Cont'd - NHL makes 12-year/$5.2 billion Canadian TV deal w/ Sportsnet, CBC, TSN out

[joelef]

Rogers did nothing wrong here, and the NHL didn't do anything wrong either. The CBC, which is a crown corporation funded and run by the government of Canada just gave away their cash cow to a private enterprise to make a profit off of with no fiscal benefits to them at all.

In zero worlds does it make sense for a public entity to make revenue for a private enterprise. This is not allowed and everyone is mum.

and if rogers didnt there probably be no HNIC on CBC.

 

[Tough Guy]

If you think CBC is free, then you are not a Canadian tax payer. Try again.

If you want to play that silly game, then CBC was $0.0000000004 cents per year of my tax dollars compared to hundreds of dollars per year for Robbers. Canaidna fans better all get second jobs or take out another mortgage on their houses, because they are in for one hell of a gauging.

CBC is free to watch. No Rob Ford style argument will change that fact.

 

[Habsawce]

then Blame TSN for not stepping up to the plate.

They weren't even given an opporunity to field an offer. This was done in a couple days behind closed doors and Bell not a chance to counter or even make a formal offer.

 

[joelef]

I actually think it will be bad for the NHL in the long run as well.

Nobody thought baseball would be an afterthought in the US and that's exactly what it's become. This deal takes hockey away from the unwashed masses for the first time in Canadian history.

It's the beginning of the end. The NHL just put a paywall up between itself and its Canadian fans. This is bad. Real bad.

then get mad at TSN for not stepping up to the plate and outbidding them.

 

[New Liskeard]

If you think Rogers main prerogative isn't to make as money as possible and control the market I have a bridge to sell you.

Of course they want to make money, as do most businesses and the NHL in this case as well. difference being, suggesting Rogers will charge ridiculous prices because they have all the rights, is nonsense and completely counterproductive. You do know you can still make money and not screw people and overcharge them right? Do you realize how much exposure and money Rogers can make on the advertising alone? Problem is, if they overcharge and no one buys, they cant make any money.

 

[Slow Hands]

If you think CBC is free, then you are not a Canadian tax payer. Try again.

Due to this deal, in a few years consumers who don't pay for cable or digital access to hockey won't have HD CBC games available to them over the air via satellite. I think that's what he was referring to when he said free.

 

[Tough Guy]

then Blame TSN for not stepping up to the plate.

That doesn't make a lick of sense. Why would you blame a company for being outbid on a sports property?

Nobody is blaming anyone. What happened today is absolutely terrible for Canadian hockey fans.

 

[hawksfan79]

then Blame TSN for not stepping up to the plate.

Why would I blame TSN? From what I understand (I'm not Canadian and live in the States, but I've been following this story fairly closely), TSN is owned by a private company, and they probably did a cost analysis on what they could bid and still be profitable. Did Sportsnet and their owners overbid to the point where it became more advantageous for the NHL to take the cash and run, or did TSN and it's owners severely underbid? My instincts tell me it's the former rather than the latter, but I could be wrong. As a consumer, it should concern you at least a little bit of having one company own all parts of the process.....just my two cents.

 

[Tough Guy]

then get mad at TSN for not stepping up to the plate and outbidding them.

Why should I "get mad" at anyone?

 

[New Liskeard]

If you want to play that silly game, then CBC was $0.0000000004 cents per year of my tax dollars compared to hundreds of dollars per year for Robbers. Canaidna fans better all get second jobs or take out another mortgage on their houses, because they are in for one hell of a gauging.

CBC is free to watch. No Rob Ford style argument will change that fact.

If handled properly, Canadians will now have so much more access to hockey than ever before, the NHL has never been stronger than after this deal today, and the cap and small market teams have benefited from this. Your bias towards Rogers is clear (you may want to check your spelling). And you are wrong yet again, CBC is not wrong and is supported by Canadian tax dollars. Deal with the facts.

