I do not know what the status of Marquee sports will be but I do object to the cost of their fans and non-fans. I for one will consider changing my choice of TV provider if the cost goes up to support the Cubs payroll. Comcast, please hold the line and not pay the Cubs
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members.
“Do you plan to offer the channel in the future? We can’t make guesses about possible channel additions in the future. However, we regularly evaluate our channel lineups as our customers' interests change and make changes we think will add more value to their services.”
Translation—when the Cubs cave or something else makes the deal amenable to us, we’ll sign on. Otherwise, you’re on your own.
I live inside the Boston Red Sox "local zone" and am still able to see their games via MLB.TV even when on NESN, at least spring training right now. You'll have to get MLB.TV's response before speculating.
Here is a list of spring training games on MLB.TV that have availability in a team's home market marked. The Red Sox game on 2/27 will be available in Boston, but, apparently, the 2/29 game against a Yankees split squad will not.
Marquee Sprots Network..... I am currently a Dish customer for TV and xfinity for internet. I know Dish will not carry the Marquee Sports Network. They have pulled all regional sports networks. This is a new channel in the chichago market. I will not switch to ATT and Direct TV. So my only options are Hulu who already carry the Marquee Network or Comcast. If comcast picks up Marquee I will be calling that day to sign up for xfinity TV. Please consider the Marquee Sports Network. I do believe you will pick up new customers by carying this channel.
Why are Cubs fans mad at Comcast? The Cubs were on CSN, WGN and ABC. The Cubs owner decided to take the team off of those channels. Tom Ricketts took the Cubs games off of Comcast. Why don’t Cubs fans blame him? No other Chicago sports team has it’s own Network.
@merrily211 wrote: Why are Cubs fans mad at Comcast? The Cubs were on CSN, WGN and ABC. The Cubs greedy billionaire owner decided to take the team off of those channels. Tom Ricketts took the Cubs games off of Comcast. Why don’t Cubs fans blame him? No other Chicago sports team has it’s own Network.
It's not an unreasonable question, but it is his team. That said, if the terms were acceptable to other cable/satellite providers to up with Marquee, then isn't it up to Comcast to come aboard with similar terms?
If no one were buying the terms Marquee and Sinclair set forth, that's a more legitimate argument. But clearly that's not the case (as many providers have signed on), so it's more Comcast just being petty. Therefore, Comcast gets more of the blame here.
@merrily211 wrote: Why are Cubs fans mad at Comcast? The Cubs were on CSN, WGN and ABC. The Cubs greedy billionaire owner decided to take the team off of those channels. Tom Ricketts took the Cubs games off of Comcast. Why don’t Cubs fans blame him? No other Chicago sports team has it’s own Network.
It's not an unreasonable question, but it is his team. That said, if the terms were acceptable to other cable/satellite providers to up with Marquee, then isn't it up to Comcast to come aboard with similar terms?
If no one were buying the terms Marquee and Sinclair set forth, that's a more legitimate argument. But clearly that's not the case (as many providers have signed on), so it's more Comcast just being petty. Therefore, Comcast gets more of the blame here.
Comcast, Dish, WOW, and YouTube TV have not signed on with Marquee.
Dish is never coming, so it’s up to you and YTTV as the last realistic holdouts. And I’m guessing YTTV will get in before you do.
You see it’s pretty obvious more people on these boards and on social media want you to offer it than not want you to offer it, just as a lot of people want ACC NETWORK. So I think Comcast needs to swallow its pride and lose the pettiness that resulted when the Cubs decided to partner with Sinclair instead of you for their new venture, and find a way to work something out. Then again, what do I know?
Correct, the other teams shared CSN. Bt the other 3 teams made up half the viewing public and the Cubs made up the other half on their own. Why shouldn't ownership want a better tv deal? I honestly do not get this old argument. We pay for CSN. I paid for 4 teams on CSN, and honestly, couldn't care less about 3 of them. Maybe, since the Cubs are off CSN, they should lower their cost. If they did that, maybe the Marquee cost could take up that lowered cost and there be no change to the consumer. With the Cubs leaving CSN, that network loses those viewers. Stands to reason that price drops. Bottom line is, as an owner you fight to get the best tv deal you can. I am sure CSN was not the best deal the Cubs could made, so they started their own network. They are the only team in Chicago to do it, but not the only team in baseball to have one. They are also the only team in Chicago that warrants their own channel. All that said, it seems the price must be pretty reasonable. Time for Comcast to agree to the deal. If they do not by mid March, I will be gone.
