12 years, $5.2Billion

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to red75's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RichHillOntario's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First CBC loses their HNIC theme song and now this.  There was no mention of layoffs for some at CBC.  Would that be on the horizon?

    [/QUOTE]


    There was on CBC radio this morning, and not just in the sports - they got slapped with 200 million in cuts over the last year and now they just lost 50 per cent of their ad revenue, so yeah there are going to be layoffs and likely massive changes across the entire network.

    And kel, in name HNIC will be around for four more years, but it will be a Rogers production aired on CBC, not a CBC production so expect some changes. And after 4 years? Who knows.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pretty difficult for me to feel sorry for the CBC, even though I love HNIC.  In my lifetime, while other Canadian TV networks were out there trying to make a go of it(quite successfully I might add), CBC executives were sticking their noses in the air, endlessly debating among themselves what Canadians "should" be watching, while constantly whining for more government money to keep the barge afloat.  CBC's always had the best of gear, the most manpower per job(as well as a bloated management), and the cushiest working conditions in Canadian media. Productivity, in their eyes, is skillfully maneuvering the convoluted policies and processess that virtually always block initiative, or more importantly, work counter intuitive to the real world.

    Like the Senate and the CRTC, the CBC is another huge tumour feeding on the Canadian tax base.   Layoffs are terrible, but this dinasaur needs to be reinvented, or put to sleep. Competitive forces drove the price to 5.2 bil.  Rogers expects to make a profit on that amount.  CBC would easily figure out a way to lose money, if they got that package for a dollar.  They've mastered that ability since the 50's.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from wallydouglas. Show wallydouglas's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    Well we wont really know until we see some answers from Rogers and the NHL as to exactly what there plans are, They both state so far this is for the fan and will benefit all. Never have I seen a deal like this where it favoured both sides and if theres any to one side its a toss up, 1st the NHL got there money, (advantage to fans ? ) none other than the expected salaray cap might go up and in all honesty thats a disadvantage to the fans because salary increases mean increases in tickets etc etc etc. The advantage for Rogers is there control, I am certain they will feed off the millions other markets are willing to pay for some coverage, again that drives up the price for the fans, so its a disadvantage to the fans, again. The NHL cares less about the fan that lives miles and miles away from an NHL arena. The cost alone for example (me) to go to ottawa to see a bruins game now for 2 is 240 dollars in tickets not bad but not really good seats, 40 dollars for gas, 20.00 dollars parking, 50 dollars in food and drinks and 4 hours travel time round trip. It may not seem like alot of money but affording this is only once or twice per season. Its true the NHL could care less about those fans and so goes it with Rogers unless they commit to keeping the price range for NHL on tv for all at a reasonable affordable cost.
    I mentioned the CRTC in my previous post because the canadian governemnts effort in the mobile phone industry and keeping costs down for the subscribers along with improving the service has been widely announced and will reflect on the upcoming bid frompotential carriers. The CRTC monitors these deals and if i am correct have the information and plans from rogers that will be submitted for approval and again if i am correct, its posted publicly for all canadians to view and respond to.

    I dont have alot of faith in the NHL and there concerns for the fans.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:[QUOTE]  NBC is an absolute joke to watch.   Sportsnet is painful.  I like TSN but HNIC is the best.  And yes thats even with the current cast.  And yes i hate healey and some of the other morons.  But no one sets the stage like hnic. 


    Who has better hockey knowledge ? Milbury/Roenick Vs Stock/Healy ?

    Hands down Milbury and Roenick all day. HNIC in between periods is a complete joke!

    [/QUOTE] Totally disagree with you on this point. I have yet to see any US produced hockey broadcast that can compare to CBC. NBC has improved a lot though. HNIC is the gold standard!/QUOTE]

    The overall HNIC production defenitely has the edge. The old hot stove panel of LeBrun, Eric Francis and Milbury were awesome. I would DVR that show and couldn't wait for the insight. But I don't know why the went too the clowns they have now.

    Stock and Healy are awful, they freakin stink to high heaven!