 

[Slow Hands]

Of course they want to make money, as do most businesses and the NHL in this case as well. difference being, suggesting Rogers will charge ridiculous prices because they have all the rights, is nonsense and completely counterproductive. You do know you can still make money and not screw people and overcharge them right? Do you realize how much exposure and money Rogers can make on the advertising alone? Problem is, if they overcharge and no one buys, they cant make any money.

There are a few things wrong with your statement:

First of all, look at Rogers' approach to wireless telecommunications in Canada. Canada has among the highest rates in the developed world when it comes to wireless telecommunications, and Rogers is a part of this. They could easily reduce the costs of their wireless rates plans while continuing to make a profit, and yet they don't.

Second of all, Rogers is banking on Canadians being hockey mad enough to be willing to pay whatever they decide to charge. The image they posted giving an example of a typical Saturday night is good and all, except when you realize that most basic cable packages don't include sports channels, meaning that people will be required to pay more in order to have full access to the full slate of games.

 

[Vegeta]

There are a few things wrong with your statement:

First of all, look at Rogers' approach to wireless telecommunications in Canada. Canada has among the highest rates in the developed world when it comes to wireless telecommunications, and Rogers is a part of this. They could easily reduce the costs of their wireless rates plans while continuing to make a profit, and yet they don't.

Second of all, Rogers is banking on Canadians being hockey mad enough to be willing to pay whatever they decide to charge. The image they posted giving an example of a typical Saturday night is good and all, except when you realize that most basic cable packages don't include sports channels, meaning that people will be required to pay more in order to have full access to the full slate of games.

Bingo. Rogers business history allows me to not give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[SomeSortOfHockey]

No, the NHL is to blame. Like someone said they clearly believe the Canadian market is shock resistant and under monetized. This is why they went for the monopoly, the NHL believes it can get away with it. As for Rogers, they are here to make as much money in over the next 12 years as possible, what happens after that is not their concern. Of course the deal is a high one, a monopoly is significantly more profitable because you have the market cornered, on the other hand it is bad for the product and bad for innovation. But like I said the NHL thinks Canadian fans can take the abuse, and hence they made this deal.

 

[joelef]

No, the NHL is to blame. Like someone said they clearly believe the Canadian market is shock resistant and under monetized. This is why they went for the monopoly, the NHL believes it can get away with it. As for Rogers, they are here to make as much money in over the next 12 years as possible, what happens after that is not their concern. Of course the deal is a high one, a monopoly is significantly more profitable because you have the market cornered, on the other hand it is bad for the product and bad for innovation. But like I said the NHL thinks Canadian fans can take the abuse, and hence they made this deal.

The NHL put there tv rights up to the highest bidder and rogers was willing to pay more then anybody else. are you saying the NHL shouldnt try to bid for tv contracts?

 

[Vegeta]

No, the NHL is to blame. Like someone said they clearly believe the Canadian market is shock resistant and under monetized. This is why they went for the monopoly, the NHL believes it can get away with it. As for Rogers, they are here to make as much money in over the next 12 years as possible, what happens after that is not their concern. Of course the deal is a high one, a monopoly is significantly more profitable because you have the market cornered, on the other hand it is bad for the product and bad for innovation. But like I said the NHL thinks Canadian fans can take the abuse, and hence they made this deal.

I think the NHL will find out that the Canadian market is more fair weathered then they'd like to admit. I have a hunch that the average Canadian is willing to cut back their hockey consumption down to the 2 games a week on HNIC on saturday.

 

[SomeSortOfHockey]

then get mad at TSN for not stepping up to the plate and outbidding them.

This deal makes it clear that TSN was never in the running because they are not a content provider nor a ISP. The NHL felt that Canadian fans can be cornered and squeezed and decided to hand out a monopoly to someone who could do just that. Rogers is basically the only player that is ready to do this.

