mattsmail wrote on Dec 3, 2007 11:41 PM:
" Boo Hoo Hoo "
Slider wrote on Dec 3, 2007 4:13 PM:
" wha wha wha "
opinionator wrote on Nov 30, 2007 5:05 PM:
" The Packers are who we thought they were! "
antieverything wrote on Nov 29, 2007 9:31 PM:
" Go Pack! 27-24 3rd quarter.
In HD on my direct tv. Time Warner/Charter... who needs ya? "
Honestly wrote on Nov 28, 2007 9:25 PM:
" kbg whatever: You are a riot. Thanks for all the extra info, now I know what kind of person you are and feel better about myself. Thanks for the direct attacks. Sticks and stones for me, but for some reason you take words personally. I truly am sorry for your family if you get hostile over a blog (is this a blog?). Time for you to move on, and get over your amazing insights and blogging abilites of debate.
Haven't you been on here long enough to see that some of us get amusement out of people like you, that get their feathers ruffled very easily. You are the number one Packer fan, let me know how much that makes your life better. "
kevin wrote on Nov 28, 2007 2:51 PM:
" Send disconnect notices now to your cable companies. Listen to the game on radio or do something else. The Packer organization, not sure what to do about them...I used to consider the Packers the true "America's Team", they have shafted their fan organization though with this NFL network deal. Funny when they want state tax dollars to refurbish a stadium, we are all their fans, but now what are we.... "
antieverything wrote on Nov 28, 2007 11:15 AM:
" Teiresias oh blinded prophet. It is your blindness that has you not seeing what lies in the battle of good vs evil. "
Teiresias wrote on Nov 28, 2007 11:06 AM:
" Here's another option: Get off your butt and get out to play some football yourself. Quit being a spectator in life, glued to the boob-tube. Get outside for some excercise with your kids or your friends. Life will go on if you don't see the game which, after all, is just a game and not the second coming. (Oh, my! I just blasphemed twice: god and the Packers!) "
antieverything wrote on Nov 28, 2007 10:36 AM:
" A funny side note. I got a flyer in the mail from Time Warner soliciting cable. With Donald Driver as the figurehead in packer garb... too funny. "
antieverything wrote on Nov 28, 2007 10:35 AM:
" To Honestly. It is not entirely based on just this game. In my opinion this topic is important because finally someone has put the gloves on against time warner an charter. Jeremy doesnt get it sadly I tried. He has this slippery slope thing stuck in his head. Jeremy there is no slipperyslope. He thinks they are monopolies... Remember when Time Warner was named in the antitrust suit? Until satellite companies came around with affordable programming that there was fair competition they had the run of the streets and made billions. With a B "
opinionator wrote on Nov 28, 2007 7:50 AM:
" For those of you who are arguing over cable companies and their decisions to carry the NFL Network or not, there is a little company in Westby called Vernon Telecom who has the NFL Network as part of their basic package and they will be carrying the game! Explain that one! "
kbg23 wrote on Nov 28, 2007 7:06 AM:
" RE: Honestly - Maybe your new hobby should be reading so you can actually understand a sentence. i didn't say that watching TV WAS my hobby. I said watching FOOTBALL and sports in general with family and friends was a HOBBY. Gee, you want me to elaborate that I also like to read, play sports, music, etc.? You sound like such arrogant idiot. Getting together with family and friends for football is a tradition and something I enjoy. I could care less what the heck you think I should be doing that night instead. Oh if I was only as perfect as you! Maybe the real issue is no friends invited you over to watch the game. "
Eddie wrote on Nov 28, 2007 6:57 AM:
" One solution is this: The NFL Network can strike a deal with local Wisconsin television stations (like WXOW), and those stations will televise the Packer games. Cable companies don't have to get involved, people don't have to subscribe to the NFL Network if they don't want to, and Packer fans would be happy. Another solution is for the National Football League to CANCEL the NFL Network (which is horrible anyway) and go back to broadcasting all NFL games via FOX, CBS, NBC, and ABC....and maybe ESPN. "
Honestly wrote on Nov 28, 2007 2:37 AM:
