Fallout from new Canadian TV deal uncertain, but expect prices to rise

Jonathan Willis
November 27 2013 07:47AM

With the news yesterday that Rogers and the NHL had agreed on a 12-year, $5.232 billion Canadian television deal, the overwhelming reaction was uncertainty. We don’t know how this will effect TSN or CBC, we don’t know how Rogers will cover the game, and we don’t know if the hockey-watching experience will be better a year from now than it is today.

What we know for sure is that NHL hockey is going to be on Rogers. What we also know, with barely less certainty, is that it’s going to cost more to watch.

The Experts

Jim Jamieson of The Province talked to two business experts: UBC’s James Brander and SFU’s Linday Meredith. The full article is here (and well worth reading) but note the similarity in comments both made.

First, Brander:

The first thing I noticed is the big price tag, and obviously Rogers has to recoup that.

And Meredith:

We’ll see a lot of bundling or extra charges for premium channels. I’m sure Rogers will be pushing hard on all those buttons because they’ve got a lot of money to recoup. Whether it means having to buy stuff you don’t want or premium channels, your cable bill will be going up.

The Logic

It’s pretty straight forward. The NHL’s national television rights cost lots more now than they used to (Chris Botta of Sports Business Journal put the total value of the old deals at roughly $190 million); this new deal increases that to an average of over $400 million per year. Even assuming that NHL hockey was a cash cow for CBC and TSN (which seems likely, given the spike in price), it’s a pretty decent bet that a massive increase in the cost of the product for the provider is going to result in price increases for the consumer.

Commissioner Gary Bettman and the executives at Rogers Communications can pay lip service to the idea that, on some level, this deal was the best deal for fans but it would be a mistake to see it as more than lip service.

The NHL is focused on one thing: money. They’ve demonstrated it time and again, especially with their willingness to force labour stoppages to squeeze as much money as possible out of the sport. Rogers was willing to pay up for the television rights; consequently, the NHL was all too happy to do a deal with Rogers.

Likewise, Rogers is a business with the primary focus of making money. A lot of that money, doubtless, will come from expanding the amount of product available and milking advertisers for all that they are worth. But it would be silly to assume that every available revenue stream won’t be tapped, and that’s likely to include increased prices for the consumer.

A shiny new television deal is unquestionably good for the business of the NHL. It may yet prove to be good for fans, too, if Rogers can deliver a superior product. Right now there’s no way of knowing whether the product will be better or worse, only that it’s likely to cost more.

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is Managing Editor of the Nation Network. He also currently writes for the Edmonton Journal's Cult of Hockey, Grantland, and Hockey Prospectus. His work has appeared at theScore, ESPN and Puck Daddy. He was previously founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue. Contact him at jonathan (dot) willis (at) live (dot) ca.
Avatar
#51 camdog
November 27 2013, 09:51AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
+1
10
props
Oiler Al wrote:

Cherry is the biggest and oldest senile dino on the show. Time for the old fart to retire. He has been spewing the same lexicon for 20 years... nothing new from him.

Nick Kyperos, the new voice of the nation, lol. Ya he's way better...

Avatar
#52 They're $hittie
November 27 2013, 09:56AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
20
props
Romulus' Apotheosis wrote:

Come now… Gene is hilarious and a side-show. It's the commentariat that deserves scrutiny here.

your right no problem with Gene, but it is so beyond terrible of a product and almost to the point of amateur and unprofessional.

Just Lame

Avatar
#53 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 09:57AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
20
props

Rogers has been screwing us with cellphone bills for years and here's the proof. I left their garbage service and what little hocked I did watch I kind of lost an appetite for. I hate that company and everything it stands for...

Avatar
#54 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 09:59AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
4
props

You fail to note that the federal government is looking at debundling channels because the practice is a joke. They won't be able to bend us over for much longer

Avatar
#55 mayorblaine
November 27 2013, 09:59AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
9
props

this is a business decision. it is about money. anyone who thinks "we" matter is wrong. "we" don't but our money does.

Avatar
#56 Spydyr
November 27 2013, 10:02AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
14
props

The bottom line is the 5.2 Billion and Rogers profits will come out of the pocket of Canadians.

They never even kissed us first.

Avatar
#57 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 10:04AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
10
props
Supernova wrote:

Interested to see how Center ice / game pass will work with no local blackouts.

The only reason I keep cable is for sports. But if I could pay $x for a subscription to the oilers and watch the Games with no blackouts I would do that In a second.