    What happens to Cherry now ?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    Sorry to hear about the Rodgers power play. NBC's new contract is Ok as long as we don't have to buy multiple extra channels just to see NHL channel. Centre Ice has been solid, but the NBC broadcasts could use cameramen that know the game better, and the upcoming game forecast often rolls into the game after a faceoff, so some improvement in the program management would help.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrrandPapiRGods. Show OrrandPapiRGods's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:[QUOTE]  NBC is an absolute joke to watch.   Sportsnet is painful.  I like TSN but HNIC is the best.  And yes thats even with the current cast.  And yes i hate healey and some of the other morons.  But no one sets the stage like hnic. 



    Who has better hockey knowledge ? Milbury/Roenick Vs Stock/Healy ?

     

    Hands down Milbury and Roenick all day. HNIC in between periods is a complete joke!

    [/QUOTE] Totally disagree with you on this point. I have yet to see any US produced hockey broadcast that can compare to CBC. NBC has improved a lot though. HNIC is the gold standard!/QUOTE]

    The overall HNIC production defenitely has the edge. The old hot stove panel of LeBrun, Eric Francis and Milbury were awesome. I would DVR that show and couldn't wait for the insight. But I don't know why the went too the clowns they have now.

    Stock and Healy are awful, they freakin stink to high heaven!

    What happens to Cherry now ?

    [/QUOTE]
    I think Cherry survives, he's too popular not to. Agreed on the old Hot Stove Crew, I don't mind PJ.
    CBC gets what hockey means to Canada and they produce a grade A product that reflects that. Love those intros. And Jay thanks for the link, great video

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    Reading the financials in the Globe, TSN's total revenues are lower than what Rogers will pay for NHL games.  There was also an argument that this isn't about direct revenues solely - Rogers will use this as a powerplay in the far more lucrative telecom market.  Rather than watching your bill climb in order to pay for the NHL, look for more ads with NHL as a loss leader.  Also, I wonder if they'll pull access to Sportsnet, or raise the bar/subs package for it, for Bell's Fibe TV service.  In short, less increased cost for existing subscribers because they'll be stealing market share from Bell and others.

    I agree, though, that SportsNet has been awful.  I would also add that I hate their business model.  Unlike TSN, which hires staff, I believe SportsNet's on-air "talent" are "independent contractors" and so don't have labour protection.  That's why they are a bunch of young, flavourless, knowledgeless d-bags straight out of Ryerson's television journalism program and local cable Junior B broadcasts.

    Also, don't forget that Rogers owns a 37.5% stake (largest share) of the Lerfs.  No doubt in my mind that this will be better for the Lerfs than for any other hockey franchise.  If you thought hockey coverage in Canada was Toronto-centric before....

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49thparallel. Show 49thparallel's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    Isn't Rogers share of Loafs same as Bell, 37.5%?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from wallydouglas. Show wallydouglas's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to 49thparallel's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Isn't Rogers share of Loafs same as Bell, 37.5%?

    [/QUOTE]
    I think so and what puzzles me reading a statement i think from the globe (could be wrong) that Rogers deal is to freeze out bell.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Reading the financials in the Globe, TSN's total revenues are lower than what Rogers will pay for NHL games.  There was also an argument that this isn't about direct revenues solely - Rogers will use this as a powerplay in the far more lucrative telecom market.  Rather than watching your bill climb in order to pay for the NHL, look for more ads with NHL as a loss leader.  Also, I wonder if they'll pull access to Sportsnet, or raise the bar/subs package for it, for Bell's Fibe TV service.  In short, less increased cost for existing subscribers because they'll be stealing market share from Bell and others.

    I agree, though, that SportsNet has been awful.  I would also add that I hate their business model.  Unlike TSN, which hires staff, I believe SportsNet's on-air "talent" are "independent contractors" and so don't have labour protection.  That's why they are a bunch of young, flavourless, knowledgeless d-bags straight out of Ryerson's television journalism program and local cable Junior B broadcasts.

    Also, don't forget that Rogers owns a 37.5% stake (largest share) of the Lerfs.  No doubt in my mind that this will be better for the Lerfs than for any other hockey franchise.  If you thought hockey coverage in Canada was Toronto-centric before....