" re: kbg32, glad to hear that you call watching your tv a hobby, what is your job, sleeping? Wouldn't a hobby be something like, playing football, woodworking, collecting stamps, I have never heard someone say watching tv is their hobby, I'll have to use that one. No high horse here, don't get me wrong, I like watching football, but it won't ruin my day to miss a three hour game that I can see the highlights on espn instead in 4 minutes. "
Big Spender wrote on Nov 28, 2007 2:31 AM:
" Anyhow, it's all much ado about nothing because Dallas: 41, Packers: 9. The Pack has faced marginal opponents all year plus they have bounced into a lot of lucky breaks; now it's time for their inevitable fall. Spare yourself the disappointment and go watch 'Survivor' on Thursday! "
jeremy wrote on Nov 27, 2007 10:27 PM:
" I am not a charter worker nor a charter subscriber. When I lived in La Crosse, I found there service to be terrible and cancelled my charter services. I am just one person that doesn't think that it's a good idea to give into 2 networks that provide programming that used to be on "free air" signals, meaning you didn't have to pay for it even if you didn't have cable. I think it's a slippery slope to give sports leagues their own network, so that they can remove free programming that we all could recieve without spending a penny on cable. "
homer1 wrote on Nov 27, 2007 10:11 PM:
" Jeremy..here is some math for ya: I was paying Charter over $125 per month for services. Now you get nothing because I switched to Century Tel for $89/month. Get your Charter propaganda outa here! You would not believe the time I have WASTED calling your company trying to rectify billing issues. KBG23 I am right there with ya! I finally told your support guy in Indonesia to do something to himself that was not very nice. You did not care about me then.....don't pretend to do it now. Give me another EVEN BIGGER smooch on my rear end Jeremy Charter! "
Josie wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:42 PM:
" I will be listening to the game on the radio, but would prefer to watch the game. It must be the tight pants! I gain nothing from watching the game, but it is something my family enjoys doing together. I wouldn't switch from cable to Dish or Directv because of this, but if Charter service doesn't get better I may switch. "
kbg23 wrote on Nov 27, 2007 7:59 PM:
" Why post a comment like that on here? just because it means nothing to you doesn't mean that it doesn't mean something to someone else. Football happens to be a very fun hobby of mine. I love watching it with friends and family. So don't judge and pull yourself off your high horse. "
Honestly wrote on Nov 27, 2007 6:22 PM:
" Is this really news worthy. My God, get a life beyond the Packers. Go play with your kids, take your wife on a date, make some money, get out of the bar. No matter if they win or lose, it will not personally affect your life, unless you have a tidy sum of money wagered on the game. That is the only reason to be overly worried on the Packs performace, but judging my the people posting, they obviously don't have the motivation, creativity, nor the money to watch the game, so I'm guessing the wager thought is dead. "
Wizard wrote on Nov 27, 2007 5:06 PM:
" To Opionator, good idea can I ride shotgun, got lots of airbags. I will bring a black marker so we can keep score in case we forget. "
opinionator wrote on Nov 27, 2007 2:47 PM:
" I am going to drive around drinking PBR and listening to the game on the radio. I think I will hit a parked car erverytime Dallas scores! "
Wizard wrote on Nov 27, 2007 2:35 PM:
" Listen to it on the radio! Why do you want watch a bunch of young men in tight pants for anyway? Those that have to have a TV and sound too dont know the game! Go to that eyesoar of a so called Packer Bar with the paint falling of it at 4th and King St get a belly full of beer and smash your car up on the way home.Down there if your are not Republican you are dirt.Right Bobby, Jay and Heir Schnieder"slitterbahn" "
antieverything wrote on Nov 27, 2007 2:28 PM:
" Jeremy,I reiterate The reason this deal hasn’t been put to bed is the NFL wants basic tier offering. Cable companies who are holding out want the benefit of the higher priced tier at the customers expense. Now as for your costs of the network,try this, TLC is 5.00 per subscriber and close behind are A&E MTV USA and ESPN. Those fees to me are crazy but if that is what it takes to be the leader in program offerings so be it.
