Mets on TV

[Theoldmole]

How can I find out if my local TimeWarner is going to be carrying the new Mets channel?

[metirish]

I would guess they are, aren't they a partner in this deal along with comcast?

[Guest KC]

I think comcast and time warner are partnered into it, it's the cablevision
arch rivals that have to worry - I just know we're going get screwed, at least
at the beginning and I'm gonna be impossible to live with if I don't get every
single Mets game available.

OE: freaky, the whores de cablevision just sent me month end e-statement
to my work email. They always have their hands out.

[nymr83]

don't worry KC, i'm sure the "generous" people at Cablevision will refund you $1 per month for every month they don't carry the Mets. That $6 will, however, be small comfort to you come October when you have missed 6 months of Mets baseball.

[Willets Point]

Can't you switch cable providers?

[nymr83]

in alot of areas you dont have a choice (other than switching to satellite)

[Willets Point]

Ah, don't you just love free market capitalism?

[Frayed Knot]

]Can't you switch cable providers?

Most cable providers have monopolies in those areas they cover, so no.

The heart of the problem stems from the fact that these cable companies frequently are owners of the content (stations) they're providing in addition to being the distributor of them - and a momopoistic one at that.
Last year's fight was based on Cablevision being the owner of MSG & FSNY channels (which carried some 120 NYM games) and what price they would charge to competing companies like Time-Warner & Comcast. Now, as TW & Comcast are partners w/the Mets on this new channel, the seller/buyer roles are reversed so Cablevision now not only has to buy the channel from the outside but it's a channel which is a direct competitor to it's owned stations and is carrying the programming that those stations used to have exclusive rights to.

Some localities are slowly (VERY SLOWLY) allowing multiple cable vendors into some areas as the phone companies attempt to break into the cable TV biz but it's going to be a while before there's any real competition for consumers. Satellite TV is obviously an option but the new channel also has to strike a deal with them.
It's gotta be one of the worst regulated industries in the country.

[Guest KC]

I just want my baseball games. Screw comments on capitalism and my
dollar a month - I give a ton of money to Cablevision for all kinds of stuff,
I don't need one dollar refunded per month, thank you.

I hate the utility companies, every last one of them. I hate them with a
hatred that would make Bret's hate of the Wilpons look like cream cheese
on a bagel versus a boat load of muck dug up from the East River and left
laying on a pier in early August for two weeks.

[Guest Edgy DC]

It's Metaphor Day here at the Crane Pool.

[Guest KC]

>>>It's Metaphor Day here at the Crane Pool.<<<

Well, for my part I think that's a simile - I'm not clever enough to do
metaphors very often.

[nymr83]

i didnt say you wanted the dollar, i said you'd get it, which is pretty lame when for most guys their favorite sports team is 90% of the reason for having cable at all (the other 10% is OTHER sports teams and ESPN News)

edit- YAY I'M BOBBY V!!!

[Guest KC]

If anyone ever does a book about BV, that picture would have to included in the
middle pictures they put in sports books. It was classic the day after it happened
and makes me chuckle every time I see it.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

You know that Bobby loves that photo -

[Guest KC]

Whatya have a backdoor key to that server? Maybe you're the hacker amongst us lol.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

I bookmarked the link to my story.

Ya got a problem with that?

[Guest cleonjones11]

Frayed Knot wrote: ]Can't you switch cable providers? Most cable providers have monopolies in those areas they cover, so no. The heart of the problem stems from the fact that these cable companies frequently are owners of the content (stations) they're providing in addition to being the distributor of them - and a momopoistic one at that. Last year's fight was based on Cablevision being the owner of MSG & FSNY channels (which carried some 120 NYM games) and what price they would charge to competing companies like Time-Warner & Comcast. Now, as TW & Comcast are partners w/the Mets on this new channel, the seller/buyer roles are reversed so Cablevision now not only has to buy the channel from the outside but it's a channel which is a direct competitor to it's owned stations and is carrying the programming that those stations used to have exclusive rights to. Some localities are slowly (VERY SLOWLY) allowing multiple cable vendors into some areas as the phone companies attempt to break into the cable TV biz but it's going to be a while before there's any real competition for consumers. Satellite TV is obviously an option but the new channel also has to strike a deal with them. It's gotta be one of the worst regulated industries in the country.

