[News] Sportsnet signs 12 year $5.2 billion for NHL CDN Broadcast rights.

[Weitz]

I have read in this thread little bit about the regional blackouts and how they are still going to be in effect?

I thought they were saying this would not be the case? And I would tend to think that they won't be?

In my mind that was my understanding because of pending legislation at the federal level that is going to outlaw this sort of thing. Anyone have any more clarity into this issue?

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by liamenator

The way Bettman was dodging questions about this, you almost wonder if this became personal, and, if so, whose egos were involved. Did the TSN brass do something to rankle GB or the NHL BoG? Did the latter take issue with TSN's coverage of the lockout, for instance?

It seems to me that TSN's coverage of the NHL in general--though still by and large pandering--has always had more of a critical edge than Sportsnet. Certainly, in comparison, the latter's coverage of the Blue Jays is laughably soft. Did the league want to cozy up to the media corp that it thinks will be more receptive to the company message regarding how the NHL should be branded?

Probably not, but with the egos involved there is little that would surprise me.

You're really, really reaching here. This kind of stuff is extremely unlikely.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I have read in this thread little bit about the regional blackouts and how they are still going to be in effect?

I thought they were saying this would not be the case? And I would tend to think that they won't be?

In my mind that was my understanding because of pending legislation at the federal level that is going to outlaw this sort of thing. Anyone have any more clarity into this issue?

There will not be regional blackouts according to the press conference this morning, they are done.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by strombad

There will not be regional blackouts according to the press conference this morning, they are done.

For national broadcasts, there will be no blackouts/region locking. People will be able to watch the game of their choice if there are multiple games on the national windows of Wed night, Saturday, and Sun night.

For regional broadcasts, like the existing agreements the Flames have with SN, the Jets have with TSN, etc., regional blackouts will still be in effect. By definition, those agreements are for broadcasting games only in specific areas. Today's agreement for national broadcasting rights has no impact on existing or future regional broadcasts or broadcasting rights.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

For national broadcasts, there will be no blackouts/region locking. For regional broadcasts, like the existing agreements the Flames have with SN, the Jets have with TSN, etc., regional blackouts will still be in effect.

Will be interesting to see then with the upcoming legislation outlawing Sports broadcasting blackouts.

"Out-of-market rights for all regional games" is part of the deal, would this not indicate an end to regional blackouts?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Probably not, because one of the mandates that Rogers CEO and Bettman mentioned continuously emphasized was extending the reach of the broadcasts and making them available to as many viewers in as many formats as possible.

Much more likely is that non-Rogers subscribers may pay a premium for the service compared to Rogers, but I doubt that this happens either. If it does, it will be marginal.

But if you are Rogers why would you make it available to Bell subscribers? You just paid a crapload of money to have control of that, it would be bad business. If I am Rogers and I have control of NHLCI there is no way in hell I make that available on Bell. What better way to get a bunch of new customers who will make the switch?

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Will be interesting to see then with the upcoming legislation outlawing Sports broadcasting blackouts.

I'd be curious to read that legislation too, because I imagine it has to do with different blackout conditions and scenarios for national broadcasts then the ones you are thinking of regarding regional broadcasts.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Oh, that proposal last week from some NDP back-bencher? Yeah, that will go no where. It sounds like the person has a fundamental misunderstanding of how regional broadcasts work. If Rogers signs the regional broadcasting rights for the Flames, it's not blacking out the broadcast outside of Alberta because it's a cartoony mustache-twirling silent film villain. It's doing so because it only has the contractual rights to broadcast thew game in Alberta.

Shockingly, the NDP back-bencher doesn't seem to know much about free enterprise business.

http://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-moves-to-...-sports-events

[Jimmy Stang]

The possibility of continued vertical integration by Rogers (and the others in the communications oligopoly) does concern me a little. I'm willing to bet that many of these "platforms" that Rogers is touting will require you to be a subscriber to another Rogers product. Want to watch on your phone? It had better be Rogers.

I can also see them doing what the TV apps have started doing on the iPad. Want to watch on your iPad? That's fine as long as you subscribe to a traditional cable package.

I guess that this is what we can expect because the broadcaster is also the cable company, the wireless provider, etc. I'm not a fan of "tied selling" like this, especially in an oligopoly like what we have in Canada.

And what's with the hate on the CFL? Don't like it? Don't watch it. But hoping that it dies? Wow. As much as TSN's over-the-top graphics and sparks and whooshes (thanks ESPN!) annoy me, I'll give them credit for carving out a good niche with the CFL. I don't see what's so bad about having a healthy domestic professional league - it doesn't have to be either/or. Canada doesn't have the population to support the NFL, so why does the CFL have to yield to it? They're not in competition with each other.