I am not a fan of the NFL network. Bad announcing, and poor camera work. They are growing pain. Frankly over the years I have dealt with Warner and Charter and here is what I have grown to expect. Weak programming, late technology, and worst or all CUSTOMER SERVICE.My direct tv experience has been amazing. I cant ever remember a good one going back to Group W! "
Josie wrote on Nov 27, 2007 2:16 PM:
" Andy K must be a jealous Vikings fan. "
opinionator wrote on Nov 27, 2007 1:08 PM:
" Andy K
CUT IT OUT! YOU'RE KILLING ME OVER HERE!!!! That post made my day. Thanks! "
andy k wrote on Nov 27, 2007 12:44 PM:
" Here's a thought: don't watch the game! Ladies (and I use that term loosely when referring to packer fans) ditch the pink 'G' hat. Gentlemen (see above) lose the 3-sizes too small packer sweatshirt you got for Xmas in 10th grade (and cover up your beer bellies for god's sake). Take a walk instead. Read a book. Talk to your kids ("shut up, the games on!!" doesn't count) Before you know it, you'll have well-behaved kids, a job you love (or just a job for the HARDCORE packer fans), and you'll drop that extra 50 pounds you all carry around. You'll make Wisconsin a better place. "
jeremy wrote on Nov 27, 2007 12:00 PM:
" Have any of you ever seen the NFL Network? It really has nothing for programming other than the 8 games/year that they have hijacked from their open air channel contracts. If you support this, you'll soon be paying for each individual sport/conference channel that airs programming that used to be free over your local open air channels. That's not something I want. "
mgf wrote on Nov 27, 2007 11:44 AM:
" If you read the article there is a quote from an NFL Network Spokesman saying it asks for about $8 per year - and it also offers Charter Advertising time (so it costs Charter less) - so - you're telling me that less than 66 cents per customer per month is too much for Charter who had over 5.2 billion in revenue last year? "
HomeTeam wrote on Nov 27, 2007 11:33 AM:
" The cost issue really gets my goat. I heard on the news today DISH installers are working overtime this week so Packer Fans- who have DROPPED Charter Cable- can see the game against Dallas. Sounds like the costs of not offering NFL network are higher- a big loss in business. Charter should think again! "
jeremy wrote on Nov 27, 2007 11:19 AM:
" Aniteverything - Networks you listed may not meet your needs, but meet the needs of many others. The NFL Network would be on basic cable if they negotiated, but they won't. In any free market, if you are going to dictate terms of your product, you're are violating the rules of a free market. If Time-Warner, Charter, get the NFL Network cheaper and realize it's profitable, they will be the first in line to add. Problem is the NFL and Big Ten want to take niche programming and charge premium prices for it. Lower the price/negotiate, if the market wants it, the prices will go up. If the NFL and Big Ten get their way, you'll see you're cable bill go through the roof. Because it won't stop there, each sport/conference will have it's own exculsive channel. That is a slippery slope. "
jeremy wrote on Nov 27, 2007 11:12 AM:
" The NFL Network wants $.75-.90/subscriber. That is double what you are paying for other networks. So it's not so cheap. The Big Ten Network wants $1.10/subscriber.
"
lets face it wrote on Nov 27, 2007 11:10 AM:
" This is George Bush's fault!! He should fix this. Hillary already has a program that entitles everyone to have the NFL network. Go Hillary!! "
footballfan4 wrote on Nov 27, 2007 11:01 AM:
" "Charter hasn’t added the NFL Network because of the “very high” cost associated with it, said John Miller, the company’s director of communications. He declined to say what those costs were..."
Sounds fishy to me - he "declines" to say how much the cost is because he knows the cost is actually very reasonable. Does Charter think we're naive? It's pretty obvious this is all about the amount of greenbacks in Charter's bank account, and they simply want to gouge their customer for more.
And then this statement is a real killer: “While we are willing to carry the network, we have to be able to carry it in a way that best serves all of our customers, not just football fans,” Miller said."
I would say AT LEAST 85% of their customers are one-in-the-same as the football fans. Get real! "
kevin wrote on Nov 27, 2007 11:00 AM:
" More ranting on cable companies: Paying the exhorbitant rates for cable programming is a screw job and it's double jeaopardy. Particularly when applied to sports channels. We get to pay a higher rate for the cable subscription itself, and then we get to pay a higher rate for the products of the manufacturers that advertise to us on these channels during the game. Who do you think pays for that huge marketing budget blown on a 15s superbowl slot. Unsubscribe, take back the airwaves. Cable is a sickness a virus, and the only cure is cold turkey, unplug it. "
antieverything wrote on Nov 27, 2007 10:36 AM:
" Jeremy.. You coulndt be more wrong about selecting programmng to meet the needs of the entire community. It is about.... Profitability
One thing that drive me crazy is the amount of shopping and religious channels I receive. But they pay the bills. I dont need them or want them. I dont need 3 disneys or 3 nicks. I think you get the picture. Nor do I see your slipper slope. Read todays survey on who has the NFL Network. There are more than not.What this says is that other entities see the value of the NFL Network.
