OT: YouTube TV dropping regional Fix sports networks
Well, this seems less than ideal for cord-cutting sports fans...
https://twitter.com/YouTubeTV/status/1233086055525634048?s=19
Change takes effect Saturday.
February 27th, 2020 at 1:51 PM ^
*FOX
$!&#@ Huel!
February 27th, 2020 at 2:36 PM ^
^^^^^^
+1 for profane Huel comment.
+1 really doesn't matter as points have worked for one day in the last 3-4 months....
$!&#@ Huel!
GO BLUE ??
Beat dem badgers!!
February 27th, 2020 at 2:48 PM ^
I wanna lock Huel and brad davison in a room and see who comes out with bluer balls
February 27th, 2020 at 5:51 PM ^
One outcome is for certain: Davison would exit the room with the same number of points he walked in with.
February 27th, 2020 at 5:55 PM ^
Now that's funny
February 27th, 2020 at 5:37 PM ^
Da fix is in at Fox!
February 27th, 2020 at 1:54 PM ^
Eh, right now pretty much no reason to worry about the regional ones if it's Detroit when the Red Wings, Pistons and Tigers suck so bad. If it includes BTN though that would suck. Can't see this lasting for long though as having those stations is important to cord cutting sport fans in general.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:40 PM ^
BTN, FS1, and FS2 were bought by Disney so those will still be available (for now at least), it was just the regional Fox Sports networks that were sold to Sinclair last year. Sinclair was allowed to keep the "Fox Sports" name temporarily while they rebrand it.
February 27th, 2020 at 1:55 PM ^
Just saw this. I'll see if it gets worked out. As competitive as the streaming marketplace is right now, I can't imagine either side can tolerate a complete divorce.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:24 PM ^
Roku had a similar spat earlier this year - just negotiating tactics.
February 27th, 2020 at 1:55 PM ^
It amazes me that, with how often this happens, providers don't offer some sort of replacement channel(s) and not feel bad about charging the same prices.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:14 PM ^
In the cord-cutting context, I blame the networks and the Comcasts of the world. None of these VMVPD services--YouTube TV, Sling, Hulu TV, and the dearly departed PlayStation Vue (RIP)--make any money. Most of them began as ambitious attempts by deep-pocketed companies to bring change to an industry fiercely resistant to it, only to find themselves forced into the same model that has allowed TV networks and cable/satellite operators to feed off each other's greed (at the consumer's expense).
Now that content owners and broadcasters can reach consumers directly, the cable/satellite operators should be on their way to obsolescence. The fact that it hasn't happened is a testament to how well-entrenched they and their consumer-unfriendly business model are. And the networks are equally guilty partners in this scheme to milk consumers for all they're worth because they're afraid of a world in which they would have to pitch consumers based on the quality of their content instead of hiding in a bundle of 80+ channels, the overwhelming majority of which consumers never watch.
/endrant
February 27th, 2020 at 2:25 PM ^
I agree with you in the sense of cord-cutting as you stated. This is the reason a majority of us (me) made the decision to leave cable television behind.
Genuine question: How long do you think the VMVPD's remain a cheaper alternative? Unfortunately, as the popularity of these providers increases, I see the cable companies jacking the prices of their internet services to recoup their losses.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:50 PM ^
How long do you think the VMVPD's remain a cheaper alternative?
That's why these providers are buying other media sources and studios...
...err trying to. AT&T by way of comparison has totally screwed the pooch integrating WarnerMedia into their portfolio and will not be profitable until they stop operating like they are in the 90s. The government needs to get involved (I NEVER say that) too because everything AT&T said they wouldn't do as a part of merger/anti-trust hearings, they are indeed doing.
But when the ESPNs of the world can charge 600% what the next channel costs. Ultimately that what needs to change -- because whether it's cable, satellite, internet, mobile, etc., the content all comes from essentially the same source right now and the money making opportunities are controlled by a very selected few.
February 27th, 2020 at 6:46 PM ^
because everything AT&T said they wouldn't do as a part of merger/anti-trust hearings, they are indeed doing.