So Comcast is the lone realistic holdout to possibly get a deal with YT and Dish likely never coming aboard. Now Comcast has a chance to reacquire people who decided to cut the cord and went to YTTV.
Subscribers didn’t seem to have a problem when Comcast and the Cubs were partners. Oh, but then there was incentive for Comcast to carry the network.
And I would say from the threads here and on social media that the vast majority doesn’t feel that way. You may feel that way, though. But don’t speak for everyone.
If you’re going to justify the Cubs leaving Comcast. Because It’s Tom Ricketts team and he has the right to get the best deal possible for the Cubs. That same right should be given to Comcast. Comcast will do what’s in its best interest as well. The vast majority of their subscribers don’t want to subsidize Cubs games on a new network.
Comcast has 1.5 million subscribers in Chicago and the surrounding suburbs. This is the best number I can find. Are there over 750,000 Comcast subscribers demanding the Marquee network? In this thread and on social media. If there were, Comcast would have a deal in place. Of course the people who aren’t getting what they want are going to make the most noise.
@merrily211 wrote: Comcast has 1.5 million subscribers in Chicago and the surrounding suburbs. This is the best number I can find. Are there over 750,000 Comcast subscribers demanding the Marquee network? In this thread and on social media. If there were, Comcast would have a deal in place. Of course the people who aren’t getting what they want are going to make the most noise.
The main reason Comcast doesn't have a deal in place is because they were a former partner of the Cubs and they're being petty. Comcast is also notorious for not jumping to add new channels unless it happens to be a channel they happen to have a stake in. We had Outdoor Life, which begat Versus, which begat NBCSN--from the get-go because Comcast owns the channel. I'd dare say the number of people interested in outdoor sports (like fishing) on television is far less than the number of people who would like to see the Cubs. And let's also not forget how long they dragged their feet in acquiring BTN (FOX Sports property).
And again, the mere fact that DirecTV and WOW (the second and fourth largest providers in the Chicago area) accepted the Cubs' terms suggests that maybe it isn't the Cubs being unreasonable here. So their customers are more willing to subsidize the channel than Comcast customers? Or maybe it's just Comcast trying to stick it to a former partner for not repartnering with them once they decided to move on (the prevailing thought at one time before the Cubs chose Sinclair was that NBCSCH+ would be rebranded as the new Cubs network and NBCSCH would stay the primary home for the Sox, Bulls and Hawks--and if that were the case, we're not having this conversation).
The idea that over half the people have to want the network before Comcast should take it in is not the right way to think about it. If we use 1.5M subscribers as a base, how many do the lose if $4 is added to a bill? My guess is not many. How many do they lose if 400,000 people want the channel. I would say a large part of that 400,000. I mean they don’t even have to add it into a package price. They are always adding a dollar here if there for equipment. And people stay. So why not add Marquee and add money per box? Not like they haven’t done that since my last deal where they promised in rate increase. When questioned on it they told me they didn’t raise my rate, they raised equipment fees. This is 100% on Comcast trying to muscle a better deal and playing hardball. If they go too far with this they will lose a lot more people then they would if they just took the deal.
sriv94
Contributor
•
112 Messages
5 years ago
We can’t make guesses about possible channel additions in the future. However, we regularly evaluate our channel lineups as our customers' interests change and make changes we think will add more value to their services.”
Translation—when the Cubs cave or something else makes the deal amenable to us, we’ll sign on. Otherwise, you’re on your own.
0
0
ThatDonGuy
Problem Solver
•
836 Messages
5 years ago
Here is a list of spring training games on MLB.TV that have availability in a team's home market marked. The Red Sox game on 2/27 will be available in Boston, but, apparently, the 2/29 game against a Yankees split squad will not.
0
0
TOBW
New Poster
•
2 Messages
5 years ago
Marquee Sprots Network..... I am currently a Dish customer for TV and xfinity for internet. I know Dish will not carry the Marquee Sports Network. They have pulled all regional sports networks. This is a new channel in the chichago market. I will not switch to ATT and Direct TV. So my only options are Hulu who already carry the Marquee Network or Comcast. If comcast picks up Marquee I will be calling that day to sign up for xfinity TV. Please consider the Marquee Sports Network. I do believe you will pick up new customers by carying this channel.
0
0
merrily211
Regular Visitor
•
4 Messages
5 years ago
Why are Cubs fans mad at Comcast? The Cubs were on CSN, WGN and ABC. The Cubs owner decided to take the team off of those channels. Tom Ricketts took the Cubs games off of Comcast. Why don’t Cubs fans blame him? No other Chicago sports team has it’s own Network.