Sort of off topic, but I do think that the future health of TSN does have a wider effect than just hockey.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Oh, that proposal last week from some NDP back-bencher? Yeah, that will go no where.

I couldn't quite remember what I heard about it as it was more just an overheard thing. I do recall it may have had something to do with Rinks that had public money used to build them. So i'm not sure it would have any effect.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

So now that Rogers has control of Centre Ice does that mean Bell tv subscribers will be SOL to order it next season?

BELL could go to the CRTC on that one.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

But if you are Rogers why would you make it available to Bell subscribers? You just paid a crapload of money to have control of that, it would be bad business. If I am Rogers and I have control of NHLCI there is no way in hell I make that available on Bell. What better way to get a bunch of new customers who will make the switch?

Because the NHL is your partner and entered into the deal with you to extend viewership and consumer choice, not to contract it. The deal is to broadcast NHL games in Canada, not to broadcast NHL games to Rogers customers.

Under your scenario, I guess Shaw and Telus would also no longer get CI or Sportsnet channels, since Rogers can't sign up customers in western Canada.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

The possibility of continued vertical integration by Rogers (and the others in the communications oligopoly) does concern me a little. I'm willing to bet that many of these "platforms" that Rogers is touting will require you to be a subscriber to another Rogers product. Want to watch on your phone? It had better be Rogers.

CRTC has mandated that they can't do that. They have to offer it to all platforms at 'fair terms'.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...article595748/

[19Yzerman19]

Really, really hoping the price for Gamecentre doesn't see a significant uptick.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

CRTC has mandated that they can't do that. They have to offer it to all platforms at 'fair terms'.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...article595748/

Well that's encouraging, but just before seeing your post, I was reading an article that Bell is getting called because they have been discounting their own mobile TV while still charging customers out of the bung hole for using the same data to watch Netflix. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

The complaint, from telecom researcher and blogger Ben Klass, argues Bell “discriminates against consumers and competitors” by offering its Bell Mobile TV service for $5 a month, with five gigabytes of video per month included.

If a Bell Mobility customer were to use five gigabytes of video (roughly two high-definition movies, or seven standard-definition movies) through a competing service like Netflix, it would cost them $40 to do so — an 800 per cent markup compared to what it charges for its own service, Klass wrote on his blog.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/11...n_4338654.html

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

CRTC has mandated that they can't do that. They have to offer it to all platforms at 'fair terms'.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...article595748/

Out of thanks, but thank you for that link.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Not really.

Hockey Night in Canada Remains on CBC: Win
Second "Over the Air" National Broadcast on Sunday Nights: Win

National games on Monday and Wednesday is largely unchanged, Regional Broadcasts remain the same.

I would actually call it a win because Sportsnet will have to improve their product for the national products, and hopefully that will extend to the regional broadcasts.

Or, Sportsnet quality could stay Sportsnet quality (or at least not rise to CBC/TSN quality), and then our Wednesday and Saturday broadcasts have taken a hit.

Also:

HNIC no longer generates revenue for CBC: loss.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by SebC

Or, Sportsnet quality could stay Sportsnet quality (or at least not rise to CBC/TSN quality), and then our Wednesday and Saturday broadcasts have taken a hit.

Also:

HNIC no longer generates revenue for CBC: loss.

You can bet your ass cable rates will increase because of this. See the Atlantic article I posted earlier in this thread. The good thing is that at least sports fans will be subsidized by non-sports fans.

[SofaProfessor]

Ok, here's another question with relation to national broadcasts.

If they are, in fact, broadcasting all these games nationally, how would that affect a Gamecentre subscriber? I don't have it but my understanding is that you can't watch any games that are broadcast in your region or nationally. So if a large portion of games will now be broadcast nationally, and the Flames are on SN-Flames, that would make Gamecentre pretty useless unless you had it for the sole purpose of watching American broadcasts. Or am I way off base?

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by SofaProfessor

Ok, here's another question with relation to national broadcasts.

If they are, in fact, broadcasting all these games nationally, how would that affect a Gamecentre subscriber? I don't have it but my understanding is that you can't watch any games that are broadcast in your region or nationally. So if a large portion of games will now be broadcast nationally, and the Flames are on SN-Flames, that would make Gamecentre pretty useless unless you had it for the sole purpose of watching American broadcasts. Or am I way off base?

Nope, that's about right. Wed, Sat, and Sun national games in Canada would not be available on Gamecentre. Nor would regional games in your region as you noted.

There would probably be at least 4-8 games on average most nights that you could still watch with it. And on nights not on the national window, you could watch regional coverage of Canadian teams outside your region with it.