No Browns on 10.1

[festivus]

UPDATED: WBNS has stated that they cannot show different NFL games on analog 10 and on 10.1. Well, they're doing it today, showing the Bills/Bears on 10.1 and the Browns on analog 10. What gives? Why can't they do this when the Browns and the Bengals are playing at the same time?

They just switched 10.1 to the Browns. Must have been an error on their part.

[Maurice Clarett]

Yeah i was wondering the same exact thing. Im sure they have the rights to show both the games. I dont see why the cant, its probably something to do with the NFL, they are very strict. Before when an Ohio State game wasnt in HD ABC showed a Miami(FL) game that was in HD on 6.1, and OSU on the regular analog.

They shouldnt do this to all the Browns fans who have SUPPORTED their team, even through the bad years. Now that they bengals have ONE winning season all these fake cincinati fans came out of the closet and jumped on the bandwagon along with WBNS.

[snodgrass23]

Yeap, pretty sure it's a regulation thing with the NFL.

BTW. Nice screen name "Maurice Clarett". When I first saw that name, I was ready to have to ban somebody because I assumed it was a joke and the board was going to get spammed. :)

[festivus]

Per WBNS it is an NFL rule that they can't show different games on 10.1 and on 10 analog. I don't know why not. I would think that the NFL would want to reach as many fans as possible. I would like to email the NFL about it but they don't post any email addresses on their website with the exception of the webmaster. Apparently the NFL doesn't like feedback of any kind.

My bet is that DirectTV has something to do with this. Force fans to get the NFL package.

[TvPat]

I don't think limiting the number of broadcast games has anything to do with the NFL Sunday Ticket. The NFL has stated in the past that the purpose of the NFL Sunday Ticket is for of town fans and not specifically for revenue. If their primary motive was revenue they would be on digital cable and Dish Network in addition to DirecTV.

The NFL makes $3.5 billion a year from their TV contracts, which breaks down to the following:
- CBS AFC package, $622 million
- Fox NFC package, $712 million
- NBC Sunday Night, $650 million
- ESPN Monday Night, $1.1 billion
- NFL Sunday Ticket, $400 million

The NFL has done very well in the last 40 years by limiting the amount of games broadcast on television. They certainly wouldn't get $1.1 billion from ESPN if there were a dozen games on Sunday afternoon. That is why they limit distribution and jack up the price of the NFL Sunday Ticket. It is also the reason why they prohibit WBNS from showing more than 1 game at a time.

[festivus]

Sorry, maybe I'm dense but I'm not sure what you're saying. Every NFL game is on TV somewhere. My point was that I don't see how not allowing a Columbus station to multicast Cleveland and Cincinnati games is beneficial to anyone other than to DirectTV. And maybe beneficial to sports bars. The number of NFL viewers in Columbus would probably almost double if the NFL allowed that. As a Browns fan, I can tell you that I have the radio on when the Bengals are on instead of the Browns. How could multicasting on Sunday at 1:00 hurt the ESPN Monday night ratings? Or even the NBC Sunday night ratings?

[TvPat]

If WBNS multicasts two games, that is two games instead of one that the other networks have to compete with.

Fox pays $712 million a year with the understanding that they only have to compete against one other game in that time slot.

NBC pays $650 million a year for Sunday night with the understanding that there were only three games broadcast that afternoon.

ESPN pays $1.1 billion (yes billion) per year for Monday night with the understanding that there were only 4 games broadcast the day before.

Economics have shown over the years that limiting the availability of a product creates an artificially higher demand for that product. It's called a monopoly. For example, when the NCAA TV monopoly was broken up in 1984, they actually made less money in the years after while showing more games. If you only allow a few games to be shown, there is a huge bidding war for those games.

In my opinion, the NFL would easily make twice the money from the NFL Sunday Ticket if they would lower the price and make it available on digital cable. The NFL thinks that limiting distribution of the Sunday Ticket makes their broadcast contracts far more valuable than the extra few hundred million they make from DirecTV. At $3.1 billion per year versus $400 million, I cannot argue with that.

[nakedeye]

Only problem is that Directv set the price for Sunday Ticket. I know it has been posted elseware that it is not, but they do. The NFL has nothing to do with it.

They set up a bidding war for it, and Directv, being a national sat provider, knows they can force you into terms for 2 years based upon hardware. You have no choice.

[festivus]

TvPat,

Ahh very interesting. I never thought of it that way. But wouldn't CBS be willing to pay more for the contract if they could multicast? For example, $700 million instead of $622? Then give Fox a $78 mil discount if they don't want to multicast. Wouldn't it even out? Maybe not.

Any way you slice it currently the fans/customers suffer. Happens with every monopoly.

I wouldn't mind seeing pay per view if it's not the local game. I just can't justify the huge cost of the direct tv plan to see my bad team the 4 or 5 times they're not on TV.