Big Ten Network battle rages

March 7, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
UPDATE (March 11): The Chicago Tribune and Street & Smith's Sports Business Journal are reporting today that officials for Comcast Cable and the Big Ten Network are closing in on an agreement to put the channel on an expanded basic tier. One insider told the Chicago Tribune that his optimism that a deal would get done soon was "95 out of 100." Another source told S&S's SBJ "the sides have agreed on the framework for a deal." An official for Fox Cable Networks, which is part-owner of BTN, told IBJ that a deal will likely involve Comcast agreeing to put the channel on the expanded basic package for a cost "somewhat less" than the original asking price of $1.10 per subscriber in Big Ten country. Outside the Big Ten area, the channel will likely go on a sports tier, the source told IBJ. 

DJwhiteThe Big Ten Network will be in Indianapolis this week and next, producing and airing 41 hours of coverage of the men’s and women’s basketball tournament and related content at Conseco Fieldhouse. So it seems a good time to revisit the BTN’s battle with Comcast Cable and other cable providers across the region. While Comcast and BTN officials say negotiations are continuing, frustrations seem to be boiling over on all fronts.

“I make more calls than I ever have this year to people who write me, really upset about it,” veteran Michigan State coach Tom Izzo told reporters after a recent game. Izzo called the Big Ten Network “a PR nightmare,” and said, “I think it has hurt all of us.”

Sources close to the Big Ten Network-and Los Angeles-based Fox Cable Networks, which owns 49 percent of the BTN-said Network officials might be ready to budge from their initial asking price to get on cable networks’ basic tier. BTN officials have been asking cable companies for $1.10 per subscriber within Big Ten country. BTN officials won’t discuss specifics of the negotiations.

Comcast and other cable providers also are feeling the heat. Comcast officials admit they are losing subscribers upset at the lack of Big Ten football and basketball coverage this year. They decline to say how many subscribers they have lost.

With basketball season ending, the pressure is easing a bit. But if a deal doesn’t get done by next football season, the pressure will intensify, media experts said. Sports writers across the region are not waiting until fall to begin complaining. Rochester (Minn.) Post-Bulletin sports columnist Paul Christian said Minnesotans are sore about not seeing Big Ten wrestling and track and field championships and a documentary series about the University of Minnesota basketball team airing on the BTN. Frankfort (Ind.) Times Sports Editor Phil Friend said he’s preparing to change cable providers to get the BTN, and he says he isn’t alone.

“The fledgling BTN was mocked my many, myself included, for thinking that people would be interested in what would be available outside of football and men's basketball.,” wrote Friend in a March 6 column. “But I was wrong. At least in the Midwest, anyway. As the BTN continues its feud with Comcast and the rest of the cable companies, they are losing this battle in the consumer eye.”

While many questions persist, the Big Ten Network’s future is solid. One reason is that Fox’s agreement with the Big Ten projects paying the conferences schools $2.8 billion over 25 years, according to Fox’s parent company’s financial statement. That would translate into $10.2 million annually per school, which would equate to about 25 percent of Indiana University’s athletic department budget.
  • I must say that as a directv subscriber, it was nice for me when they added the BTN and I could ditch my ESPN full court subscription package. If satellite was willing to pay to add BTN to its regular package (I don't subscribe to total sports) and likely forfeit other full court subscribers like myself (at a loss of $99/ season), it doesn't speak well to Comcast's dedication to its customers that it won't follow suit and get the BTN into its lineup.
  • I think Comcast has lost more customers than they will admit to. I think they refuse to give in, because it sets a bad precedent for other channels who may try to strong arm Comcast.

    I know many people who have switched because of the B10 network, and have realized how much they get for their money with Direct TV.
  • I understand some people don't even have the option of getting the BTN if they want it. Some areas can't get Satellite and AT&T isn't in their area. With that said, there is nothing wrong with the BTN itself, in fact it is pretty impressive minus some shotty commentary time to time, but the gripe is with the Providers and the Legal issues between the BTN and the Provider.

    There is a simple temporary solution. Make it a fee-based add-on for people who don't have it but want it. Until they get the final deal in place at least they can offer it a la carte. I would be at least somewhat relieved knowing I had it, but a little upset about paying additional for it.

    I used to have Comcast and I couldn't stand it. We had several issues with them and it was tough to resolve. We switched to DirecTV and I cannot foresee myself leaving them for a long, long time.

    If you are debating between DishNetwork and DirecTV... go DIRECTV no questions asked. Better technology, better service, better company all around.

    I hear good things about the AT&T program as well, but the Fiber Optic lines don't run to many older and rural areas yet.

    This is not all BTN's fault. It is a shared blame. It is 2 companies standing firm and the consumer getting the shaft... that is unless you have it, then you likely love it. I do.
  • Don't justify raising my cable bill to get this network.

    Put it on a premium cable package, not expanded basic.

    If I want watch a game I will go to the local tavern.
  • I will not pay extra for BTN programs. Put it on a separate tier or on demand There are now too many channels not worth watching. Do not add another one.

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by