    [/QUOTE]

    Great, we'll get more of Nick Kypreos, Sportsnet's version of Glen Healey, oh the horror!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to red75's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RichHillOntario's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First CBC loses their HNIC theme song and now this.  There was no mention of layoffs for some at CBC.  Would that be on the horizon?

    [/QUOTE]


    There was on CBC radio this morning, and not just in the sports - they got slapped with 200 million in cuts over the last year and now they just lost 50 per cent of their ad revenue, so yeah there are going to be layoffs and likely massive changes across the entire network.

    And kel, in name HNIC will be around for four more years, but it will be a Rogers production aired on CBC, not a CBC production so expect some changes. And after 4 years? Who knows.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pretty difficult for me to feel sorry for the CBC, even though I love HNIC.  In my lifetime, while other Canadian TV networks were out there trying to make a go of it(quite successfully I might add), CBC executives were sticking their noses in the air, endlessly debating among themselves what Canadians "should" be watching, while constantly whining for more government money to keep the barge afloat.  CBC's always had the best of gear, the most manpower per job(as well as a bloated management), and the cushiest working conditions in Canadian media. Productivity, in their eyes, is skillfully maneuvering the convoluted policies and processess that virtually always block initiative, or more importantly, work counter intuitive to the real world.

    Like the Senate and the CRTC, the CBC is another huge tumour feeding on the Canadian tax base.   Layoffs are terrible, but this dinasaur needs to be reinvented, or put to sleep. Competitive forces drove the price to 5.2 bil.  Rogers expects to make a profit on that amount.  CBC would easily figure out a way to lose money, if they got that package for a dollar.  They've mastered that ability since the 50's.

    [/QUOTE]

    There are other factors in why the CBC is important.  I wouldn't call it a tumour - that sounds like the rhetoric you hear from governments when they don't like the way they're being covered.

    One reason you have to see CBC in a different light is that, as the public broadcaster, it has a different goal than to be a competitive business.  In fact, the usual argument in favour of transforming it is that it takes commercial opportunities off the table.  One of those opportunities: HNIC.  As the dissemination mechanism for a good chunk of the independent film and television companies in this country, it's performing the role of business subsidy to those industries, and doing it much more cheaply, actually, than subsidies for things like agriculture or oil and gas.

    Biggest reason it continues to be important: best news coverage and investigative journalism in Canada.  Global and CTV are laughable in the depth and courage of their coverage.  Global is perpetually teetering on becoming SunTV.  With the internet being a largely unregulated information environment (someone might take Stanley as gospel...) and newspapers collapsing under a failing business model, I think we need the CBC to have the funding and capacity to keep the electorate informed.

    All that said, there's no rational reason other than nostalgia and offsetting costs with ad revenue for CBC to continue to hold NHL rights.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davinator. Show Davinator's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion


    Watching the replay of Bettman's in studio interview with Bob McCowan, he was asked about the NHL Network and its future...Bettman carefully reminded Bob that there is NHL Network-US and NHL Network-CAN with overlapping programming.

    He said that they need to look at NHLNet-CAN closely, but it may become redundant on Canadian Cable packages.

    However, the NHLNet-US network is currently in 30-55million(!?) homes because the main stream sports networks don't carry the NHL they way the Canadian networks saturate the cablewaves. He doesn't think that much will happen to the US version, for now. NBC has a similar multi-channel package in the US but not with the all-in-one potential of TV, internet, cable, phone coverage of Rogers coast to coast.

    Bill Daley thought the NHL Center Ice package would probably need to be reconstructed or modified too.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davinator. Show Davinator's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ...snipped...

    All that said, there's no rational reason other than nostalgia and offsetting costs with ad revenue for CBC to continue to hold NHL rights.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Rogers Prez( I don't have time to look up his name) said as much - they recognize the institution that HNIC has been for 60+ years and basically offed them the four year deal to carry it on. He also specifically said that the CBC(=Canadian tax payers) won't be paying a dime for the rights. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davinator. Show Davinator's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    That's 'offered', not 'offed'...but 4 years down the road, who knows?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to 49thparallel's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Isn't Rogers share of Loafs same as Bell, 37.5%?

