Fox Sports 2

---

@lipstickcat wrote:

I don't understand why FS2 is only available in some areas since it is a nationwide,not local,station? And Xfinity is a Nascar sponsor! How & why is such a deal made? There's even a petition on Fox Sports Race Hub site, which I signed, to get FS2! So it all comes back to Comcast.

---

Comcast does offer Fox Sports 2 in some markets based on some existing contractual obligations. Some of these could be contractual obligations inherited from the previous cable provider. 

---

@ComcastTeds wrote:

---

@lipstickcat wrote:

I don't understand why FS2 is only available in some areas since it is a nationwide,not local,station? And Xfinity is a Nascar sponsor! How & why is such a deal made? There's even a petition on Fox Sports Race Hub site, which I signed, to get FS2! So it all comes back to Comcast.

---

Comcast does offer Fox Sports 2 in some markets based on some existing contractual obligations. Some of these could be contractual obligations inherited from the previous cable provider. 

---

Hi Ted,

You bring up an interesting subject. You state "Some of these could be contractual obligations inherited from the previous cable provider." Would you be so kind as to tell us how many of these markets have FS2 because of a "Legacy Contract" and how many markets FS2 was actually added to the lineup without a legacy contract dictating that Comcast MUST carry FS2? Is it not true that when the contractual period is terminated, that Comcast has no plans , at this time, to continue making FS2 available in these markets?

---

@Ctstreetrodder wrote:

---

@ComcastTeds wrote:

---

@lipstickcat wrote:

I don't understand why FS2 is only available in some areas since it is a nationwide,not local,station? And Xfinity is a Nascar sponsor! How & why is such a deal made? There's even a petition on Fox Sports Race Hub site, which I signed, to get FS2! So it all comes back to Comcast.

---

Comcast does offer Fox Sports 2 in some markets based on some existing contractual obligations. Some of these could be contractual obligations inherited from the previous cable provider. 

---

Hi Ted,

 

You bring up an interesting subject. You state "Some of these could be contractual obligations inherited from the previous cable provider." Would you be so kind as to tell us how many of these markets have FS2 because of a "Legacy Contract" and how many markets FS2 was actually added to the lineup without a legacy contract dictating that Comcast MUST carry FS2? Is it not true that when the contractual period is terminated, that Comcast has no plans , at this time, to continue making FS2 available in these markets?

 

 

---

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.

I still have an issue with the fact that I can't talk to anyone, in the know, locally.  I'm sure there are more people than the techs and the people at the office taking your money and telling you we can't do anything about your requests or complaints.

---

@ComcastTeds wrote:

---

@SpeedBuggy wrote:

What bothers me about all this is Comcast's refusal to let us know why these channels aren't available. (I also want MAVTV).  There has been speculation the reason that ATT Uverse have been showing Darts instead of NASCAR is that FOX bumped up their rates above the agreed rate for NASCAR and Basketball, claiming they were additions to the lineup.  Personally I wouldn’t mind them putting these channels into an enhance sports package where if we want them, we pay extra.  I’m willing to pay extra for the channels.  Just make them available.  If they don’t, I will pay Dish for them.

---

Apologies. I gave some general responses as to why this channel is not available in all areas in this thread a few times.

 

At the risk of repeating, I can do so again for any newcomers to this topic: 

 

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.

 

 

 

---

Why do you assume that people will not be willing to pay more for FS2? My monthly cable bill keeps going up and I still have the same poor service. In fact, Comcast added a new regional sports "fee" and I did not get anything in return. Maybe you should use some of that extra money to pay Fox for FS2. I don't mind paying more if I actually get something in return, but instead I get the worst of both worlds: I pay more and still don't get anything in return. Comcast cannot claim that they are concerned with raising their customers monthly bills when they unnecessarily raise bills all the time. 

WHY WHY WHY?  Does Comcast (xfinity) not carry Fox Sports 2??? It is utterly ridiculous that programming on Fox Sports gets moved around on a whim when programs run over, rain delay, or whatever.  BUT when Comcast does not carry all of the Fox Sports channels the viewer is missing out if their sport is the one that is rerouted.

Other companies carry all of the Fox Sports stations.  I play for multiple packages so that I can watch soccer.  When will this be rectified?? I have tried to be a loyal comcast customer and have been for years.

What are you doing with all the $$$ I have been giving to you?

Thanks.

Went to watch the Sunday night MLS match tonight on FSC 1 and found NASCAR instead. Scroll said that the game was moved to FSC 2, of course Comcast doesn't carry that, so we are out of luck. Brilliant. Why do I have two different FSC 1 channel numbers with the same content and no FSC 2? Will Comcast please tune into what their customers actually want to see? In my area, soccer is much bigger than NASCAR. Wake up! Where does one go to make a request anyway?