The fact that the TW hasnt decided to offer this network is not a slippery slope but a bad business decision. "
antieverything wrote on Nov 27, 2007 10:21 AM:
" RE:Kevin. I can see where you get your passion for this dilemma. I did make some changes and made the switch to the Direct Tv less than a year ago. I have gotten better programming, more HD channels, and the NFL for alot less money than Charter. Time Warner has lost 83,000 subscribers in the three months ending Sept. 30, and another 57,000 in the three months prior. What does this tell you. These cable companies have been resting on thier laurels for years, much the way domestic car companies have. Now they too are playing catch up. A poor product for a high price will not last in a free market. "
jeremy wrote on Nov 27, 2007 10:20 AM:
" I do not work for Charter or have Charter services. I just think we're headed down a slippery slope if we start allowing cable channels to dictate to cable providers where there channel is located on the service tiers. Other channels are negotiated into tiers and the cable company selects a broad range of programming channels to meet the needs of the ENTIRE community, NOT JUST THE SPORTS FANS! The NFL Network and Big Ten Network are asking for 3 to 10 times that of a normal niche program channel. In fact the only network that charges higher right now is ESPN and that is for ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Classic. "
kevin wrote on Nov 27, 2007 10:06 AM:
" Re:anti-everything,,,,you are so right this is a free market society and as part of the free market I refuse to pay, and as part of the free market that is paying for the product(nfl football), and which, by the way is not mission critical to your life (and so it is expenable),,,,I reserve the right to place blame where I want to. You folks need to vote with your dollars, unsubscribe....send a message to the cable company and the NFL at the same time. Listen to the game on the radio or go to a bar and give someone else the money.... "
antieverything wrote on Nov 27, 2007 9:47 AM:
" For those of you that think this is all the fault of the NFL network think again. They are trying to keep their product on the base tier programming to keep the cable companies from blackmailing the subscriber in to the next tier of garbage programming. NFL Network is a profit based company and there is nothing wrong with them making a profit. We live in a free market and if the Time warners/charters dont want to give in so be it. And if you dont think the NFL shouldnt have exclusivity... your are also wrong. This is their OWN PRODUCT. They get to call the shots. And in 5-7 years it is highly likely the only way to view an NFL game is on the NFL network.. Watch it happen "
Kevin wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:58 AM:
" Live free, quit your bitchin or die. Unsubscribe from your cable companies now if they piss you off so much. I did, haven't missed it a day since I did 15yrs ago, add of that money. If the NFL wants to hold us hostage kiss those folks off as well. As much as I am a Packer fan, I will not purchase the NFL network for them.....just another drop of blood this turnip has done run out of.... "
opinionator wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:49 AM:
" I'm with ToeJam. You Packer fans are better off not seeing this game. It will be UGLY! Take it from a Bear fan who hasn't been able to see many games on TV in Cheeseland this year. If you don't have to watch it, it didn't happen!!! "
scottk wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:47 AM:
" I think Charter really is right on this one. The sooner that all cable companies, satelite providers and customers give into the NFL network the sooner that more and more, and eventually ALL, NFL games will no longer be available on the free TV networks. Go ahead and laugh and shake your head, give it 10 or 20 years and we'll see where we're at!
By the way, I'm a charter customer and much happier now that I switched from Dish Network. "
dean wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:30 AM:
" It is all bushs fault the texas rangers and dallas cowboyes field are one utility' the tax payers are sick of paying for it so that is why the NFL wants your 8 bucks ,Enron field never happened all cooperate crooks in texas skimmed the money along with the 8.8 billion Bremer misplaced in Iraq "
ToeJam wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:13 AM:
" Save yourself some trouble Packer backers, Dallas Cowboy 37 Green bay 15 now go cry in your beer and get over it. "
Terri wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:12 AM:
" I'm pissed at everyone! NFL for selling their games to cable channels. (ESPN and now NFL Channel) What was wrong with playing them on regular local channels??! Then Charter for not providing the NFL channel. I despise charter, but I also don't like centurytel. They provide horrible internet service. And I'm worried about trying satellite because of what I've heard happens during rain and snow storms. Plus I have 4 TVs in my house. So all of you out there, what is my best alternative? Through Charter, I have telephone, internet and cable with Moxie (a Tivo like service) "
fatbastard wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:10 AM:
" Charter Blows, it always has and it always will. Hey Trib, why not mention every other bar in the area that will be serving the game with a side of locally brewed products? "
Big Spender wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:09 AM:
" "Other options still available to fans?" Hmmm...let me see...there's computer programming, which is what I'm doing when I'm not blogging between long compiles. Or, there's books. There's youtube. Or, if you must watch TV, there's 'Survivor,' which is more fun to watch than the Packers anyhow. There's very little action during most sports telecasts anyhow: it's four hours of beer commercials with ninety seconds of watchable sports thrown in. Or, most important, you can go out to shoot some hoops yourself that day and avoid an early heart attack caused by watching too many games instead of participating in them. Life isn't a spectator sport. And, the sun will still come up the next morning if the Packers aren't on TV.