    [/QUOTE]

    No, Bell has the second largest share, but it's still smaller at 28%.  There is another 9.5% held by BCE Master Trust, but that's an independent thing - basically a hold-over from the days of the Teacher's pension fund owning the Lerfs.  Bell doesn't control how it votes, I don't think.

    In any event, even if it was an equal partnership in MLSE, Bell and Rogers would have to compete in their marketplace.  Sounds like, on this one, Bell went big, but ultimately chose to go home.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    There are other factors in why the CBC is important.  I wouldn't call it a tumour - that sounds like the rhetoric you hear from governments when they don't like the way they're being covered.

    One reason you have to see CBC in a different light is that, as the public broadcaster, it has a different goal than to be a competitive business.  In fact, the usual argument in favour of transforming it is that it takes commercial opportunities off the table.  One of those opportunities: HNIC.  As the dissemination mechanism for a good chunk of the independent film and television companies in this country, it's performing the role of business subsidy to those industries, and doing it much more cheaply, actually, than subsidies for things like agriculture or oil and gas.

    Biggest reason it continues to be important: best news coverage and investigative journalism in Canada.  Global and CTV are laughable in the depth and courage of their coverage.  Global is perpetually teetering on becoming SunTV.  With the internet being a largely unregulated information environment (someone might take Stanley as gospel...) and newspapers collapsing under a failing business model, I think we need the CBC to have the funding and capacity to keep the electorate informed.

    All that said, there's no rational reason other than nostalgia and offsetting costs with ad revenue for CBC to continue to hold NHL rights.

    [/QUOTE]

    I obviously disagree quite strongly.  The governments basically broke, and Canadians simply can't afford to carry a "business" who considers iteslf above the risk/reward realities it's competitors and the rest of the world live with.  Hunger, health, and education are better examples of what's important from our government.  Although I share your opinion about "national news",I totally disagree about local. Anyway, it's not fact, just taste.  If the marketplace wants more/better news, the other players will react accordingly.  Simply put, the CBC provides very little that can't be accessed elsewhere.  What it does, virtually no one cares about outside the boardroom, or the other associated businesses counting on their own  continued gov't handouts.   Making the argument that any of these companies deserves 10 digits per year, of taxpayer money...into infinity screams our collective ineptitude when it comes to understanding basic responsibility. 

    I'm as supportive of the arts as anyone.  I don't believe a 1.1 billion dollar annual public handout to a national TV network is good value from any vantage point.  Economic, journalistic, political or cultural.  They're certainly not needed to champion the sanctity of hockey in Canada.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:[QUOTE]  NBC is an absolute joke to watch.   Sportsnet is painful.  I like TSN but HNIC is the best.  And yes thats even with the current cast.  And yes i hate healey and some of the other morons.  But no one sets the stage like hnic. 



    Who has better hockey knowledge ? Milbury/Roenick Vs Stock/Healy ?

     

    Hands down Milbury and Roenick all day. HNIC in between periods is a complete joke!

    [/QUOTE] Totally disagree with you on this point. I have yet to see any US produced hockey broadcast that can compare to CBC. NBC has improved a lot though. HNIC is the gold standard!/QUOTE]

    The overall HNIC production defenitely has the edge. The old hot stove panel of LeBrun, Eric Francis and Milbury were awesome. I would DVR that show and couldn't wait for the insight. But I don't know why the went too the clowns they have now.

    Stock and Healy are awful, they freakin stink to high heaven!

    What happens to Cherry now ?

    [/QUOTE]
    I think Cherry survives, he's too popular not to. Agreed on the old Hot Stove Crew, I don't mind PJ.
    CBC gets what hockey means to Canada and they produce a grade A product that reflects that. Love those intros. And Jay thanks for the link, great video

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you think jr and milbury know more?  Bc they were better players?   Trust me no one hates healey more than I do.   CBC is purely a Canadian tradition.  I dont wanna imagine it without it.  NBC doesnt have Ron Mclean who i think is brilliant.  His combo with Grapes is really good whether you like or hate them.  I personally love the combo. 

    i cant imagine them wanting to change something that is working so well. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:[QUOTE]  NBC is an absolute joke to watch.   Sportsnet is painful.  I like TSN but HNIC is the best.  And yes thats even with the current cast.  And yes i hate healey and some of the other morons.  But no one sets the stage like hnic. 