Yes! My DirecTVNow that wasn't ever supposed to go up as an early adopter has gone up 50%. If I could find a suitable non-cable/satellite option I would jump just for spite. But, nobody carries all of the 13 channels we actually care about.
February 27th, 2020 at 6:56 PM ^
My DirecTVNow that wasn't ever supposed to go up as an early adopter has gone up 50%
I think those issues are separate from what I was mentioning.
Even pre-AT&T DirecTV did what you mentioned. For no reason, my rates would jump. So I'd call them to cancel and they'd return it to what was originally promised.
What I'm talking about is AT&T testifying before Congress that they wouldn't prevent WarnerMedia owned content from streaming on other services as a condition of merger approval.
AT&T has done exactly that now.
... and in addition to the perjury, WM lost $1B last quarter because of it. But they did that to themselves.
I could go on... well, at least with the public stuff.
AT&T is one of my clients and the level of crippling, self-inflicted, bureaucracy and morons running the show throughout that organization is just mind numbing. AT&T has got to be in the top 3 of most fucked up companies I have ever set foot in.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:31 PM ^
It's the "same model" stuff that I'm starting to really realize is the case here. So now YTTV is having the same annoying disputes that Comcast and Cox have. How is this "cutting the cord" anymore? It seems like the only difference is now in a technical sense only.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:42 PM ^
The whole "cutting the cord" notion was nonsense. Channels were never going to be offered a la carte which is what you actually need to cut costs for consumers. Companies like Disney, Comcast, Fox, and ViacomCBS rely on the channel bundling model during negotiations to force providers to carry less popular networks and would lose too much money if their networks were unbundled. Add in the fact that these companies are now all starting their own streaming services, and it can get hard for consumers.
The reason this is happening to Sinclair is they are not large or popular enough to force providers to pick up their networks. If this continues, they will either drop their price or sell their networks to larger companies who can force providers to pay in a larger bundle.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:50 PM ^
Well said. The one thing it did do was introduce more competition into the world that was primarily dominated by companies with enough capital to get property rights to install cable. That high expense severely limited competition which allowed a near-monopoly in some/most areas, which allowed for higher prices. "Cord cutting" at least introduced a new method to deliver TV content that wasn't dominated by property rights of the cable lines (granted you still need good internet access which is still dominated by this same issue, but that's getting better as technology advances).
February 27th, 2020 at 3:11 PM ^
That is true, and hopefully internet services will improve to point where there will be enough competition to drive down the price of internet. The lack of competition in telecommunications industry is a huge problem in the USA unfortunately.
February 27th, 2020 at 3:49 PM ^
The impact of lobbyists, etc is never going to allow competition to truly exist in the telecommunications industry. Google already tried their hand at getting into the internet industry and shut it down because they were being blocked from getting infrastructure in place. Also it doesn't help that the head of the FCC is a former Comcast lobbyist and one of the very first things he did was get rid of net neutrality. I suspect based on my data usage and speed (speed slows to a crawl after we have used a good amount each month) that Comcast has been throttling us even though we pay for unlimited. Comcast claims they got rid of throttling, but I do not believe them.
February 27th, 2020 at 3:08 PM ^
A la carte wouldn't make anything cheaper for consumers unless you watch just one channel. The costs don't make sense for individual channels. Not enough people watch FX or HGTV or Comedy central by themselves for them to be profitable unless they are charging like $20 per person. And those are the popular channels, most would just have to completely fold. So individuals are left paying $20 per channel with probably lower quality programming.
February 27th, 2020 at 1:55 PM ^
Hmm...Putin "accidentally" tweets "fix" instead of "Fox"
February 27th, 2020 at 2:04 PM ^
For all of the fanfare about cord cutting, I think we are slowly working our way back to square 1 if you are a sports fan.
Netflix and Disney+ are fine for most people, but cable is practically required for sports. I know Hulu has a $55 package, but I see little difference between the $105 I would pay for Hulu+slow ATT internet vs the $110 I now pay for cable and fiber.
$5 more gets me more channels, faster internet and no streaming lag. That is totally fine with me.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:15 PM ^
I agree, and I’ll go further: I don’t think streaming ever approached cable in full-breadth sports content.
