OLN/NHL screwing themselves already

[BRice16]

http://www.nypost.com/sports/27301.htm

You a Rangers or Devils fan with Cablevision? You want to see your teams on OLN's new coverage? Too bad, because OLN is blacking you out. Why? because OLN is on a seperate sports tier, so the NHL and OLN are blacking out games until the network is on basic cable.

I'm sorry, but a network with no leverage and a league with even less shouldn't even try to play this game. Once again I'll say that the NHL should be grateful they're on TV at all this season and they shouldn't be pulling crap like this.

 

[SquiggyFM]

> I'll say that the NHL should be grateful they're on TV at
> all this season and they shouldn't be pulling crap like
> this.
>

Hell, the NHL should be grateful they're the NHL this season.

 

[wxctintern]

I wonder if they'll do the same with COX Cable in Connecticut. Here OLN was moved from Analog Cable to Digital Cable last year.

 

[BRice16]

> I wonder if they'll do the same with COX Cable in
> Connecticut. Here OLN was moved from Analog Cable to Digital
> Cable last year.
>

Well, I think the big issue is that they are doing this in the NYC area market, where Cablevision reports 3 million viewers of its system. A league that averages only slightly better numbers than a rounding error shouldn't allow 3 MILLION eyes (in a hockey tradition-rich area) to be blocked. You could be talking about a third of your viewers here.

I doubt they'll fight the fight in a smaller market. Just a guess.

 

[Mediabrat]

> Well, I think the big issue is that they are doing this in
> the NYC area market, where Cablevision reports 3 million
> viewers of its system. A league that averages only slightly
> better numbers than a rounding error shouldn't allow 3
> MILLION eyes (in a hockey tradition-rich area) to be
> blocked. You could be talking about a third of your viewers
> here.
>
> I doubt they'll fight the fight in a smaller market. Just a
> guess.

The NHL's point -- and I think it's a good one -- is that their fans shouldn't be forced to pay extra (as in fees for digital cable and possibly even a special sports tier) just to see their league's nationally-televised games. I know the trend has started where leagues will give some of their rights to specialty channels that are found mostly on digital tiers (NBA TV, SpeedChannel, NFL Network, etc.), but at least some cable-based games are still on widely available channels (ESPN, TNT, FX, etc.). The least the NHL can do is try to put their fans on the same level as the other big sports.

Also, it should be noted that despite James Dolan's delusions, Cablevision is not the dominant cable provider in the tri-state area. Time Warner has most -- if not all -- of NYC, Comcast has at least half of New Jersey, and as Jay noted, Cox has Connecticut. Cablevision really only controls Long Island and northern New Jersey. Yes, it sucks for those affected -- and if Cablevision knows what's good for them they'll play ball here, though history suggests they won't -- but it's not the worst mistake the league could have made.

 

[MarkLaRoi]

> > I'll say that the NHL should be grateful they're on TV at
> > all this season and they shouldn't be pulling crap like
> > this.
> >
>
> Hell, the NHL should be grateful they're the NHL this
> season.
>


It's bad enough that I lose a month of regular OLN programming for that bike race, is this gonna rob me of more PBR on Saturday and Sunday nights? (I know very little about hockey's normal schedule because I'm not a fan.)<P ID="signature">______________
~Always leave a hole when you go.
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.OneVoiceNow.Blogspot.com>Are we really one voice?</a></P>

 

[6tothebronx]

>Cablevision really only
> controls Long Island and northern New Jersey.

Actually Cablevision controls a lot more than that. Cablevision controls all (or most) of Fairfield County, Connecticut which is part of the New York City DMA, and they also control most of the lower Hudson Valley suburbs (Westchester, Rockland, etc.) These are all prime viewing areas for NYC hockey.

 

[BRice16]

>
> The NHL's point -- and I think it's a good one -- is that
> their fans shouldn't be forced to pay extra (as in fees for
> digital cable and possibly even a special sports tier) just
> to see their league's nationally-televised games. I know
> the trend has started where leagues will give some of their
> rights to specialty channels that are found mostly on
> digital tiers (NBA TV, SpeedChannel, NFL Network, etc.), but
> at least some cable-based games are still on widely
> available channels (ESPN, TNT, FX, etc.). The least the NHL
> can do is try to put their fans on the same level as the
> other big sports.
>

I don't disagree with that, but I think that's a risk that the NHL took when they didn't accept an offer from a widely avalable channel. They shouldn't go back crying about it now.

When you take the money and run, there are certain disadvantages. Yes, ESPN's offer was $10-15 million less, but the difference in exposure and credibility from ESPN2 to OLN is worth a great deal more that the difference in cash.

The NHL is betting that, in the long term, OLN will become a competitor to ESPN. Sadly, like many of the bets the NHL and its owners have made in the last year, this one was misguided. Despite their claims to the contrary, OLN is not a major player for MLB rights. They have been all but excluded from the new NFL package discussions. They have the Tour de France, but without Lance, very few viewers are going to care about it. Their sports division is going to be a one trick pony with the NHL and the league is going to suffer for it in the long run.