    Who has better hockey knowledge ? Milbury/Roenick Vs Stock/Healy ?

     

    Hands down Milbury and Roenick all day. HNIC in between periods is a complete joke!

    [/QUOTE] Totally disagree with you on this point. I have yet to see any US produced hockey broadcast that can compare to CBC. NBC has improved a lot though. HNIC is the gold standard!/QUOTE]

    The overall HNIC production defenitely has the edge. The old hot stove panel of LeBrun, Eric Francis and Milbury were awesome. I would DVR that show and couldn't wait for the insight. But I don't know why the went too the clowns they have now.

    Stock and Healy are awful, they freakin stink to high heaven!

    What happens to Cherry now ?

    [/QUOTE]
    I think Cherry survives, he's too popular not to. Agreed on the old Hot Stove Crew, I don't mind PJ.
    CBC gets what hockey means to Canada and they produce a grade A product that reflects that. Love those intros. And Jay thanks for the link, great video

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you think jr and milbury know more?  Bc they were better players?   Trust me no one hates healey more than I do.   CBC is purely a Canadian tradition.  I dont wanna imagine it without it.  NBC doesnt have Ron Mclean who i think is brilliant.  His combo with Grapes is really good whether you like or hate them.  I personally love the combo. 

    i cant imagine them wanting to change something that is working so well. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Could not agree more. It cannot be easy working with Cherry, and I like him, Mclean does it brilliantly.

    Don Cherry, like him or hate him, agree with him or disagree with him, eats, sleeps and breathes hockey, especially Canadian hockey. He's done alot for Canadian hockey and has a tremendous passion for it. I respect that.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to OrrandPapiRGods' comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:[QUOTE]  NBC is an absolute joke to watch.   Sportsnet is painful.  I like TSN but HNIC is the best.  And yes thats even with the current cast.  And yes i hate healey and some of the other morons.  But no one sets the stage like hnic. 



    Who has better hockey knowledge ? Milbury/Roenick Vs Stock/Healy ?

     

    Hands down Milbury and Roenick all day. HNIC in between periods is a complete joke!

    [/QUOTE] Totally disagree with you on this point. I have yet to see any US produced hockey broadcast that can compare to CBC. NBC has improved a lot though. HNIC is the gold standard!/QUOTE]

    The overall HNIC production defenitely has the edge. The old hot stove panel of LeBrun, Eric Francis and Milbury were awesome. I would DVR that show and couldn't wait for the insight. But I don't know why the went too the clowns they have now.

    Stock and Healy are awful, they freakin stink to high heaven!

    What happens to Cherry now ?

    [/QUOTE]
    I think Cherry survives, he's too popular not to. Agreed on the old Hot Stove Crew, I don't mind PJ.
    CBC gets what hockey means to Canada and they produce a grade A product that reflects that. Love those intros. And Jay thanks for the link, great video

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you think jr and milbury know more?  Bc they were better players?   Trust me no one hates healey more than I do.   CBC is purely a Canadian tradition.  I dont wanna imagine it without it.  NBC doesnt have Ron Mclean who i think is brilliant.  His combo with Grapes is really good whether you like or hate them.  I personally love the combo. 

    i cant imagine them wanting to change something that is working so well. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Could not agree more. It cannot be easy working with Cherry, and I like him, Mclean does it brilliantly.

    Don Cherry, like him or hate him, agree with him or disagree with him, eats, sleeps and breathes hockey, especially Canadian hockey. He's done alot for Canadian hockey and has a tremendous passion for it. I respect that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not to mention his unwavering support of veterans, past and present, who served in the military. He is also very supportive of the police, provincial or national forces.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    done alot for Canadian hockey and has a tremendous passion for it. I respect that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not to mention his unwavering support of veterans, past and present, who served in the military. He is also very supportive of the police, provincial or national forces.