I would have been happy if it did. If there were some $30/month all sports only sports streaming option, I’d drop cable and subscribe to it this afternoon. But there isn’t. Instead, there’s stuff like YouTube TV, which saves me a few (and only a few) dollars and nets me fewer channels, worse picture, and marginally less consistency.
The best the streaming services have managed is “Almost as good for almost as much.” It works well for some people. It’s not quite getting it done for me. Charter offers me everything, including the small niche stuff (BEin, Mav TV, Olympic, etc) and multiple BTN feeds for football Saturdays. I also get stuff that my wife enjoys, and I get better picture options and fewer outages, and I don’t have to ignore tweets that are two minutes ahead of the live game I’m watching.
Streaming is nice, but it’s not a panacea.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:32 PM ^
Ha, great phrase. I do agree with the "almost as good for almost as much". You're still having to pay for internet ala carte, after all.
What you didn't mention is the flexibility Hulu TV (in my case) affords me. I don't need Live TV 12 months a year. Closer to 4 months maybe. I subscribe in and out without penalty, and that saves me tons of $, on a yearly basis. For the rest of the 8 months a year, I'm fine with [regular] Hulu, Disney, ESPN+, Netflix, and other free or ala carte content. I also subscribe in and out of HBO Now from time to time.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:37 PM ^
I'm rocking:
Netflix
Amazon Prime
Disney+
Hulu Live
Netflix, Prime Video, and Disney+ would all be there if I have cable or not, so it is basically coming down to cable vs. Hulu Live. With WOW!, renting a modem & 4 cable boxes, I was paying $165, which creeped North of $200 once the 2-year deal ended. Dropped down to internet + Hulu for $120 when Hulu Live first dropped. Now my 2 year internet only discount wore off and Hulu increased by $10/month, I'm at like $145.
So yeah, only saving a few bucks for slightly worse quality. What I value is having access to hulu on my phone or computer in one location. I don't have to sign into NBC sports, sign into CBS sports, sign into FOX sports, etc. to watch online. I don't have 5 separate apps on my phone. And turning off the TV in the living room, cleaning up, brushing your teeth, and climbing into bed to resume your TV show 15 mins later is nice. You're not letting the tv schedule dictate your actions. You don't have to wait till the next day for it to show up OnDemand. My life has been slightly better with Hulu than it was with cable. YMMV.
Plus Handmaid's Tale is good AF.
February 27th, 2020 at 4:01 PM ^
Probably depends on what you define as important. I went from ~$120/mo cable bill to $50/mo for internet + $20/mo for Philo 8 months a year and $50/mo 4 months a year.
$1,440 vs $760 is a not inconsiderable savings on a per year basis. Netflix, if you can find something worth watching, is shareable. So is Hulu, YTTV and Philo and anything else you may get. Even more hidden cost savings.
It's worth it to me, even if YTTV can't figure out it would be convenient to add a check to something you've already watched like any halfway competent DVR would. No idea what they have 100,000 employees doing, but it can't be anything more useful than that.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:40 PM ^
The idea that cord cutting was good for consumers was always an illogical farce people got duped into when a small percentage of early adopters were able to take advantage of a loophole in the market (plus a lot of mooching).
Sinclair fucking sucks though, fuck that company.
February 27th, 2020 at 3:53 PM ^
I had Dish it was 170 for my bundle.
I have YTTV now and its 110 for internet and TV.
Not to mention no contract, no huge dish on my house, no dvr rental fee, unlimited DVR, and I can take it with me if I want. Not sure how I got dooped
February 27th, 2020 at 4:00 PM ^
Who is your internet provider for $60/month, and how's the real estate in your area?
February 27th, 2020 at 6:31 PM ^
Mine is AT&T for $50/mo no taxes or fees on top of that. Fiber. Yes I have a contract. 1 year. I asked if they could put me on a 3 year contract but they wouldn't go for that. It's irritating to have to call (after your contract has expired naturally, not before), to get a deal, but until the rocket surgeons at Spectrum realize they've finished our subdivision and they could add another 50 or so houses to their service area, I've only got one option.
My Mom who has both AT&T and Comcast available got hers for $30/month. A steal!