 

[karnige]

I doubt that with Scott Moore former president of CBC Sports in charge.

you think so huh? get ready for overpriced channels and price hikes every year so they can pay this insane contract with the NHL

 

[hawksfan79]

I think the NHL will find out that the Canadian market is more fair weathered then they'd like to admit. I have a hunch that the average Canadian is willing to cut back their hockey consumption down to the 2 games a week on HNIC on saturday.

That's the key, and to use not a totally analogous situation, but somewhat similar, Directv's monopoly on NFL Sunday Ticket here in the US, you would think now they could charge even more for this service. They've actually been cutting the price of Sunday Ticket in recent years, and even including it for free for new subscribers. There is a point where consumers draw the line...I suspect we might see that in the NHL if Rogers goes out of control.

 

[New Liskeard]

There are a few things wrong with your statement:

First of all, look at Rogers' approach to wireless telecommunications in Canada. Canada has among the highest rates in the developed world when it comes to wireless telecommunications, and Rogers is a part of this. They could easily reduce the costs of their wireless rates plans while continuing to make a profit, and yet they don't.

Second of all, Rogers is banking on Canadians being hockey mad enough to be willing to pay whatever they decide to charge. The image they posted giving an example of a typical Saturday night is good and all, except when you realize that most basic cable packages don't include sports channels, meaning that people will be required to pay more in order to have full access to the full slate of games.

There is some incorrect statements in your post. Where does it say that Rogers is banking on Canadians whatever they decide? Do you have anything tangible to support that claim? Also, it has been shown that some hockey will be played on standard basic channels with rogers. So what you are saying is also incorrect. There is an assumption Rogers will overcharge due to exclusivity. I'd like to see that happen first before I start crying foul as many already here are suggesting without any tangible evidence.

 

[joelef]

This deal makes it clear that TSN was never in the running because they are not a content provider nor a ISP. The NHL felt that Canadian fans can be cornered and squeezed and decided to hand out a monopoly to someone who could do just that. Rogers is basically the only player that is ready to do this.

the NHL wasnt and shouldnt be concerned if that company is a "monopoly"(the government is the real monopoly) there concerned with who will pay the most for there tv rights and rogers did that.

 

[karnige]

then get mad at TSN for not stepping up to the plate and outbidding them.

Bell said they came in with a fair bid and rogers went to town in the end. Why would Bell match this contract. its insane. In fact Bell has said they expect Rogers to sell some of their rights to TSN to broadcast because the amount of cash they have to pay is extremely high and will want to cut costs. The prices to air all these games and pay for broadcasters and the whole shabang is so expensive. I think Rogers wanted it do bad they might regret it

 

[joelef]

Bell said they came in with a fair bid and rogers went to town in the end. Why would Bell match this contract. its insane

Because its called bidding and competition. Sports go with whatever channel is the highest bidder.

 

[New Liskeard]

That's the key, and to use not a totally analogous situation, but somewhat similar, Directv's monopoly on NFL Sunday Ticket here in the US, you would think now they could charge even more for this service. They've actually been cutting the price of Sunday Ticket in recent years, and even including it for free for new subscribers. There is a point where consumers draw the line...I suspect we might see that in the NHL if Rogers goes out of control.

And there it is. To think that Bettman and company would not give this any consideration when giving away the NHL rights, and signed the biggest TV deal in the history of the NHL in both term and monies, with no consideration that the main distributor will monopolize the product and stagnate the growth. Seriously.....

 

[Fenway]

You are assuming Bell was the NHL's first choice, perhaps Rogers was.

I think Bettman made it clear to the bidders he wanted ONE partner in Canada - as he did in the US.

CFTO (Channel 9) in Toronto is said to be the most profitable TV station in North America. They didn't need the NHL and Bell would not tamper with their formula.

Was Bell aware that CBC would solve the OTA problem? That is unclear but it appears Bell just crunched the numbers and walked.

Very unlikely Rogers is able to purchase CBC stations due to CRTC regs.

BUT - If Rodgers says they would allow CBC to produce a national news show it might fly.

 

[joelef]

If rogers was a monopoly like everyone saying they wouldve low balled them.