---

@mccoy86 wrote:

---

@ComcastTeds wrote:

---

@SpeedBuggy wrote:

What bothers me about all this is Comcast's refusal to let us know why these channels aren't available. (I also want MAVTV).  There has been speculation the reason that ATT Uverse have been showing Darts instead of NASCAR is that FOX bumped up their rates above the agreed rate for NASCAR and Basketball, claiming they were additions to the lineup.  Personally I wouldn’t mind them putting these channels into an enhance sports package where if we want them, we pay extra.  I’m willing to pay extra for the channels.  Just make them available.  If they don’t, I will pay Dish for them.

---

Apologies. I gave some general responses as to why this channel is not available in all areas in this thread a few times.

 

At the risk of repeating, I can do so again for any newcomers to this topic: 

 

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.

 

 

 

---

Why do you assume that people will not be willing to pay more for FS2? My monthly cable bill keeps going up and I still have the same poor service. In fact, Comcast added a new regional sports "fee" and I did not get anything in return. Maybe you should use some of that extra money to pay Fox for FS2. I don't mind paying more if I actually get something in return, but instead I get the worst of both worlds: I pay more and still don't get anything in return. Comcast cannot claim that they are concerned with raising their customers monthly bills when they unnecessarily raise bills all the time. 

 

---

Apologies. That "extra money" is going to pay for the additional charges for existing sports programming and sports channels costs that is already being incurred. 

As mentioned earlier, we are not currently permitted to add Fox Sports 2 to a tiered Sports Package. 

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.

---

@MediumAl wrote:

Went to watch the Sunday night MLS match tonight on FSC 1 and found NASCAR instead. Scroll said that the game was moved to FSC 2, of course Comcast doesn't carry that, so we are out of luck. Brilliant. Why do I have two different FSC 1 channel numbers with the same content and no FSC 2? Will Comcast please tune into what their customers actually want to see? In my area, soccer is much bigger than NASCAR. Wake up! Where does one go to make a request anyway?

---

To clarify, duplicate "mirrored" channels (like having FS1 on two separate channels in the channel lineup) do not take up additional bandwidth or channel space. 

The multiple channel locations are simply presented as an optional channel entry points for our customers. 

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;

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.

We don’t currently have an agreement to add Fox Sports 2 to any Sports Package, as much as we might want to.

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.”

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.  

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

Unfortunately, it’s not always as easy as saying, “hey, some (or most) of our customers want this this, 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, we will certainly do so here and in other places.

Approved solution? LOL!  How is this "solved"?  The only solution is to make FOX SPORTS 2 available to those who want it. Period.

"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."

Comcast had no problem with "equipment and such..." when they foisted Al Jazeera TV off on us, did they?  How is that bandwidth use working out for you now?

Comcast is so afraid of increasing costs, because they will lose customers; Why are they not afraid of losing customers who are just plain tired of being gouged for what they already have, and cannot watch what they want to, because the "bandwidth" is taken up with so so many krap channels that nobody watches, but we have to pay for, in order to watch our team play, or "Game of Thrones"?  

That is a bunch of typical BS used by various carriers to justify a lack of service. The cost of carrying a channel such as Fox Sports 2 would be pennies. It would certainly be much less than $1. Adding $1 to the sports package would not cause them to lose any customers. 

---

@markdartj wrote:

Approved solution? LOL!  How is this "solved"?  The only solution is to make FOX SPORTS 2 available to those who want it. Period.

 

"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."

 

Comcast had no problem with "equipment and such..." when they foisted Al Jazeera TV off on us, did they?  How is that bandwidth use working out for you now?

 

Comcast is so afraid of increasing costs, because they will lose customers; Why are they not afraid of losing customers who are just plain tired of being gouged for what they already have, and cannot watch what they want to, because the "bandwidth" is taken up with so so many krap channels that nobody watches, but we have to pay for, in order to watch our team play, or "Game of Thrones"?  

---

Apologies, not sure how that was marked as the solution. I removed that designation. 

Condensed version on Al Jazerra America below:

Al Jazeera America was formerly Current. Comcast had a distribution contract with Current. Current was sold to Al Jazeera America and that existing contract carried over to the new ownership.

Some more background here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_TV

---

@fingerstim wrote:

That is a bunch of typical BS used by various carriers to justify a lack of service. The cost of carrying a channel such as Fox Sports 2 would be pennies. It would certainly be much less than $1. Adding $1 to the sports package would not cause them to lose any customers. 

---

As mentioned previously, our current contract with Fox does not allow us to offer Fox Sports 2 in a Sports Package, as much as we would like to do that.