I thought like you did but just over a year ago I cut off my cable and it is one of the best things I've done. Mostly garbage on anyway and I can find anything on the net. You can stream every sport or show and easily hook up to a tv if you don't like the comp screen. Screw cable...

Avatar
#58 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 10:08AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
+1
11
props

The best thing that the NHL did for me was the lockout before this last one. It showed me that I didn't need hockey and opened my eyes to all the other things I could do with my time and money. I called it quits over this last lockout. I still follow the oilers from time to time but I don't go out of my way to watch and don't give katz a dime of my money. He wants to turn this team into a joke...well... the joke will be on him soon enough, the sheep just need to wake up and pull their heads out of their backsides

Avatar
#59 Rob...
November 27 2013, 10:09AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
5
props
Jonathan Willis wrote:

One point here: the current government has been pushing for that. It's far from a certainty that the Conservatives will win a federal election in 2015, and also far from a certainty that the Liberals and/or NDP would continue the same policies if they were to win an election.

I'm not endorsing one side or the other, simply noting that politics is fluid.

If the 'other side' gets in power I'm buying stock in Frito-Lay and hydroponics companies. The changes they'll bring in will have little to do with the CRTC unless they redefined it to mean cannabis regulation and trafficking commission.

Avatar
#60 Romulus' Apotheosis
November 27 2013, 10:09AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
3
props
They're $hittie wrote:

your right no problem with Gene, but it is so beyond terrible of a product and almost to the point of amateur and unprofessional.

Just Lame

Oh, I completely agree that he's lame and a real groaner… he just enjoys it so much that I find him… I don't know… not entertaining, but an object of curiosity.

Avatar
#61 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 10:09AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
+1
12
props

ADIOS RISHAUG!!!!

Avatar
#62 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 10:15AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
3
props
Lowe Expectations wrote:

Remember, a big part of this is the push for people to have rogers plans for smartphones, tablets etc in order to get the streaming of games. I think the streaming side is the untapped market Rogers will be going after. TV in it's current format is slowly dying.

Like hell I'm going to burn through my data and pay up the ass to watch this turd of a team and product...

Avatar
#63 2004Z06
November 27 2013, 10:15AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
0
props
jake wrote:

Compared to revenue sharing under the present agreement to air games in Canada by TSN CBC, SN, I wonder how much more $ teams (in particular US based teams that are struggling) will get as a result of this Canadian broadasting rights deal. I guess another way of asking is how much does this benefit Canadian teams: to reach the cap floor, to reach the cap ceiling, to attract higher end talent, to retain higher end talent...etc etc...in a salary cap era? - it likely doesen't.

3 mil per year.

Avatar
#64 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 10:18AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
+1
5
props
Spydyr wrote:

The bottom line is the 5.2 Billion and Rogers profits will come out of the pocket of Canadians.

They never even kissed us first.

Just stay away from companies that are involved with the NHL and Sportsnet and you won't have to bitch about the increase...

Avatar
#65 IronyInThePark
November 27 2013, 10:23AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
10
props
Bryzarro World wrote:

ADIOS RISHAUG!!!!

Interesting point...and to take this further consider this observation.

This will definately change the landscape of staff employed with TSN in regional or local areas. Will there be enough work in Edmonton for Ryan...maybe /maybe not.

I happen to thing that Ryan's interview of Bryzgalov took on a Labour Relations slant with him focusing on the "how do you feel about Philly terminating your employment with them" angle.

The irony is now should we be asking or planning the interview with Ryan when he surfaces after getting terminated with TSN about why they didnt keep him and how does he feel about TSN now.

Avatar
#66 Todd
November 27 2013, 10:27AM
Trash it!
11
trashes
+1
13
props

Man I don't get it... Why are people complaining? Its so typically Canadian to feel entitled. But sports? Really? People feel entitled to their NHL hockey...

If it costs too much, don't watch. If you don't like the product, don't watch. If you do like it, and its worth the cost for you, great! That's how the real world works.

Maybe some of the lefties out there can get involved here. Regulate it, unionize it, cap it, watchdog it. Send ideas to a policy think tank and figure out how to socially engineer the optimal NHL TV deal that is accessible, honest, fair and FREE for everyone! Maybe get those fat cat executives at Rogers to subsidize it for us.

OR - it could be run like the NFL. A league who has focused on making money and having an amazing product and the end result is THE BEST sports product on the planet.

