ESPN3, Speed2 and ISPs

Stacy King · **Posted:** Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:38 am

Aaron Buckley wrote:

This is no different that the NFL package and Directv. You have U-Verse or Cable? Then no NFL package for you.

If these were TV channels, I'd agree with you 100% ... as it is, I only agree with you about 70%

What I don't want to see is us having to choose between "packages" of internet sites that we can and can't view and having to decide between ISPs in order to get a better "package"... and I'm just afraid that this will set a precedent for that.

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:41 am

Stacy King wrote:

Which I guess they have every right to do... but why not ALSO provide a subscription plan to customers directly using the same filter, only reversed (if your ISP is NOT on the list, then you can subscribe to ESPN3/Speed2 for $X.XX per month/year)?

The only thing I can figure is that when they first launched this they probably cut a LOT of deals with the bigger ISPs to get the thing going. Otherwise, NOBODY would have bought it, I don't think. ISP margins, especially then, were just razor thin already. They didn't have tons of cash sitting around to make that happen. But somehow I'd bet the ATT's of the world got a honey of a deal, and part of that deal was that ESPN agreed to *not* sell it via subscription, too. That puts an even bigger premium on getting people to switch to the ISP that's carrying that content...they simply can't get it any other way.

--Donnie

Stacy King · **Posted:** Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:44 am

It's sad that it's TV and internet content that gets me more riled up than anything LOL

clinehall · **Posted:** Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:53 pm

Stacy King wrote:

clinehall wrote:

Free Market System.

But that's just it Cline! This business plan ISN'T free market! If it was, I would have the choice to view/pay for ESPN3 or Speed2. Instead, my choice is determined by who my ISP is while at the same time being forced to choose between a provider (and ALL their other products which I may or may not want) just to have access to an individual site's content.

It's a cowardly thing to do by ESPN and Speed if you ask me. But again, I need to know what's in it for the ISP partnership... is it just a way for those ISPs to get new subscribers? They MUST be paying ESPN or Speed something... otherwise it would be the worst business plan ever for the websites.

Hey a thoughtful polite discussion of economicswhichcanleanintopolitics discussion on the internet, only on our forum!

Basically it has already been said, but:

My definition of free market allows the producer of a product to sell for how much and whatever means they want. As long as it comes under free trade, the consumer is protected. You don't have to buy it! While I wish I could buy about 20 of the channels I have on my cable system at a prorated price, they ain't gonna let me.

Now with the advances in technology who knows what is on the horizon. Have you noticed how much stuff is on tv that is filmed with a GoPro? Things are getting alot cheaper to produce, will the sporting events limit the rights to showing or look to it as good for their business.

RobLupella · **Posted:** Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:39 pm

[quote="clinehall
My definition of free market allows the producer of a product to sell for how much and whatever means they want. As long as it comes under free trade, the consumer is protected. [/quote]

Oh I hope you don't universally believe that. I do in this case, but...

THSCC Forums

ESPN3, Speed2 and ISPs

Who is online