ebl11's profile

New Poster

 • 

1 Message

Wed, Aug 21, 2013 7:00 AM

Fox Sports 2

As a NASCAR fan, I was afraid that I would not be able to see the same racing events that I used to see on Speed when they rebranded the channel this past weekend.  I was just proven correct.  I now won't be able to see the Whelan Modified race that is airing on FoxSports 2 from Bristol tonight as Comcast doesn't have Fox Sports 2 in the channel lineup.  I was able to watch it last year when it was on Speed.

 

I strongly encourage Comcast to rectify this situation and add Fox Sports 2 to the lineup.  If I can't watch the things I want to watch because the channel isn't available, then I'm going to look for a cable provider who can provide it.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members.

Responses

markdartj

Regular Contributor

 • 

148 Messages

7 y ago

Maybe I wasn't clear with my point, ComcastTeds. Nobody in their right mind is going to complain about a 20 cent increase in their cable bill. Like i said, give the ones who want FOX SPORTS 2 a forty cent increase, heck, I'll even pay an extra dollar a month if it meant I can get access to FOX SPORTS 2. That would cover those who truly object to a 20 cent increase in their bill. I JUST CANNOT FATHOM THAT THE REASON YOU REFUSE TO GIVE US FOX SPORTS 2 IS BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO RAISE OUR BILL BY TWENTY FRIGGIN CENTS. Most people won't even notice a 20 cent increase, especially if it means they get a channel they might actually watch. How much are we paying for all the garbage channels you foist off on us, wait, I know, In my case, it's over 200 dollars a month. So what if everybody's bill goes up twenty pennies a month. All of a sudden COMCAST has gotten a conscience? Just do this and all this ugliness goes away.
SpeedBuggy

Contributor

 • 

74 Messages

7 y ago

Put Fox Sports2 and MAV TV into a sports or Outdoor package like Dish does with MAV TV and charge a couple bucks extra,  Other systems do it, so dont say you can't.

seau

Frequent Visitor

 • 

12 Messages

7 y ago

Thank you for the sliver of hope CT. I will be keeping my fingers crossed that the powers to be at Comcast will do the smart thing!

CCTeds

Gold Problem Solver

 • 

18.9K Messages

7 y ago


@SpeedBuggy wrote:

Put Fox Sports2 and MAV TV into a sports or Outdoor package like Dish does with MAV TV and charge a couple bucks extra,  Other systems do it, so dont say you can't.


That may be the theme of any current discussions and negotiations. 

 

 

 

seau

Frequent Visitor

 • 

12 Messages

7 y ago

CT, thank you for posting the information. Communication and facts are the only thing  that stands between success and failure in almost all cases. For now you have fulfilled my need for the facts and I trully hope that Comcast will continue to communicate as this situation drags on. Since I am in business for myself, (even though I'm just a 3-man operation) I understand that you can not always allow another business or customer to dictate what you must pay for a service or product. Hopefully both parties can find a happy medium, which will satisfy their many customers and investors.

I think it's time for all of us here to go on the offensive against Fox Sports like we have Comcast and demand an explaination of facts. Unfortunately Comcast is the one that gets our money directly so Fox isn't held to the same degree and I'm sure that fits into their negotiations, which means they are not as woried about loosing us as customers. We need to convince them that if we don't purchase the products that their advertiser's are trying to sell us, then their bottom line can be effected the same as Comcast's can.  

We also need to put more pressure on NASCAR as they are the ones who ultimatly choose who displays their content.

I'm not saying that we should back off of Comcast, but everyone needs to realize that it takes two (2) cars to have a race!!!

Thanks again for the communication and I hope you will continue to keep us up-to-date, if indeed you are the "chosen one" to provide us the information. 

CCTeds

Gold Problem Solver

 • 

18.9K Messages

7 y ago

Just wanted to recap, consolidate and summarize the current situation with Fox Sports 2 that some may find helpful.

 

Below is not new information and most all has been posted previously in earlier posts - just putting it all in one place; 

  

We certainly realize that anything short of a post that says "Comcast is adding Fox Sports 2 in all areas on this date and your monthly cable bill won't go up" will not be a satisfactory answer for most.

 

We don't have any announcements to make regarding additional locations for the addition of Fox Sports 2 at this time. We also don't have an expected date for an announcement for the Fox Sports 2 in additional Comcast areas. I'm not currently aware of any decisions to remove or add Fox Sports 2 in any locations. Any potential channel additions or deletions would be communicated ahead of time according to any FCC and local franchise requirements.