    [/QUOTE]

    He has a big heart, I love people like him. We need more of them.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    done alot for Canadian hockey and has a tremendous passion for it. I respect that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not to mention his unwavering support of veterans, past and present, who served in the military. He is also very supportive of the police, provincial or national forces.

    [/QUOTE]

    He has a big heart, I love people like him. We need more of them.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree Kel, i don't always agree with him but i love the guy.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Don-Bruino. Show Don-Bruino's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    Must be nice, all of you get into a discussion of high-priced talent; where will they end up; who will be out of a job; and who is better than who?

    Rogers never touched anything that they could increase or raise. My rates will be going sky high in a very short period of time, and so will some of you. Why is no-one upset? It's going to cost me three times more to watch my Bruins.

    There is a monopoly happening. Governments have gone to great lengths to end monopolies because they snuff-out competition and consumers don't get a fair deal. Rogers is going to have their way here.

    When will the Government intervene? F--k Rogers and each and every one of their shareholders.

    They rank at or near the bottom for customer service and satisfaction in every poll ever undertaken.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Don-Bruino. Show Don-Bruino's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    And another thing: what's with all these Sportsnet and Rogers employees backslapping each other (on the air) for what they have accomplished and how they are on the cusp of the future, and hockey will be presented like never before!

    Give me a break!

    They own the joint now. They'll make everybody pay. They will destroy HNIC and keep the name. All broadcasters will have to play by their rules. If they don't they will have every chance of failure and then be bought out by Rogers at cut rate prices.

    Yes, the future - HOCKEY HELPS ROGERS SWALLOW UP CANADA.

     

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    You're spinning a bit, wheats.

    At first you were saying that Rogers will pass on the cost of this deal to everyone who had a contract with them.  Then you're saying they have a monopoly and will hammer you to watch the Bruins.  If the first is true...switch carriers.  Get a different IP.  Get Bell Fibe.  If they try to gouge you for hockey, then they won't be also gouging you for cell and internet service.  You'll just walk, right?  If they try to gouge you for everything, I think they'll lose a lot of cash on this deal really, really quickly.

    It's also going to be interesting to see what they do with out-of-market services like Centre Ice and GameCentre live.  That's all I really care about.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    done alot for Canadian hockey and has a tremendous passion for it. I respect that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not to mention his unwavering support of veterans, past and present, who served in the military. He is also very supportive of the police, provincial or national forces.

    [/QUOTE]

    He has a big heart, I love people like him. We need more of them.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree Kel, i don't always agree with him but i love the guy.

    [/QUOTE]

    He is getting long winded the older he gets if thats possible but his heartbis huge.  He spends a lot of his time watching minor hockey.   Bc he loves it.  He tears up over police, fire and military...very proud canadian and a canadian icon.  I love the man

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chef09. Show Chef09's posts

    Re: 12 years, $5.2Billion

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    HNIC is a tradition i cant live without.  Anything that takes the game away from the true megapower is going to be a sad day.   NBC is an absolute joke to watch.   Sportsnet is painful.  I like TSN but HNIC is the best.  And yes thats even with the current cast.  And yes i hate healey and some of the other morons.  But no one sets the stage like hnic.  Their intros give me goosebumps.  neil young.  Major goosebumps.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Is HNIC going ot be gone? Please say no..

    [/QUOTE]


    Not gone but total editorial control-staffing etc. will be dictated by Rogers . I agree with Shupe: HNIC is something I don't want to live without. I love the way they do Hockey on Sat. Night and Hockey Day in Canada. TSN is great for the Canadian Junior Championships. Nesn for B's games but Hockey Night with the Hot Stove, their good(Grapes) bad,(Healey) and ugly(the new theme song) I love. Typically I stream the week day games from anywhere but Saturday Night is a tradition. The memories . . .  Kasper benching Neely& Stevens, Cherry kissing Gilmore-whacking Ron on the head with sholder pads, classic. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share