0
sriv94
Contributor
•
112 Messages
5 years ago
It's not an unreasonable question, but it is his team. That said, if the terms were acceptable to other cable/satellite providers to up with Marquee, then isn't it up to Comcast to come aboard with similar terms?
If no one were buying the terms Marquee and Sinclair set forth, that's a more legitimate argument. But clearly that's not the case (as many providers have signed on), so it's more Comcast just being petty. Therefore, Comcast gets more of the blame here.
0
0
Again
Expert
•
31.8K Messages
5 years ago
Comcast, Dish, WOW, and YouTube TV have not signed on with Marquee.
0
sriv94
Contributor
•
112 Messages
5 years ago
Dish is never coming, so it’s up to you and YTTV as the last realistic holdouts. And I’m guessing YTTV will get in before you do.
You see it’s pretty obvious more people on these boards and on social media want you to offer it than not want you to offer it, just as a lot of people want ACC NETWORK. So I think Comcast needs to swallow its pride and lose the pettiness that resulted when the Cubs decided to partner with Sinclair instead of you for their new venture, and find a way to work something out. Then again, what do I know?
0
0
ralphc10
Contributor
•
21 Messages
5 years ago
Correct, the other teams shared CSN. Bt the other 3 teams made up half the viewing public and the Cubs made up the other half on their own. Why shouldn't ownership want a better tv deal? I honestly do not get this old argument. We pay for CSN. I paid for 4 teams on CSN, and honestly, couldn't care less about 3 of them. Maybe, since the Cubs are off CSN, they should lower their cost. If they did that, maybe the Marquee cost could take up that lowered cost and there be no change to the consumer. With the Cubs leaving CSN, that network loses those viewers. Stands to reason that price drops. Bottom line is, as an owner you fight to get the best tv deal you can. I am sure CSN was not the best deal the Cubs could made, so they started their own network. They are the only team in Chicago to do it, but not the only team in baseball to have one. They are also the only team in Chicago that warrants their own channel. All that said, it seems the price must be pretty reasonable. Time for Comcast to agree to the deal. If they do not by mid March, I will be gone.
0
0
sriv94
Contributor
•
112 Messages
5 years ago
OK, so much for that.
https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/youtube-tv-is-losing-sinclair-owned-fox-sports-networks/
So Comcast is the lone realistic holdout to possibly get a deal with YT and Dish likely never coming aboard. Now Comcast has a chance to reacquire people who decided to cut the cord and went to YTTV.
0
0
sriv94
Contributor
•
112 Messages
5 years ago
And I would say from the threads here and on social media that the vast majority doesn’t feel that way. You may feel that way, though. But don’t speak for everyone.
0
0
merrily211
Regular Visitor
•
4 Messages
5 years ago
0
merrily211
Regular Visitor
•
4 Messages
5 years ago
0
0
sriv94
Contributor
•
112 Messages
5 years ago
The main reason Comcast doesn't have a deal in place is because they were a former partner of the Cubs and they're being petty. Comcast is also notorious for not jumping to add new channels unless it happens to be a channel they happen to have a stake in. We had Outdoor Life, which begat Versus, which begat NBCSN--from the get-go because Comcast owns the channel. I'd dare say the number of people interested in outdoor sports (like fishing) on television is far less than the number of people who would like to see the Cubs. And let's also not forget how long they dragged their feet in acquiring BTN (FOX Sports property).
And again, the mere fact that DirecTV and WOW (the second and fourth largest providers in the Chicago area) accepted the Cubs' terms suggests that maybe it isn't the Cubs being unreasonable here. So their customers are more willing to subsidize the channel than Comcast customers? Or maybe it's just Comcast trying to stick it to a former partner for not repartnering with them once they decided to move on (the prevailing thought at one time before the Cubs chose Sinclair was that NBCSCH+ would be rebranded as the new Cubs network and NBCSCH would stay the primary home for the Sox, Bulls and Hawks--and if that were the case, we're not having this conversation).
0
0
ralphc10
Contributor
•
21 Messages
5 years ago
0
0
Andyr1
Gold Problem Solver
•
8K Messages
5 years ago
Don't look to YouTube TV. They are dropping a bunch of sports networks due to costs:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/02/27/youtube-tv-to-drop-fox-regional-sports-yes-network-mlb-nba-nhl/4896555002/
0
0