Avatar
#67 book¡e
November 27 2013, 10:29AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
13
props
Bryzarro World wrote:

Like hell I'm going to burn through my data and pay up the ass to watch this turd of a team and product...

You should check out something called wi-fi.

Avatar
#68 book¡e
November 27 2013, 10:30AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
+1
14
props
Spydyr wrote:

The bottom line is the 5.2 Billion and Rogers profits will come out of the pocket of Canadians.

They never even kissed us first.

Yeah, stupid profit. Profit is terrible. Without profit and trade and markets we would be so much better off. Now let's go hunt some deer with our sharp sticks.

Avatar
#69 book¡e
November 27 2013, 10:33AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
+1
8
props
bleedblue wrote:

Its time for the Communist Broadcasting Corp to go away. And drop Cherry off at the Tyrell Museum for display.

Keep your redneck trash in Ontario - we don't need your backwards thinking regressives in Alberta.

Avatar
#70 Doctor Smashy
November 27 2013, 10:33AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
4
props
camdog wrote:

Nick Kyperos, the new voice of the nation, lol. Ya he's way better...

Now that is a chilling thought...

...from the network that brought us this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI2FVbtNv0U

...stay classy Sportsnet.....

Avatar
#71 The Benevolent Orca
November 27 2013, 10:36AM
Trash it!
13
trashes
+1
2
props

I don't see increase's coming. If this means more hockey on TV to watch, I'm all for it. TSN has dreadful commentary anyways, so good riddance.

One question from me. What happens to TSN now? Their viewership in Canada is going to plummet. Maybe they can work a stronger CFL deal. I'd be all over that.

Avatar
#72 TonyT
November 27 2013, 10:52AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
6
props

I regularly watch trade deadline day on both networks (tsn and sportsnet), and I have been pleasantly surprised as to how many trades Kypreos actually breaks before the insiders.

Avatar
#73 Derick V
November 27 2013, 10:55AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
5
props

TL'DR: There is a scenario where Rogers screws fans and gouges them for access to hockey. Alternately, they subsidize this with creative revenue streams as a service provider and aggressive ad sales. I hate greedy Rogers just as much as you guys, but relax people!

It's interesting that the reaction to this is solely that Rogers plans to subsidize the cost of this deal solely on our backs alone. I don't see this as being entirely the case.

First you must consider that Rogers will try to leverage NHL coverage to lure customers away from other service providers (mainly Bell and minor carriers) by bundling access to hockey coverage for their customers. Look no further than how much Bell advertised TSN Mobile to customers during the playoffs (where Rogers was locked out).

Rogers would rather have you as a cable customer at Bell's loss to save you money on more hockey than screw everybody and alienate customers. You're worth more to them as a customer of their services than as a consumer of their content. If they can put the two together they'll make a lot more money than if they just jack up the prices on access to content. There are already overtures hidden in the media coverage that they are thinking of doing this.

Secondly, the more ways consumers CAN watch, the more games they offer TO watch, the more people hockey people will watch. This blanketed national coverage will clearly drive up ad prices on Rogers' networks. They will seek to subsidize this deal heavily with ad sales. They are taking 100% of ad revenue on HNIC AND using the brand to draw eyeballs in the Cup playoffs and finals. They'll make a killing on that and it's a bigger loss to CBC than people realize.

Avatar
#74 Spydyr
November 27 2013, 10:56AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
+1
11
props
book¡e wrote:

Yeah, stupid profit. Profit is terrible. Without profit and trade and markets we would be so much better off. Now let's go hunt some deer with our sharp sticks.

Yes, billionaires and millionaires get more money on the back of the working class.

The discrepancy between the rich and the rest of us continues to grow.

Avatar
#75 Derick V
November 27 2013, 11:02AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
4
props
The Benevolent Orca wrote:

I don't see increase's coming. If this means more hockey on TV to watch, I'm all for it. TSN has dreadful commentary anyways, so good riddance.

One question from me. What happens to TSN now? Their viewership in Canada is going to plummet. Maybe they can work a stronger CFL deal. I'd be all over that.

TSN will be fine as long as two things happen:

1. They compete with the NHL coverage for ratings by acquiring strong media deals for other sports people like to watch (NFL, CFL, NBA, MLB).

2. Keep their strong hockey news coverage and analysis when the games aren't on so people switch channels when the game's over and they want to hear smart people talk about the game that just ended.