I live in Morris County and don't plan on actually seeing mant Mets games...so if they suck i'm golden...

[Elster88]

Willets Point wrote: Ah, don't you just love free market capitalism?

IIRC from economics, only one cable provider is allowed per area because it keeps from millions of cable lines crisscrossing the skies.

Same with electricity and phones.

Thus, those monopolies are legal.

[G-Fafif]

SI.com on SNY today. I'm posting a link to the second page of the article because I am not without a penchant for self-interest.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/alex_belth/02/01/sny.mets/1.html

[Guest KC]

>>>Coupled with analyst Keith Hernandez (who "has Tourette's where the truth is concerned," according to Prince)<<<

What's that all about?

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

Very cool - Greg hits the big time!

[metirish]

]Coupled with analyst Keith Hernandez (who "has Tourette's where the truth is concerned," according to Prince)

I think that's supposed to be a compliment, not sure how though.

[G-Fafif]

metirish wrote: ]Coupled with analyst Keith Hernandez (who "has Tourette's where the truth is concerned," according to Prince) I think that's supposed to be a compliment, not sure how though.

Keith can't help but blurt out what he's really thinking. No filter for BS. Yes, definitely a compliment.

[metirish]

Yeah that's what I thought, the reference to Tourette's is not something you see every day, I think his no filter for BS comes form frustration at times.

[Frayed Knot]

]IIRC from economics, only one cable provider is allowed per area because it keeps from millions of cable lines crisscrossing the skies. Same with electricity and phones

Yeah, that was the given reason for a single phone company for years.
ATT essentially wired this entire country and so they were granted a legal monopoly to all long-distance service based on that. But they also had to deal with much more stringent price regulation while Cable has little or none. This is like having to worst of both worlds: no competition OR regulation to cap pricing.

Of course ATT eventually abused their monopoly long enough to the point where they got a court-ordered breakup shoved down their throats. IIRC, Congress's one attempt to regulate cable prices made the matter considerably worse.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

metirish wrote: Yeah that's what I thought, the reference to Tourette's is not something you see every day, I think his no filter for BS comes form frustration at times.

The one time Keith told an unpleasant truth ("this team has quit") he had to put his testicles in escrow. after recanting before the Council of Active Mets and doing penance for his sin.

[Willets Point]

Elster88 wrote: IIRC from economics, only one cable provider is allowed per area because it keeps from millions of cable lines crisscrossing the skies.

Don't cables run underground in the city?

[Guest Edgy DC]

It's also not really an economics principle, but a logistics one.

The other thing about cable companies is getting exclusive government contracts to simultaneiously provide the product of the programming to consumers as well as the services to deliver them is a huge setup for corruption.

[Frayed Knot]

Which was exactly the kind of 'got you coming and going' practices that got the phone company broken up.

They were granted a monopoly for long-distance service, but the local services were "granted" by them to individual companies (NY Tel, NJ Tel, etc) who they just happened to own. They also required you to rent equipment from them in order to use their lines (remember when you couldn't own your own phones) and that equipment was exclusively bought from a manufacturer (Western Electric) who they also owned!

[metirish]

These cable companies try to squeeze you, when I was moving before Christmas I had arranged to get my cable cut by December 13th but no later than that,I had paid up to that date the guy from Suscom had told ne....cool with me, I then arranged to drop of the boxes and remotes of at the local office no later than the 15th, I was informed that if I didn't drop them of I would be billed for "equipment", fine with me, I dropped them off and got a recipt, a few weeks later at my new place I get a bill from Suscom for $634 for a 'failure to return equipment" charge....it was easily sorted out on the phone but still I got quite a shock...