[NU Sports] Interesting article ...

[Eric West]

At 10:58 AM 10/31/2007, Roy Lamberton wrote:
>Memo to the Big 10 Network - The BTN is a Niche product, even in the Big 10
>states. The fans of the schools will pay good money, regardless of where they
>live, to watch their team in action.

See, this is the part of the argument that makes no sense to me. Lifetime 
is a niche product, too -- as is BET, Oxygen, Speedvision, EWTN, and dozens 
of other channels that I and many other people never watch -- yet cable has 
no problem charging us so that others can watch them. So what's suddenly 
wrong with those people returning the favor by paying a little extra so we 
can watch the BTN? And no, I won't pay $50 extra a month (or more) to 
switch to digital and then add some weak sports tier from Comcast (that 
doesn't even have ESPNU or CSTV, among others). I can just listen to the 
radio, or go to Chili's in Evanston and watch the game there.

>Pretending that the AC/SEC/Big 12/Pac
>10/WAC fans in Comcast or Time Warner markets will watch the BTN seems a 
>little
>foolish, and I know Comcast has the sales numbers from ESPN+ to back that up.

Why? As a college football fan, I enjoy watching all sorts of teams play, 
and I know I'm not alone. Ironically, because of Comcast Sports Network's 
triple-header last Saturday, I was able to watch more Pac-10 games in 
Evanston than Big Ten games. Somehow Comcast didn't have a problem making 
everyone in the Chicago area pay for three Pac-10 games on their channel, 
but it's a miscarriage of justice to charge them to watch Big Ten teams? 
The way I see it, the only difference -- and indeed, the only thing Comcast 
cares about -- is that the extra BTN money won't go to Comcast.

I want to be on Comcast's side, but their arguments don't make sense and 
their incessant propaganda (including a two-month-old "Update" that keeps 
talking about how no one would want to see Michigan vs. Appalachian State) 
is maddening.

---
Eric West
e-west at northwestern.edu