I'd say both have to happen, but likely won't. It'll be hard for fans to stomach NBA on TSN with the abrupt transition to TH2N and Insider Trading right afterwards. Trying to keep both fan-bases watching at different times will likely piss off other content providers because their product isn't getting suitable wrap-around coverage.

If they go all in on other sports products, the hockey team will likely jump ship to Rogers or NBC, possibly keeping a "loaner" clause to come back for IIHF tournaments.

Dark days ahead indeed. They survived for four years a while back, but this is three times the length in an age where people will watch the product they want on 2+ screens at a time with little attention for other venues.

Avatar
#76 pelhem grenville
November 27 2013, 11:05AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
1
props

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/future-nhl-free-agents-will-cash-in-on-tv-deal/

...the mcdavid kid will be a gazilionaire

Avatar
#77 Gravis82
November 27 2013, 11:06AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
5
props
Todd wrote:

Man I don't get it... Why are people complaining? Its so typically Canadian to feel entitled. But sports? Really? People feel entitled to their NHL hockey...

If it costs too much, don't watch. If you don't like the product, don't watch. If you do like it, and its worth the cost for you, great! That's how the real world works.

Maybe some of the lefties out there can get involved here. Regulate it, unionize it, cap it, watchdog it. Send ideas to a policy think tank and figure out how to socially engineer the optimal NHL TV deal that is accessible, honest, fair and FREE for everyone! Maybe get those fat cat executives at Rogers to subsidize it for us.

OR - it could be run like the NFL. A league who has focused on making money and having an amazing product and the end result is THE BEST sports product on the planet.

Agree, but right now Rogers Sportsnet is actually the worst product. That's the problem with this. I'm sure they get will better and one day reach an NFL level of "amazingness". I'm just not looking forward to paying more to watch an inferior product go through 5 years of growing pains. I also simply cannot choose to not watch if i don't like the product. It's a required element in my life, just like gas in my gas in my car, which i also think is overpriced, but i buy it anyway. I'm screwed.

Avatar
#79 Bertly83
November 27 2013, 11:17AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
+1
7
props

televised hockey isn't a right, it is a privilege. we pay for this privilege.

if you don't want to pay, then you lose the privilege.

if it costs something to produce, its not given away for free. this is business, this is life.

whether they raise prices or don't, that's the nature of the beast.

do you pay for cable now? yes. will you continue so that you can watch hockey? yes.

Avatar
#80 Todd
November 27 2013, 11:18AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
0
props
Jonathan Willis wrote:

The new deal works out to roughly $14.5MM/season on average for every NHL team.

Darren Dreger reported that some of that money comes off the top to the Canadian clubs, but I haven't seen anyone report how much of it does.

No idea if this is accurate, but yesterday on Hockey Central, Doug MacLean said the US teams will get about $10mil/year

Avatar
#81 Todd
November 27 2013, 11:21AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
3
props
Bertly83 wrote:

televised hockey isn't a right, it is a privilege. we pay for this privilege.

if you don't want to pay, then you lose the privilege.

if it costs something to produce, its not given away for free. this is business, this is life.

whether they raise prices or don't, that's the nature of the beast.

do you pay for cable now? yes. will you continue so that you can watch hockey? yes.

^^ THIS X 100

Avatar
#83 book¡e
November 27 2013, 11:23AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
+1
6
props
Spydyr wrote:

Yes, billionaires and millionaires get more money on the back of the working class.

The discrepancy between the rich and the rest of us continues to grow.

So.... revolution?

I am all for instituting more progressive taxes to help address inequality and ensure that there are good opportunities and incentives for all to succeed, but there is nothing wrong with profit - it is integral to a well functioning market.

Avatar
#85 book¡e
November 27 2013, 11:31AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
11
props
The Benevolent Orca wrote:

I don't see increase's coming. If this means more hockey on TV to watch, I'm all for it. TSN has dreadful commentary anyways, so good riddance.

One question from me. What happens to TSN now? Their viewership in Canada is going to plummet. Maybe they can work a stronger CFL deal. I'd be all over that.

I think we will finally get back to the great coverage of World Strongman Competitions that we were provided with in the 1990s.

It used to be that you could find a good caber tossing competition just by flipping through the channels, now even finding people carrying fridges in a 50 meter dash is difficult.

Avatar
#86 They're $hittie
November 27 2013, 11:32AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
7
props
Jonathan Willis wrote:

A couple of general comments on the thread:

1. People are absolutely right to point out that broadcasting hockey is a business, and Rogers can charge whatever they want, at which point consumers have the right to pay the increased prices or consume less hockey. All I've said above is that expecting those prices to increase is natural; I'm not casting a moral judgment one way or the other.

2. With that said, I'm not surprised the idea of higher prices annoys people, or that people in general don't feel warm and fuzzy to the telecomm companies.

3. Right now, I'd agree that Sportsnet offers the third-best product of the three English language Canadian providers. The regional teams aren't even a little critical and the analysis lags far behind TSN. I imagine they'll up their game (I don't think Rogers bought these rights so they can spend the next decade hearing 'man, I miss TSN!') but we'll see.

4. I'm personally a fan of Gene Principe. I get that he's not serious, but he adds some levity to a broadcast that has been loss-heavy the last few years.

Again I dont mind Gene, but the oilers on ice performance, the old boys club, the old arena, the octane, and Sportsnets coverage of the oilers is already the laughing stock of the league.

I get that their are 20 owners who would love to have the edmonton market and the young core of players, but everything else about this club, (as 99 would put it) is Mickey Mouse.

That is why I dont want Gene and his puns around anymore. It would be ok if the rest wasnt so amateur.

Avatar
#87 Dipstick
November 27 2013, 11:33AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
+1
13
props
Spydyr wrote:

Yes, billionaires and millionaires get more money on the back of the working class.

The discrepancy between the rich and the rest of us continues to grow.

They didn't get rich by sitting on their asses complaining.

Avatar
#88 book¡e
November 27 2013, 11:38AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
12
props
Dipstick wrote:

They didn't get rich by sitting on their asses complaining.

To be fair to Spydyr, our system has done a pretty good job of being biased towards certain groups of wealthy individuals and companies while not always providing an opportunity for individuals from less fortunate backgrounds to succeed. I love the market system for directing many aspects of the economy, but I would double the amount currently invested in public schools and programs targeted towards young individuals in general.

Having a society where economic 'winners' prosper is great, but it needs to provide everyone with a chance to succeed. Then, its up to them if they take it or not.

Avatar
#89 Lochenzo
November 27 2013, 11:40AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
0
props

I agree JW. The first concern I had upon hearing the news was production quality. I like what TSN and HNIC bring to the table and prefer watching Oiler games through those venues. Assuming that there is a price increase to watch hockey, I would expect Rogers to increase the production value.

I don't see how Rogers doesn't increase the price. They have a monopoly on a product that is in tremendous demand. They will find a price point that most of us would pay and charge that price.

The angle with the CBC sounds more like a transition period. It would be a shock to the system to lose HNIC within a year. They've given us 4 years to be weened off of HNIC.

Avatar
#90 **
November 27 2013, 11:47AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
2
props

For what I read, what I can conclude ('i might be out to lunch, but that's what I see) is that Rogers and the NHL are betting on having at least 1, possibly 2 expansion teams within the 12 years of the deal. That alone will be a huge amount of cash back for Rogers in coverage and sponsorships.

The second thing I believe Rogers is betting on is cross platform coverage, they seem to be ready to push viewership of the games on tablets, cell phones and computers. They are also eliminating regional blackouts and will be having games available on several channels, so that's more sponsorship money right there.

They're probably going to cut back on costs, so good bye coach's corner.

Avatar
#91 Dipstick
November 27 2013, 11:48AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
1
props
book¡e wrote:

To be fair to Spydyr, our system has done a pretty good job of being biased towards certain groups of wealthy individuals and companies while not always providing an opportunity for individuals from less fortunate backgrounds to succeed. I love the market system for directing many aspects of the economy, but I would double the amount currently invested in public schools and programs targeted towards young individuals in general.

Having a society where economic 'winners' prosper is great, but it needs to provide everyone with a chance to succeed. Then, its up to them if they take it or not.

There is no question that the NHL owners and media companies benefit by the non competitive CRTC rules in this case. I would really appreciate being able to pick which channels I want to watch and only pay for those. Maybe, someday. No offence meant to Spydr.

Avatar
#92 Joel
November 27 2013, 11:56AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
2
props
Bryzarro World wrote:

You fail to note that the federal government is looking at debundling channels because the practice is a joke. They won't be able to bend us over for much longer

Um, no.

If they debundle channels (and we are at least a year away from that actually be implemented), what makes you think that they won't jack up the price of the individual sports net channels?

And for that matter, don't assume that getting just ONE sports net channel will be enough to watch all the games for your team. Look at the sample schedule they had as part of the press release, you'll have to have a couple sports net channels, CBC and City TV to get all 82 games.

