Comments about ‘Pac-12 working to get satellite, telco deals’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Aug. 10 2012 3:16 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Jealous U
Alpine, UT

The "nationwide" PAC 12 network pipe dream is proving to be nothing but smoke and mirrors.

Hank Pym
SLC, UT

Could it be the P12 is doing the right way? Building a solid distribution outlet for known & proven commodity one step at a time.

The alternative is jumping through hoops for 30 pieces of silver. Who would need instant validation/gratification that bad?

sammyg
Springville, UT

Uteology

I don't care about the money, I don't care about your comparison to the Big 10 Net and I cannot quote a whole dang article by Jon Wilner. I've left nothing out intentionally to skew a position. I posted the source. Facts are what they are.

The point being is that the PAC 12 Net is not what it was originally said it was going to be. It might evolve to something more but it is going to fall short of what it was hyped to be.

48 million households available, not all will be partaking in PAC 12 Network. Hey, I added a potential 24 million more households from the NCTC deal in July. I talked with them directly.

"Ballpark, we have 24 million subscribers among our 900+ member companies. Please let me know if you have any further questions." -- Hilary Hutton NCTC Membership Affairs Coordinator

... but again the cable provider decides IF they distribute or not.

Massage the numbers all you want.

Uteology
East Salt Lake City, Utah

@Ducky: "It actually may be in far less if all 30 million big10 homes were actually given the channel by the providers that had it."

-------------

Oh Duckster try reading what I posted, not what you think I posted.

According to the article sammy quoted you are wrong. Let me explain:

The Pac12Nets currently have "agreements with distributors" that reach 48 million homes. ...But by comparison, the Big Ten Network had "agreements with distributors" reaching approx 30 million homes when it launched in 2007.

Conclusion, PAC-12 has 48 million "agreements with distributors" and Big Ten had 30 million "agreement with distributors" when each launched.

Unless you have the actual subscriptions for each one can easily argue that because PAC-12 has a bigger FOOTPRINT the PAC-12 "could" have more subscribers.

No Conference Will Take Us
SEATTLE, WA

Don't understand fellow BYU fans obsession with the PAC 12 network. Especially exposure. We can't even get decent ratings playing on ESPN. IF that is going to work for us. We are going to rely on BYU scheduling better games, and rely on the fan base of opponents to bring the ratings up. WAC teams don't cut it for us.

And fellow BYU fans are kidding themselves if they think BYU TV is relevant. Nobody outside of BYU faithful watches that. Yet how many homes is that available in, and have to pay extra for the digital package? In addition ESPN is not free.

Duckhunter
Highland, UT

@uteology

No, you said the pac12 network "IS available in 18 million more homes" when that is not true. It IS NOT available in even 48 million homes, that is reported fact.

Nice spin, fail.

Kosta Fesenko
Chicken McNuggetville, UT

Duckhunters little comments have grown more cute as time has gone on. Now he is on a "my athletic department is profitable! and yours isn't!'

does it get any more pathetic?

LOL!

Uteology
East Salt Lake City, Utah

@Ducky

My bad, I misspoke. The 30 and 48 million was referring to the article I quoted, and it clearly said it was "agreements with distributors" of 30 vs 48 million, not in homes.

So I think I was clear that "the PAC-12 network has a BIGGER footprint than what the BIG 10 had when they launched in 2007 by 18 million."

Unless you can provide actual numbers that:

A) The BIG 10 was available in 30 million homes (or total subscriptions)
B) The PAC-12 will be available in less than 30 million homes (or total subscriptions)

My point stands PAC-12 "could" have more subscriptions than the Big 10 network launch based on the 30 million vs 48 million "agreements with distributors".

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Alls I now is they dont' even have a HD truck like us haha.

Duckhunter
Highland, UT

@uteology

If you'll go back and read what I posted you'll see I am way ahead of you. I already asked for those numbers, how many ACTUAL homes was/is each network available in. Regardless neither comes anywhere close to how many homes BYUtv is ACTUALLY in, there isn't any of this "well the carrier has it but they don't actually put it on their system" stuff. No the carriers have it and it is actually in all of those homes in all of those markets.

Yea I know what utah "fans" assert about it "no one will watch it" but why do any of you think anyone will watch womens tennis on the pac12 network even if it is actually available to watch which it is becoming pretty apparent that it isn't in most places. For that matter why would anyone that isn't a fan of utah or oregon st. watch a football game between the 2 of them? No one will unless there is absolutely nothing else on at the time.

Basicly utah "fans" are getting what BYU fans already have but on a much smaller scale with less availability. Congratulations?

