Laker Games, NBALP & Time Warner's Channel Information
#1
Posted September 06, 2012 - 08:45 PM
#2
Posted September 06, 2012 - 08:47 PM

Props to fkMikeBrown
#3
Posted September 06, 2012 - 08:54 PM
#4
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:25 PM
#5
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:34 PM
lol thats what we all said about the nba lockout during the past season. it ended up taking quite a while until they actually got a deal. let hope it doesnt go the same way as it did with the lockoutBy the start of regular season all cable carriers will have it trust me. Both sides have too much to lose to not make a deal by then. They're just trying to get whatever leverage to gain a better deal right now because they got time to play these games
#6
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:40 PM
#7
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:43 PM
lol thats what we all said about the nba lockout during the past season. it ended up taking quite a while until they actually got a deal. let hope it doesnt go the same way as it did with the lockout
not even the same thing

Props to fkMikeBrown
#8
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:46 PM
Its too much of a money making channel for it to be on one carrier. Fans need to stop worrying so damn much.
#9
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:50 PM
Viacom and DirecTV disagree. Oh, you too Pac-12 Network?By the start of regular season all cable carriers will have it trust me. Both sides have too much to lose to not make a deal by then. They're just trying to get whatever leverage to gain a better deal right now because they got time to play these games
#10
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:52 PM
No more new threads about this.
#11
Posted September 06, 2012 - 09:57 PM
Viacom and DirecTV disagree. Oh, you too Pac-12 Network?
What did they both do?

Props to fkMikeBrown
#12
Posted September 06, 2012 - 10:06 PM
Viacom and DirecTV agreed after their channels were down for weeks. As for the Pac-12 Network, I'm still waiting. Impatiently I might add.What did they both do?
#13
Posted September 06, 2012 - 10:08 PM
#14
Posted September 07, 2012 - 02:23 AM
I'm moving to Santa Barbara soon and as of this moment, none of the cable providers in the area are planning on carrying the TWC Sports package--which is fine by me because I don't plan on having TV/cable! With netflix and online news sites, there is absolutely no reason to have cable TV anymore. So I'm wondering, IF (and I know it's a big if) none of the cable companies end up striking a deal with TWC, does that mean I can order NBA League Pass Broadband and watch it without getting blacked out in the Lakers TV zone?
Thanks in advance to anyone who can answer this question!
#15
Posted September 07, 2012 - 03:13 AM
#16
Posted September 07, 2012 - 04:36 AM
I highly doubt other cable networks won't pick up the Lakes channel, they will loose too many customers
#17
Posted September 07, 2012 - 06:23 AM
Viacom and DirecTV agreed after their channels were down for weeks. As for the Pac-12 Network, I'm still waiting. Impatiently I might add.
Lakers games are among the highest rated programming in California. PAC-12 football is not. Especially when the highest rated PAC-12 team is on national tv 95% of the time.
People will pay for the lakers, people aren't going to pay for washington state, cal, Washington, Colorado college sports
#18
Posted September 07, 2012 - 07:28 AM
#19
Posted September 07, 2012 - 07:31 AM
Edited by AFXTWIN, September 07, 2012 - 07:31 AM.
#20
Posted September 07, 2012 - 10:49 AM
This is true. However, Comedy Central, MTV, BET, VH1, Nickelodeon, and Spike are some of the most watched channels on TV and that didn't stop a lengthy negotiation.Lakers games are among the highest rated programming in California. PAC-12 football is not. Especially when the highest rated PAC-12 team is on national tv 95% of the time.
People will pay for the lakers, people aren't going to pay for washington state, cal, Washington, Colorado college sports
Also, for a company who calls themselves the "Undisputed Leader in Sports TV" they should carry the Pac-12 Network.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users