 

Comcast does offer Fox Sports 2 in some markets based on some existing contractual obligations. 

 

There are other video providers (likely in your area) that may offer Fox Sports 2.

 

Our content and programming teams are in regular contact with Fox on many topics, including possible additional distribution for Fox Sports 2. The conversations are ongoing. A contract and agreement to terms is required before we can offer any channel to our customers.  These need to be terms that make sense for both parties and for our customers.    

 

All channels, regardless of affiliation, are required to go through the same application and approval process in order to be carried by Comcast.

 

Our programming teams and local management teams constantly evaluate programming choices and make decisions based on customer interests, costs, channel bandwidth management and contractual obligations.

 

As with any network contract, we want to come to an agreement that offers the best terms for our customers and our company that keeps both our costs and our customer's monthly costs to a minimum. Any possible addition of any new network would also most likely incur additional costs to Comcast that would be passed along to our customers. As mentioned above, those additional costs are one of the factors in considering adding any new network.

 

Generally, new networks want to be added to a very widely distributed level of service for the potential of the most eyeballs (ratings) and advertising revenue. That means that the costs would be spread across all of the customers that have that channel in their level of service, not just to those who want to pay individually for that specific service or via a separate Sports Package.

 

Of course, situations may change based on customer demand, channel bandwidth opportunities, business opportunities, costs and contractual obligations. The Comcast employees who participate in these forums certainly pass along  collective feedback, interests and concerns to those teams. This forum is not the sole source of customer input.

 

ONLINE ACCESS

 

The current contract terms with Fox only allow online access to Fox Sports 2 for customers who have that channel (Fox Sports 2) in their level of service. 

That is how most all cable networks operate and this situation is standard across all video providers.

 

Below from the Fox Sports Go site:  http://msn.foxsports.com/foxsportsgo/

Live streams of all the FOX Sports Networks are available at no additional cost to fans who receive FOX Sports as part of their TV subscription through participating TV providers. If you get FOX Sports 1, FOX Sports 2, and FOX sports regional channels at home, you've got access!

 

  

If you are interested in both sides of the story, you should also ask Fox Sports 2 why they don't have more distribution on Comcast and other video providers, you can do that here: http://msn.foxsports.com/feedback   

 

Apologies that Fox has chosen to put some of their high profile events on one of their least distributed cable channels.

 

It takes two parties to negotiate and come to an equitable agreement for carriage of any cable network. Below is a quote from Mediacomm (a peer video provider) from early 2013 that I think helps illustrate the situation.  

“Contrary to accusations by industry critics, cable companies are reluctant to raise video subscriber rates because when we do, we lose customers. Mediacom does not make more money when we raise video prices, since we remit virtually every penny of the increase on to the content owners. Over the last three years, the increase in our programming costs was more than double the increase in video revenues, even after taking our subscriber rate increases and equipment charges into account.”

 

While contracts with our programmers are indeed proprietary and confidential, a quick internet search will provide some ballpark information around estimated pricing for this network per subscriber.

 

http://www.whatyoupayforsports.com/2013/07/fox-sports-1-will-add-0-57-to-your-monthly-tv-bill/

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/raissman-murdoch-suits-gambling-out-fox-espn-article-1.1279503

 

I cannot confirm-deny-endorse the information in the above but I thought it would be helpful for others to review.

 

Generally in addition to per subscriber fees, there are additional capital costs incurred (equipment and such) as well as any opportunity costs (what else could we use that bandwidth for).  This is no different than most other businesses who evaluate their costs and potential customer impacts.   

 

I hope that the above helps to explain some of the ”whys”.

 

Unfortunately, it’s not always as easy as saying, “hey, some of our customers want this programming,  let’s put it on and pay whatever the costs are and pass those costs along to all of our customers”.  

 

If and when we have additional news to announce regarding Fox Sports 2, we will certainly do so here and in other places.  

markdartj

Regular Contributor

 • 

148 Messages

7 y ago

TWENTY CENTS!
CCTeds

Gold Problem Solver

 • 

18.9K Messages

7 y ago


@markdartj wrote:
TWENTY CENTS!

Generally in addition to per subscriber fees, there are additional capital costs incurred (equipment and such) as well as any opportunity costs (what else could we use that bandwidth for).  This is no different than most other businesses who evaluate their costs and potential customer impacts.   

 

Your feedback and passion have been noted. 

SpeedBuggy

Contributor

 • 

74 Messages

7 y ago

Always an excuse.

 

Contributor

 • 

86 Messages

7 y ago

I just couldn't resist!!!!