LonestarRunner
Salt Lake City, UT

No conference championships for U

I don't understand why a Utah fan is so embarrassed to be associated with the Utes that he continues to pretend that he's a BYU fan.

BYUtv is far more relevant to it's intended audience, BYU fans, than the PAC Net is to Utah. BYU owns and controls what is televised on BYUtv. The PAC Net is controlled by the PAC 12 and has no vested interest in catering to Utah fans.

BYU fans are simply pointing out to our delusional brothers on the hill that the PAC Net is going to fall far short of what was initially promised when it was announced. Thousands of Utah fans who were expecting to be able to tune in to the PAC Net and to find it available on their basic cable or satelite systems are going to be bitterly disappointed. To argue otherwise is simply to ignore the facts.

Truth Machine
Salt Lake City, UT

Kosta Fesenko

"my athletic department is profitable! and yours isn't!

does it get any more pathetic?"

Only for Utah fans who have been beating their chests about the gobs of money the Utes were making, now having to sugar-coat defeat in which athletic program is more profitable.

scott
Alpine, UT

Just imagining the breathless anticipation of PAC 12 fans awaiting the launch of their brand new conference network, rushing home from work to catch the 4:30 weekday afternoon kickoff of the inaugural game...

and being treated to a scrimmage between Utah and Northern Colorado.

*ouch*

phoenix
Gilbert, AZ

Hank Pym

"Could it be the P12 is doing the right way? Building a solid distribution outlet for known & proven commodity one step at a time."

No, it looks more like the PAC grossly overestimated the demand for their product and now they're being forced to admit that they over-promised, but under-delivered.

Seriously, how many fans outside the PAC footprint are going to be interested in paying a subscription fee to watch Utah play Washington State?

TroyTown
Anaheim, CA

phoenix

Rushing home from work to catch a 4:30 kickoff in LA? Are you kidding?

Even for a devoted Utah fan, it would be nearly impossible to catch the game before the end of the 2nd quarter without taking the day or at least the afternoon off from work.

It's obvious that the Utah - Northern Colorado game is just being used as a trial run to work out the kinks before they have to televise a real football game.

NightOwlAmerica
SALEM, OR

phoenix said:

""Hank Pym

"Could it be the P12 is doing the right way? Building a solid distribution outlet for known & proven commodity one step at a time."

No, it looks more like the PAC grossly overestimated the demand for their product and now they're being forced to admit that they over-promised, but under-delivered.

Seriously, how many fans outside the PAC footprint are going to be interested in paying a subscription fee to watch Utah play Washington State?""

I will as a person with WSU ties. The network has not even launched yet and you know everything about it. Gee thank you. You are such an expert. Yawn.

NightOwlAmerica
SALEM, OR

scott said"

Just imagining the breathless anticipation of PAC 12 fans awaiting the launch of their brand new conference network, rushing home from work to catch the 4:30 weekday afternoon kickoff of the inaugural game...

and being treated to a scrimmage between Utah and Northern Colorado.

*ouch*"

Scrimmage indeed. Just imagine the breathless anticipation of PAC 12 fans watching the WAC teams on TV! Bet the ESPN executives will be glued to their seats for those ratings. Those last three games are going to be great! What a way to complete the season.

*zing*

sammyg
Springville, UT

Nightfouled

Yeah, chuckle all you want, as Mr. Holmoe promised and has delivered, it's Wisconsin and Notre Dame in November 2013 and who knows who else will be on the schedule. It's getting great.

But sadly, several of your Ute buddies across the nation are not going to be watching their team on the 'national' PAC 12 Network and if they have satellite they might be watching Leave It To Beaver instead.

The upside as I mentioned before might be if you get walloped by Colorado again, maybe a few less people will notice.

Snack PAC
Olympus Cove, Utah

upinthenight

zing???

Nice try, but NOBODY on BYU's schedule even comes close to the ineptitude of #209 Northern Colorado(0-11).

At least BYU doesn't lose to the season-ending creampuffs on its schedule.

*zing*

sammyg
Springville, UT

Mercury News... 8/13 4:21 Pacific... Jon Wilner blog... This just in...

Spoiler alert... if you have Dishnetwork... grab a Kleenex... and get DirectTV on speed dial

"At this point, the Pac-12 Networks don't have carriage agreements with either of the major satellite operators, DirecTV or Dish Network. But negotiations are ongoing and commissioner Larry Scott is optimistic a deal will be struck with at least one of the satellite carriers.

Media industry sources believe DirecTV, with its reliance on sports programming, is far more likely than Dish to come to terms."

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments