The Hlog

Well said, it's time some insiders from the Big Ten schools start telling it like it is...

Bottom line for me: I have four young children. They are NOT seeing their Daddy watch Hawkeye basketball games this season. At all. Because of the BTN.

They had to go with their Daddy to bars last fall to watch three of the football games. Not an enjoyable experience to have younger kids sit for 3 hours at a bar.

I own my own growing business, and have been thinking about a donation in the five figures amount some time. However, I have actually thought about writing a check, take it personally down to the U of Iowa Athletics, and wrip it up in front of them telling them they have to get the BTN in my home with Mediacom wired in before they see that money.

It's too bad. They could be starting a bad situation where generations of young kids do not see the Hawkeyes.

i admire Izzo almost as much as i did ol' Jud. and i'm glad (but not surprised) that he has spoken up.

i don't know about other Big Ten(11) cities but here in Columbus all one had to do was replace buckeyes w/Hawkeyes and Time Warner w/MediaCom and the newspaper stories were the same as what i read on the Gazette website. I have NO love for TImeWarner but i despise the BigTen Network. in years past i got to see almost as may Hawks Football and hoops games as i did when i lived in Linn County. this past season i'll admit i didn't miss much but i would have watched had the games been available.

Go Hawks!

"We have so many things right now that we're trying to fight—the price of tickets, the economy of our state," Izzo said. "And then we throw this at them."

I think your mis interpreting Mr. Iszzo's despair that many of his fans don't get to see games unless they subscribe to the correct distribution provider, with his sympathy for the cable companies. As with most things in life, if you don't like it, get DirectTV!!

The Cable Operators are the same scum that wanted to dump local channels? They are the same scum that have increased rates 17 tyimes in the last 17 years. If the cable companies don't want to carry the BTN like theior competitors, then file your complaints to them!! Don't blame the BTN network you fools.

I expect this type of drivel from Mr. Hlas,
but as for the other two guys, get a grip. If you have been holding back that huge donation to the U of I because you can't get the games, why don't you invest in DirectTv feed with all that money, then you could get BTN? For the guy that has enough money to sit in a bar with his kids(which I am not against because my poppa bounce me on his knee in many a pub), why not swap out your cable for satellite.

If your that upset about not being able to see the games, then I suggest you do something about it. Unless you want to hold off and let the poor cable companies go to bat for you. Whoop, hang on. . . I hear another rate increase galloping down the trail.

Thank God for extra terrestrial!

One other note, I used to have to go down to IC to watch the Men play Baseball. Now I Tivo it and watch it when the wife is gone. When I really want to get away, I sttill go down to and watch it live.

& to Mr. Hlas, would you get off that high horse and come back down to planet earth. If you want to report something important, why don't you raise the question as to why half the seats in Carver are empty. Or better yet, why do our fans suck so bad? that is the real question. Look at some of our bretheren in the Big Ten and tell me why our Hawks don't deserve the same treatment?

Sincerely,
Bufo Marinas

I think I can understand the controversy, but I am not sure. All I know is I am a Hawkeye living in Arkansas. It is a pleasure to watch the Iowa games on the BTN. We have missed few of basketball or football game since we moved here in 1998. One of the conditions of the move was that we would be able to watch the Hawks. We thank the satellite providers and the BTN

You're donating 5 figures and you're too cheap to get DirecTV? I call BS on that one. The product is available, you just choose to not pay for it.

Goomer,
Sorry, you're not calling any BS on my stance. Good try.

For your information, I pay about $160 a month to Mediacom for extremely high speed cable, HD service, expanded basic, sport tier, and a few other small misc amounts. It's not that I choose not to pay for DirecTV (sorry for double negative). Not at all. I get GREAT service by Mediacom - 99% up time and have EXTREMELY high speed Internet.

Few other points, my friend:

1) I was just talking to someone at the car wash this morning believe it or not... said their satellite had been unavailable for a few days. Said her relation had it unavailable for 5 days in February. I'm not sold on satellite service. Some could have good experience, others not, too much risk for me as I do not have the time for change and the risk of time to overcome problems. My home cable Internet service is EXTREMELY important for my business and family.

2) You should also understand there were two specific instances where I missed games while traveling because of the BTN not being on cable. I visited both my parents and my in-laws over the Dec - Jan time period when Hawkeye basketball games were being played. Both have cable (Mediacom and Cox)... so BOTH times I could not see them play, and AGAIN.... my kids DID NOT see them play either. Do you think these households (60 / 70 year olds) would be apt to change to satellite? Not.

3) Any business venture needs to prove its worth and VALUE to consumers. The path to viewers for the BTN is through big cable - like it or not - and they must PROVE their worth first by allowing a sports tier package subscription on cable. People whine and complain about the cable bills - but don't hesitate to BLAME the cable company for not bowing to the BTN and include it in Expanded Basic service. This obviously would raise rates AND give other networks like NFL network the ammo to demand similar packages - causing rates to go even higher.

Think it through. The BTN missed entirely on its business approach and has caused severe problems for the member schools.

Out of site, out of mind.

Out of mind contributed to the LOWEST attendance this season since Carver Hawkeye was built!

That costs the University money, now and in the future. It's costing them my donations now and in the future too until it is solved. I don't like to hold the U of I hostage over it, but they certainly have a voice in the matter and should understand they are hurting themselves.

Perhaps they get a chunk amounting to something like $6M from the BTN annually, but how much does empty seats, lower donations, and LOST generations of fans amount to?

BTN is toast in my mind in its current strategy.

Dude, step back from the fumes.

Let me share what I got from your postings.
1) You plan on holding the U hostage.
2) You travel alot and expect the hawks to provide mobility products to suite your life-sytle
3) You, or someone close to you, works for a cable company.
4) you dislike the NFL network for the same reason
5) Your not a True Hawk fan
6) Through transference, you may plant the whininess seed in your children
7) It is your belief attendance is down because
the BTN exists.
8) You believe donations from Alum are down because of the BTN network.
9) You believe older people, are against technology improvements

Thats all I got for now, peace out

This, from Bill Martin, the AD at U of Michigan. . .

The prior conference football and basketball broadcasting contracts took effect in 1997, and expired at the completion of the 2006 seasons. Conference television agreements are often in force for this period of time, and every decade or so renegotiations are made with the networks to ensure the long term vitality of the conference. Naturally, one of the main goals of the conference television contracts is to maximize the exposure and value of these contracts for the conference schools.

In our new agreement with ABC/ESPN, the conference was able to get back about half of the conference football games and about 2/3 of the conference basketball game "inventory" without sacrificing any reduction in the rights fees. We believe, and this year continues to confirm, that this retained inventory has considerable value. The conference used this inventory as the first step in establishing the Big Ten Network.

ABC, ESPN, and ESPN2 will broadcast approximately the same number of conference football games as they did last year. What has changed from prior years is that there are no longer any syndicated games (the 40 or so conference football games that "ESPN plus" broadcast). The games that would have been only "regional" under prior media contracts are now carried by the BTN.

Ultimately the conference structured an arrangement that would provide solid programming for both ABC/ESPN and the BTN, agreeing to a process where ABC/ESPN selects a "premier" game each week, with the BTN having the ability to show hundreds of high demand games. In addition to the rights fees generated by the BTN, the conference retains a controlling interest in the network, with Fox Cable Networks owning a minority interest.

Our conference Presidents and Athletic Directors agreed unanimously to support the media contracts negotiated by Commissioner Delany. We debate topics intensely at the conference level, and the various member schools often have contradictory viewpoints. Consequently, it is not often that we are unanimous in our decisions.

Why didn't you get these agreements secured prior to launch?

Agreements with cable carriers are virtually impossible to secure in the concept stage. The first agreement, with DirecTV, was made early because of the close relationship between Fox Cable Networks, our minority partner, and DirecTV. A similar agreement was made a short time later with Dish Network, a competitor of DirecTV.

Ideally, agreements with cable companies would have been executed prior to the launch of the network, and the BTN team worked for several months to accomplish that. I'm told that it is the nature of the industry for the cable companies to "hold out" until the last minute in order to get the best deal.

As discussions with the big four cable companies in our area (Comcast, Time-Warner, Charter, and Mediacom) have shown little progress to date, it doesn't seem that it really would have mattered how much lead time the network had in reality. If the network had waited for cable agreements to be executed prior to its inception, the BTN never would have launched because the big four cable companies have continued to posture without meaningful negotiations. The delay in negotiating a deal until the last minute was expected; the continued resistance to being carried on expanded basic within the Big Ten footprint was not. And we certainly didn't expect to be hammered by a misleading Comcast media campaign.

The Big Ten Network is a joint venture between the Big Ten Conference and Fox Cable Networks. We are confident in its ultimate success, as Fox has a proven track record and experience in successfully launching other channels. Together, Fox and the conference have hired an executive team seasoned in the cable television industry, and we expect that the BTN will ultimately achieve its distribution goals.

You are not a professional team. Why do you need all this money?

The financial model of intercollegiate athletics has not changed from the days of Fielding Yost. The simple fact of the matter is that revenues for football and basketball generate the resources to pay for other sports teams and the athletic department infrastructure. There are no "profits" to distribute to shareholders; surpluses, if any, are dedicated to long-term capital projects or reserves for potential future deficits.

Yet, because of the success of our football program and the size of our stadium, many believe the athletic program generates more than enough revenue to fund its operations from football tickets alone. In fact, only 40% of our revenue is from the sale of football tickets. Therefore, the athletic department is indeed financially dependent on other revenue streams, such as media rights contracts.

For some universities in our conference, particularly those that don't have the good fortune of having a football stadium our size, wouldn't balance their books without subsidies from the general fund of their university. For them, the revenues from the BTN offer budget relief for the entire university.

Whether the system is right or wrong is largely irrelevant; this is the economic model for intercollegiate sports. It bears repeating: Revenues from football and basketball generate the resources to pay for other sports teams and the athletic department infrastructure.

We simply cannot choke off resources for other sports because they cannot fund themselves. That's not Michigan. If we are going to field teams, they are going to be the best they can be. We also have to manage according to the market conditions we are dealt with; namely we have to pay market value to retain and recruit the best coaches, we have to periodically invest in our "historic" physical plant where needed, and we have to incur the financial aid costs for our student-athletes.

Michigan's Athletic Department is proud to support 100% of the student-athlete scholarship costs each year for all 25 men's and women's teams. Conference revenues, particularly rights fees for television contracts, are an integral part of providing funds for our sports teams, among which athletic scholarship monies are of paramount concern.

How are cable rates determined?

I don't profess to be an expert in the cable business. However, I do know that cable rates are a function of numerous variables, including cable company infrastructure costs, programming costs, and competitive pressures. Ultimately rates may vary considerably based on the area that you are in, whether you "bundle" other services, and what level of service you require (digital, high definition, etc.).

Most of the major companies have been successful in rolling out "triple play" packages that combine cable television, broadband internet and phone service for $99. In many areas, there are competitive pressures that limit the cable companies' ability to raise rates. Indeed, anecdotal evidence suggests that many consumers can call their cable company, threaten to convert to a competitive service such as satellite or AT&T, and ultimately negotiate a lower cable bill.

The Big Ten Network itself does not charge individual households one penny. Cable and satellite companies pay to carry all cable networks, including the Big Ten Network. The decision whether to raise rates is made by your provider, not by the Big Ten or the Big Ten Network.

Do we expect the cable companies to pass on the costs of distributing the BTN?

Contrary to what you may have heard or read, cable carriers do not have to pass on the asking price of the BTN to the consumer. In fact we expect that most cable companies would actually profit from the carriage of the Big Ten Network.

To suggest, as Comcast has, that the formation of the BTN creates a "Big Ten tax" for all consumers, is absurd. There is no more a "Big Ten tax" as there is a "Lifetime tax", "Oxygen Network tax", "A&E tax", or a "Home Shopping Network tax". Over 150 cable operators have agreed to carry the BTN and have found a way to get the BTN on expanded basic without impacting its customers negatively.

To offset the cost of distribution, the Big Ten Network will provide the cable companies with revenue opportunities through local advertising sales, in addition to opportunities to upgrade their customers to digital service, sell high-definition packages, promote video-on-demand, and create more interest in "sports tiers" outside the Big Ten region.

When a cable company claims the cost of the BTN must be passed along to consumers they are using a negotiating ploy, and not providing an accurate description of how they run their business. DirecTV, Dish Network, Insight, WOW, RCN, and about 150 other cable companies already added the network to their expanded basic level of service without a simultaneous price increase to consumers.

Ultimately, market forces will determine the appropriate price for cable carriers to pay the BTN to be carried on expanded basic. At this point, however, it appears that Comcast, in particular, is in no rush to start good faith negotiations on that issue.

Outside the Big Ten Region and ESPN game plan

You should know that the BTN has significantly reduced the cost to cable operators to carry the network outside the Big Ten area and that the BTN is flexible in the level of service cable providers could offer the network (including digital and sports tiers). The network is flexible out of our region so that cable companies can be responsive to their customers.

For those outside the Big Ten region, the perspective on the BTN varies widely depending on whether you are a satellite customer. For satellite customers, the reaction to the creation of the BTN has been overwhelmingly positive. Fans of ours appreciate the opportunity to see every game under our two new media agreements (all ABC/ESPN games are national now, as well as BTN games).

However, cable customers outside the region who previously purchased the ESPN Game Plan service are understandably upset that the creation of the BTN has limited their ability to watch our games to date on the BTN. In the past, regional ABC football games and the football and basketball games aired on ESPN Regional and ESPN Plus were available nationally to those that subscribed to the ESPN Game Plan service. Games that would have been only "regional" under the prior media contracts are now carried by the Big Ten Network, and thus there are no additional games available on ESPN GamePlan.

As mentioned earlier, all cable providers have been given attractive offers (i.e., around 10 cents per month per household) to carry the BTN in regions outside the Big Ten area. For cable operators that service customers both in and out of the Big Ten region, agreements are typically executed for both areas at the same time that result in a reasonable blended rate. However, we expect that the larger cable companies agree to carry the BTN on expanded basic in the Big Ten region at the same time it is made available outside the region at a reduced cost. Once these distribution agreements are in place, fans outside the Big Ten region will have access to our games.

But all I really care about is football

While many fans with families indicate they are thrilled with other fall sports programming such as volleyball and soccer, others have insisted that all they care about is the football games.

As I mentioned in my previous message, it is true that not everyone will be interested in every game or every program on the BTN - just as not everyone watches or is interested in other cable channels that are on the 50-70 channels that are common to expanded basic cable service. We don't expect all of our fans will appreciate all of the programming available or want to watch the BTN all day.

Certainly, we expect to have our football games be the highest rated programs on the BTN. Recent results have borne this out, as the Michigan vs. Purdue game had the highest-rated overall program in all of cable television in the Big Ten coverage area. The conference expects similar results for basketball, particularly in traditional basketball hotbeds such as Indiana, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.

Television viewership has become less homogenous and more splintered. While we understand that some viewers will have no interest at all in some sports; there are some families, particularly those with children playing popular sports such as volleyball, soccer, baseball and softball, who will watch the BTN on a consistent basis. Overall, we are pleased with the programming options that the BTN has to offer.

When will the Big Ten Network stream games via the Internet?

The BTN will create and execute a broadband video strategy that will complement the programming found on the network. Several factors will play a role in determining the breadth and depth of our broadband streaming offering, including rights issues and continuing negotiations with cable providers for expanded basic distribution. The BTN will likely stream many games when the network reaches its distribution goals with the major cable companies. Keep an eye on www.BigTenNetwork.com for the latest information.

Reach of the Network and impact on recruiting

We have read where many believe the poor distribution of the network will result in the inability of fans and potential recruits to watch our games. As BTN distribution agreements are finalized, the two new media agreements will actually result in the opposite outcome.

Under the previous ABC/ESPN agreement, Big Ten games may have been available in only certain areas of the country on ABC (for example, last year only two Big Ten games were truly national - our Ohio State game and the Ohio State vs. Iowa game). This year, all Big Ten ABC/ESPN games are distributed to the entire nation, including our four games broadcast to date on ABC this year.

In prior years, games that would have been syndicated to local markets are now carried across the country on the BTN. Once our distribution agreements are in place, the total households that have access to games will be dramatically higher than under the prior arrangement.

Production Standards

While many have reported that they thoroughly enjoy the production quality of the games, others have been critical of the play-by-play, color announcers, and other programming aspects. Given that this venture was just launched less than two months ago, I am confident that the programming will continue to evolve and improve over time.

Many have also speculated that the commercial time for the BTN is greater than ever before, and has resulted in lengthier games. The commercial formats for the BTN games are exactly the same as ESPN games, so there should be no meaningful differences in the length of the game between ESPN and the BTN.

Isn't this just about the money?

Certainly, some people boil it down to this simple question. There appears to be no question that the Big Ten games offered on the BTN have value. For those that think that it's all about the money, do you think that value should be distributed exclusively to the cable companies and the existing major networks? Shouldn't public university athletic departments be able to monetize the value of their content, rather than simply distributing the games for free?

There was some speculation prior to launch that Comcast was simply playing hardball and refusing to negotiate in the hopes that the BTN would get desperate and agree to a lower-than-market rate. Now, one has to wonder if Comcast will hold off an entire year to make it more painful for everyone and send a powerful message to other conferences that if they plan to launch their own networks, they better let Comcast have an ownership interest in them before they can expect to be distributed on expanded basic within their system.

We've Switched!

I am indeed grateful for the support of our fans that have chosen to switch providers so that they can watch the BTN. Some have even reported that their overall cost under new providers has gone down from their former bundled cable, broadband internet, and phone service. The list of alternative platforms and choices is somewhat bewildering, and I truly appreciate those that take the time to investigate and act on alternatives. Your choices and costs of alternatives can vary dramatically based on your geographic area and the level of service you need. I recommend that you talk to your neighbors, review electronic "message boards" for stories of fans who have switched, and call AT&T and the satellite companies for comparable products and rates for your area.

Although they won't say it, I'm guessing that DirecTV, Dish Network, AT&T, and cable "overbuilders" such as WOW are secretly delighted that the big four cable companies continue to resist having the BTN on expanded basic. They won't release information on how many have switched, but I know that switches to alternatives have been considerable across the Big Ten footprint.

What else can we do?

Many people who have responded indicated that they left a message with 1-866 WANT-B10, have called their cable companies to ask for the Big Ten Network, but are legitimately hesitant to switch to a satellite or another provider.

Some have reported that when they call their cable company they seem to receive a standard scripted response from their cable companies and they wonder whether their complaints have even been recorded.

Unfortunately, the four major cable providers in our region have been behaving consistently and have indicated they will "sit this out". Some believe that the only ways to change the major cable carriers' position are to have enough people leave as subscribers or seek political action via consumer complaints to their federal or elected officials.

We understand that this is a difficult or impractical situation for some. Some have suggested online petitions, writing congressional representatives, or other organized campaigns. The conference and the BTN are currently evaluating the alternatives to reach agreement with the cable providers, and we will keep you up-to-date as the situation evolves. We want to thank you for your support as we move through this transition period.

Wish Iowa's AD had this guys . . . ability to communicate.

http://www.mgoblue.com/sport/article.aspx?id=104622