 

I was Confused,,
I became confused when I heard the word "Service" used with these agencies:

Internal Revenue
'Service'
U.S. Postal
'Service'
Telephone
'Service'
Cable TV
'Service'
Civil
'Service'
State, City, County & Public
'Service'
Customer
'Service'

But today, I overheard two farmers talking, and one of them said he had hired a bull to
'Service' a few cows.




BAM!!! It all came into focus. Now I understand what all those agencies are doing to us.

You are now as enlightened as I am.

Contributor

 • 

86 Messages

7 y ago


@CAMartin wrote:

I certainly, happily, and immediately would agree to trade in every channel I have in languages I don't speak, every music channel besides Palladia and VH1 Classic, and many other channels to get FS2.

When the day comes that we only pay for what we watch, cable customers nationwide will scream the providers' praises to the heavens.

Until then, paying for things we don't watch and not getting channels we'd like has us speaking about cable companies in another direction entirely.


Right after "Pigs Fly" & Politicians are Honest! I'm thinking I'll see the pigs flying first!!!!! "Back in the day" we could pick and choose, that all went bye bye to NEVER be seen again! Why do you think Comcast sticks FS1 in the top tear????? Ya think????? ALL part of their business model. We get to pay for a 100 pound package, of which MOST of us only use 12 oz of it. The ONLY reason I have Comcast is for NASCAR / Automotive Shows. Other wise I would just stay with my FREE over the air REAL HI Def  TV. NOT the dumbed down "stuff" that we get on everyones cable (not just Comcast)!

New Poster

 • 

4 Messages

7 y ago

I certainly, happily, and immediately would agree to trade in every channel I have in languages I don't speak, every music channel besides Palladia and VH1 Classic, and many other channels to get FS2.

When the day comes that we only pay for what we watch, cable customers nationwide will scream the providers' praises to the heavens.

Until then, paying for things we don't watch and not getting channels we'd like has us speaking about cable companies in another direction entirely.

New Poster

 • 

4 Messages

7 y ago

That assumes all things would remain as they are. Advertisers would be involved, and access could be billed in new ways...none of which brings us any closer to FS2.
Defender1

Contributor

 • 

82 Messages

7 y ago


@CAMartin wrote:

When the day comes that we only pay for what we watch, cable customers nationwide will scream the providers' praises to the heavens.


No, you'd be screaming bloody murder at being charged 10x what you pay now. It's the sole reason ALL communications companies (Comcast, Verizon, Dish, DirecTV, etc) have packages. It mitigates the cost per channel so it's something even feasible.

 

Take the new WWE channel for instance (disclaimer: I know it's not a cable/channel per se but is good for compairison). It's 9.99/mo. for this single station. Now, that's not a bad price. But imagine having to do that for EVERY channel you want to watch? If you like more than 5 or 6 channels, well... There goes every cent you earn. If you liked, say... 20 channels? 200/mo just in station costs. Forget your HSI or phone service too.

 

This is something already developing in online streaming services. Ever use a roku? Many of their channels are charged per channel per month. Costs add up REAL fast.

 

Unfortunately it's the lesser of 2 evils.

New Poster

 • 

2 Messages

7 y ago

Hey there... Fairly new Comcast customer, who came over from Direct tv a couple of months ago.

 

We bundled our internet, phone, and tv... and I'm happy with the cost of the bundled services. However, with Direct tv I had pretty much every channel... and nearly all of them were in HD.

 

I really miss that. The programming options in my area with Comcast are really inferior. If it wasn't for the better streaming and on demand options, as well as the high speed internet and bundling options of Comcast, I would have canceled with them during my 30 day trial period.

 

It sucks that customers have to sacrifice programming... As a soccer fan, and specifically a Liverpool fan, I am seriously considering canceling my Comcast account and crawling back to Direct Tv before the start of next seasons Champions league games. If Comcast doesn't adopt Fox Sports 2 in my area (SF/Bay Area), I may have no choice...

 

I was so desparate for some of the soccer games Fox Sports covered this season that I acually bought the Spanish channels bundle just to get Fox Deportivo, or whatever it is called. I don't speak Spanish, and I never watch any of the other channels other than the Fox Spanish channel... but I bought the whole freaking bundle just to get a few extra Champions league games that weren't on Fox Sports 1.

 

So please Comcast, continue negotiations with Fox Sports... expand the markets you carry Fox Sports 2 in. You will make a lot of customers, who are willing to pay a little extra, happy.

 

 

New to the Community?

Start Here