And just wait. I can see a year or two down the road, and all playoff games are on a special Sportsnet Playoff channel. At a nice premium of course.

Avatar
#93 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 12:13PM
Trash it!
14
trashes
+1
3
props
Rob... wrote:

If the 'other side' gets in power I'm buying stock in Frito-Lay and hydroponics companies. The changes they'll bring in will have little to do with the CRTC unless they redefined it to mean cannabis regulation and trafficking commission.

If trudeau got in power I would move out of this country and become muslim. World would be lost at that point...

Avatar
#94 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 12:15PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
1
props
Joel wrote:

Um, no.

If they debundle channels (and we are at least a year away from that actually be implemented), what makes you think that they won't jack up the price of the individual sports net channels?

And for that matter, don't assume that getting just ONE sports net channel will be enough to watch all the games for your team. Look at the sample schedule they had as part of the press release, you'll have to have a couple sports net channels, CBC and City TV to get all 82 games.

And just wait. I can see a year or two down the road, and all playoff games are on a special Sportsnet Playoff channel. At a nice premium of course.

Buddy... you don't and won't have to pay for all the turd channels you don't watch. Most likely save money and if you're glued to the tv, well, get a life.

Avatar
#95 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 12:16PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
0
props
Joel wrote:

Um, no.

If they debundle channels (and we are at least a year away from that actually be implemented), what makes you think that they won't jack up the price of the individual sports net channels?

And for that matter, don't assume that getting just ONE sports net channel will be enough to watch all the games for your team. Look at the sample schedule they had as part of the press release, you'll have to have a couple sports net channels, CBC and City TV to get all 82 games.

And just wait. I can see a year or two down the road, and all playoff games are on a special Sportsnet Playoff channel. At a nice premium of course.

Buddy... you don't and won't have to pay for all the turd channels you don't watch. Most likely save money and if you're glued to the tv, well, get a life.

Avatar
#96 Bryzarro World
November 27 2013, 12:16PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
0
props
Joel wrote:

Um, no.

If they debundle channels (and we are at least a year away from that actually be implemented), what makes you think that they won't jack up the price of the individual sports net channels?

And for that matter, don't assume that getting just ONE sports net channel will be enough to watch all the games for your team. Look at the sample schedule they had as part of the press release, you'll have to have a couple sports net channels, CBC and City TV to get all 82 games.

And just wait. I can see a year or two down the road, and all playoff games are on a special Sportsnet Playoff channel. At a nice premium of course.

Buddy... you don't and won't have to pay for all the turd channels you don't watch. Most likely save money and if you're glued to the tv, well, get a life.

Avatar
#97 CaptainLander
November 27 2013, 12:17PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
0
props

Really? I am going to have to pay more for something I like? That never happens.

If you look at this another gouging of "Canadians are so made about hockey that we can charge what we want, miss seasons have the local teams be crap eve-year and still sell out every game and have big local tv ratings..." time will tell if this is a good strategy for the NHL. I live in Cowtown and have kids in Jr. High. They, like many of their friends as I found through my recent inquiring do not give a rats @$$ about hockey. In asking them, maybe 5 out their class mates actually watched hockey, out 30ish. I can completely understand not wanting to watch the local team here but as an Oil fan I am a bit biased. Maybe this a back example of nation wide opinions but they will always take xbox time over hockey watching. I just get the feeling that 20 years from now the NHL will be a vary different league then it is today. Granted it looked pretty different 20 years ago.

Avatar
#98 bwar
November 27 2013, 12:17PM
Trash it!
27
trashes
+1
15
props

I hope Rogers saved enough money to hire a replacement for Gene Principe.

Avatar
#99 Dave
November 27 2013, 12:26PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
+1
38
props

I like Gene ... he lives in Edmonton and is one of us. He can tone it down a notch. Our broadcast crew is far better than Calgary's.

Avatar
#100 Rocket
November 27 2013, 12:30PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
14
props

I stopped using cable years ago and now just use the interwebs for errything. Thanks to the multiple lockouts and terrible local NHL team, I don't (fully) financially support hockey. I don't buy merch anymore either and I'm squarely in the NHL's target demographic. I still watch Oilers games on the Internet through uh... Other means but I won't be going back to cable anymore.

I don't blame people for being upset with this deal. It seems like every new deal Bettman does screws over the hard working fans. What's up with that?

Comments are closed for this article.