"
krusty wrote on Nov 27, 2007 8:07 AM:
" I'd like to have a round of applause for dean! Today dean has opened his eyes a tiny bit and realized that at least one problem...Not getting the Packer game from charter IS NOT President Bush's fault. Way to go Dean! Your mother and I are soo proud of you! "
TRALEE wrote on Nov 27, 2007 7:46 AM:
" Due to the cost of Charter cable, I switched 2 yrs. ago to Direct TV. Not because of the NFL Network, but a few times a year it works out that is a benefit too. Direct TV has turned out to be a great cable company. For those unhappy with Charter, consider Direct TV. And no, I don't work for Direct Tv, just a very satisfied customer. (and not because of NFL Network) "
bb wrote on Nov 27, 2007 7:15 AM:
" There are many of those cable channels that are forced onto Charter (and Dish and DirctTv, etc.). I for one could care less about football, Thursday night is the best night of the week for TV anyway! "
kbg23 wrote on Nov 27, 2007 7:00 AM:
" This responsibility does not rest solely on the NFL Network. Charter just raised prices - AGAIN $5 to $6 a month for both internet and cable services. It's time this company realizes that there are other choices out there and that people will switch. You seriously think there are less NFL Network viewers in this state then QVC or MTV? I would highly doubt it. They have no problem raising prices every six months, I surely think people could handle .70 cents. I just switched last week to Dish Network. No more screwed up billed, limited channels, HORRID customer service outsourced in Pakistan and all this for half the cost. Imagine that. "
jn wrote on Nov 27, 2007 6:49 AM:
" I admire Charter and other cable companies who didn't cave in to the NFL's or Big Ten Nets demands. In the case of the NFL it only carries ONE game a week for about 4 months. What do they do when football is over...show old reruns of games from 10 years ago? Charter offered to carry it for those who wanted to pay for it but money hungry NFL said no as advertisers on game wouldn't have enough audience. I'll listen to Packer-Cowboy game on the radio...it's still FREE! "
bluebunny wrote on Nov 27, 2007 6:46 AM:
" My parents have the NFL Network (and Big 10) as part of their cable package a few minutes up the road in Galesville. Their cable bill is also cheaper than my Charter bill-go figure. Apparently the cable company in tiny Trempealeau county has figured something out that Charter has not. "
dean wrote on Nov 27, 2007 6:20 AM:
" Also is isnt right some markets can carry it over the air and others cant which is an NFL rule. "
dean wrote on Nov 27, 2007 5:49 AM:
" If al la carte was required as a choice that problam and others would be over "
GetReal wrote on Nov 27, 2007 5:30 AM:
" If the fans would be smart and boycott the games that are only on the NFL network and leave the stadiums empty we would not be having this problem! If the NFL league wants to make more money I suggest they reduce the players pay, not overcharge the fans even more. If the NFL league wants to have their own pay network it should be commercial free so the entire game can be seen commercial free like wrestling on HBO and the viewer has the option to pay to watch something commercial free! After all why should they be able to double-dip on getting paid from both advertisers and viewers! Also I for one am getting sick of reading about these overpaid criminals being in trouble with the law all the time! "
The Moderate wrote on Nov 27, 2007 4:47 AM:
" Charter carried The NFL Network in La Crosse until COMCAST & TIME WARNER got into their big fight with NFL Network. Charter saw the opportunity to ride their coattails. I'd rather they dropped some of the other channels they carry if it is about money. I was extremely happy to switch to CenturyTel's TV Service when it became available. And apparently it was a great idea. "
Eddie wrote on Nov 27, 2007 12:52 AM:
" Jeremy, your post suggests that you work for Charter Communications. The reality is that BOTH the NFL Network and Charter are at fault here. They are BOTH putting profits ahead of customer service. It comes down to this - if Charter Communications can include ESPN on their basic cable package, then they can also include NFL and Badger games on it, too. "
homer1 wrote on Nov 26, 2007 11:41 PM:
" I laugh when I hear Charter state that they don't want to have subscribers pay for a channel many don't want. GIVE ME A BREAK!!!! If that is the case, then why did I have to get 75% garbage channels in my package with them? I had to take them even though I didn't watch them. I dumped Charter last summer and it feels GREAT! I have been watching the NFL channel and Big 10 network for a lower price than what Charter was bending me over for. Give me a big smooch right there Charter!!!! "
jeremy wrote on Nov 26, 2007 11:35 PM:
" The NFL Network and Big Ten Network are illegal monopolies trying to hold the free market captive. These networks are charging $1.70 and $1.10/subscriber, respectively for their networks. Here's the hitch, they won't allow the cable company to broadcast their network unless they're put on the basic cable tier, thus forcing everyone to pay for their networks. They will not negotiate with cable companies. They even tried to force a bill through the state legislature to force cable companies to carry their networks on the basic cable tier. "
Advertisement
