrote:
TG1996 wrote:I think cable TV as a whole is an increasing amount of a bullshit scam, personally. They're going to squabble of a dollar a subscriber for this (I'm sure it's much deeper, but that's the theme I keep seeing.),
That's it. The Big Ten network wants $1.12 per subscriber per month within the conference footprint, which is a ton of money.

A birdie tells me Time Warner got ESPN-U for about 12 cents per subscriber per month.

Is the Big Ten network really worth 900 percent more than ESPN-U?

To the Big Ten footprint of their market I would say it's undoubtedly 900% more valuable than ESPN-U. All of those UM, OSU, MSU, etc fans that can no longer watch their team on basic cable are going to switch providers. I think this season we didn't see it because most people just assumed the cable company would eventually pick it up. They haven't and I'm betting that in the next year Time Warner loses a huge chunk of sports fan viewers who want BTN.

Personally I wish we could get a la carte programming, but in the end I don't think my (or many of us on this website) would see their bills go down much. It's my understanding that these sports channels (specifically ESPN & ESPN2, etc) are by quite a large margin the most expensive channels that your cable company pays for. Right now the little old ladies who just watch game show channel are helping subsidize our viewing of ESPN. I think I saw somewhere that ESPN alone was $3/month for each person who gets the channel. If you moved to a la carte type pricing you can bet that would be at least $5, probably more. And that's just one channel.

I don't deny that a la carte pricing would be great for a lot of people, but I think most of us sports fans that want all the various ESPN, Fox sports, etc, would end up paying just as much if not more than we do now.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 9:55 am

This is absolutely fantastic news.