February 28th, 2020 at 2:12 PM ^
The transition is still happening though. The majority of people still have cable and that is still subsidzing the costs of channels. HGTV or can charge lower rates to YTTV because millions of people are paying for it through cable even though they never watch. The more people cut the cord the more expensive channel rights will get for streaming services and the more fractured services get. Disney won't put anything it owns on any other service, neither will netflix or amazon. Same thing with internet costs, the less people buying internet as part of a cable bundle will cause the costs of internet alone to continue to go up as places like Verizon and Comcast make up for lost revenue.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:04 PM ^
Is BTN considered a regional Fox Network since it falls under the Fox Sports umbrella now?
February 27th, 2020 at 2:09 PM ^
Yes I believe so
February 27th, 2020 at 2:19 PM ^
I don't think so. There are two groups of Fox Sports: the one owned by Fox and the one sold to Sinclair.
I think 51% of BTN is still owned by Fox in the Fox Sports Media Group with FS1 and FS2.
Disney sold off the regional Fox Sports Networks to Sinclair after the 21st Century Fox acquisition. If this change only involves the Sinclair networks, I think BTN would be unaffected.
For example, DISH Network has not carried the Sinclair regional Fox Sports Networks for almost a year now, but the Fox Sports Media Group (FS1, FS2, & BTN) are all still carried on DISH.
February 27th, 2020 at 4:55 PM ^
Let this be the case, please!
February 27th, 2020 at 2:07 PM ^
Still worth it. Never paying $180 a month to DirecTV again.
February 27th, 2020 at 3:53 PM ^
How are you paying $180 per month? I have been with Directv since 2012 and I pay $70 per month. They try to anually jack my price up, but I call and threaten to leave and they put me back to my original price.
February 27th, 2020 at 3:54 PM ^
Agreed NFG, I dont give a hoot what happens with all this streaming stuff, I will never go back to paying that kind of money to a cable/dish provider ever again. I was at like $230 a month to comcast back in the day
Shit... if I dont have a channel for a specific non-nationally televised game that I want to watch...Im headed to the local sports watering hole.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:08 PM ^
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Hulu Live is the superior streaming option for cord cutters. I get every sports channel I could ever want and the bonus of limited commercials for shows on Hulu is the icing to the cake.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:15 PM ^
yeah, but they have that BS where you pay $10/mo extra for no ads, and then an extra $15/mo for "enhanced DVR" if you want to be able to fast forward commercials on any recorded media.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:13 PM ^
Can you hurry up and fox the title of this post
February 27th, 2020 at 2:39 PM ^
Goddamnit. First Sony Vue folds, causing me to opt for youtube.tv (which I don't really care for to begin with, their DVR sucks balls). Now this. Think I'm just going back to DTV, cost be damned.
February 27th, 2020 at 2:56 PM ^
Chord cutting is stupid. But wow are the red wings having a bad year.
February 27th, 2020 at 3:50 PM ^
If you like paying more, contracts, and interrupted service, than yes stick to the chord.
I had Dish prior to YTTV.
Dish: $90 for basic, 40 for Internet, 5 for landline, bunch of fee's another $10. Throw in netflix and prime another $20. Total of around 170. Not to mention a huge dish on the side of my home, rental fee for a DVR box, and the weather interrupts service.
YTTV: $50 for service, no contract, unlimited DVR, no DVR rental, no service calls, no dish on the side of my home. $60 for internet. Add in prime and netflix and its 130 vs 170. Pretty simple call imo.
February 27th, 2020 at 4:00 PM ^
Ill add one more benefit to steaming...way less dusting. All those damn cable/dish boxes collect dust bunnies on the reg. GD dust bunny sum bitches.
Or the endless amounts of damn hdmi cords, coaxial cables you inherit when getting any part of your cable/dish serviced. "I dont want these please take them" " no sorry, your trash now"
February 27th, 2020 at 3:20 PM ^
Prediction: FOX and YouTubeTV will work things out pretty quick
February 27th, 2020 at 3:30 PM ^
They will negotiate a deal soon. This is common.
February 27th, 2020 at 3:49 PM ^
Yup, they may as well drop all sports if they drop Fox Sports or ESPN.