[News] CBC/Rogers extends HNIC partnership for 7 years

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Is it true that CBC pays nothing?

Yes. They are basically just turning over their signal.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Yes, that was the original agreement.

Do they incur costs for paying the TV crews or salaries of the announcers, etc or is Rogers just letting CBC air their feed?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Yes. They are basically just turning over their signal.

That's interesting as there's nothing really in it for CBC as Rogers is getting the advertisement money for Canadians tuning in. It actually makes a lot of sense for Rogers as they wouldn't likely be able to net the national broadcast advertising money from their cable feeds.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's interesting as there's nothing really in it for CBC as Rogers is getting the advertisement money for Canadians tuning in.

Relevance. Without hockey they'd probably be defunded within a decade.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's interesting as there's nothing really in it for CBC as Rogers is getting the advertisement money for Canadians tuning in.

The only thing CBC gets out of it is some advertising for their own shows.

[MacFlame]

I'm glad the deal got extended. I don't want to see all hockey go to a full subscription model in Canada. I'm still bitter at the fact that hometown hockey went from City (OTA) to sportsnet (subscription).

HNIC is the only "free" game we get in Canada now (yes, I know it's in our taxes)...really not sure why anyone would have a problem with that.

[Coach]

I love waiting for a very simple "hmm, I was wrong, my bad." It's a rarity around here and I'm really not sure why. You'd think people would be happy when things that upset them are pointed out to have no reason to be upset about.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I love waiting for a very simple "hmm, I was wrong, my bad." It's a rarity around here and I'm really not sure why. You'd think people would be happy when things that upset them are pointed out to have no reason to be upset about.

I am usually the first to say "I was wrong about this or that player/coach" but when it comes to Rogers even a dime of tax money is too much for them as far as I'm concerned. I'm a bit of a skeptic when it comes to CBC behind the scenes but if it is true that no money is getting paid to Rogers then my bad, I was wrong.

[transplant99]

Yeah the CBC was part of things only because of the "brand", with no monetary cost to the CBC, and allows them to use HNIC as a promotional vehicle for other programming.

It's actually a pretty good deal for them and Rogers. It gives RSN another way to deliver games, and gets a ton of eyeballs for the CBC to cross promote.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

The only thing CBC gets out of it is some advertising for their own shows.

Well... they both get some less tangible things. The CBC get's to have the HNIC brand stay relevant while Rogers controls the national NHL rights and Rogers get's to use that brand.

[hwy19man]

Originally Posted by transplant99

It's actually a pretty good deal for them and Rogers. It gives RSN another way to deliver games, and gets a ton of eyeballs for the CBC to cross promote.

I am glad the deal has been extended and it is very good for both parties.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's interesting as there's nothing really in it for CBC as Rogers is getting the advertisement money for Canadians tuning in. It actually makes a lot of sense for Rogers as they wouldn't likely be able to net the national broadcast advertising money from their cable feeds.

Also draws people to the channel who then stay for whatever's on after

[Rubicant]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

Oh god. We still have till 2026 to go on this Rogers deal? Gross...

While that is bad, when I first saw this thread, I thought it said that Rogers was extending its broadcasting agreement for another 7 years.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

Oh god. We still have till 2026 to go on this Rogers deal? Gross...

Seeing people complain about having access to multiple NHL games every single day of the season is ridiculous.

[CroFlames]

HNIC died the day Bell bought the jingle.

It was all downhill from there, and since the Rogers deal, it's HNIC in name only. Sad.

[Northendzone]

I am happy the deal was extended. Saturday night hockey belongs on CBC

[hwy19man]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am happy the deal was extended. Saturday night hockey belongs on CBC

And Sportsnet and City.

[Rubicant]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Seeing people complain about having access to multiple NHL games every single day of the season is ridiculous.

For me at least, I'm not comparing what we have with Rogers against not having access to multiple games per day. I'm comparing with the other company that was bidding for the rights - TSN - who would also have had the ability to present multiple games at once each day.

The quality of a TSN broadcast vs a Rogers broadcast isn't even comparable IMO, so I'm bummed that we have to put up with subpar picture and sound quality.

[CroFlames]

I was at a sports bar the other day and requested 2 different nhl games.

One was a Flames game on Snet, the other was Caps on NBC. The two TVs were side by side and the models were identical.

The picture quality was night and day between the two broadcasts.

Some people think we should be thankful for subpar broadcasts? It's more than just bad HD.

[Joborule]

I don't understand how the Sportsnet camera production is so dark. What equipment are they using? We joke about it, but are they literally using 'HD' equipment from 2004? TSN, NBC, and the regional channels in the states have much better visual clarity.