http://www.digg.com/tech_news/ESPN_chargin...o_carry_ESPN360
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060801-7397.html
[spoiler]As broadband becomes commonplace in most homes across America, television networks have boosted their online video offerings and made paid content available for free in many cases. ESPN is taking a different approach to ESPN360, its online video offering, charging Internet service providers (subscription required) for the right to carry the service.
ESPN's attempt to get ISPs to foot the bill is commonplace in the cable and satellite TV world, where the likes of Comcast and DIRECTV pay a per-subscriber fee to ESPN for its programming. On the Internet, it's a different story. End-users are expected to foot the bill for such premium services, either via a subscription or pay-per-view model.
ISPs have mixed reactions about the new service. Some are embracing it, like Verizon and Charter. In particular, Verizon carries it because the company believes it helps them stand out from the competition. "It is sort of like an arms race" right now in the video-online world, said Bill Heilig, Verizon's executive director for portal and content services. With Verizon rolling out its FiOS fiber network in selected areas, having premium content like ESPN360 may help convince some customers to switch.
Other ISPs are standing on the sidelines. Cox Communications, in particular, doesn't like it at all. A spokesperson for the company said that signing on to carry it would require Cox to burden all of its customers with additional costs—even those that don't want the service.
Exclusive deals with ISPs are not uncommon—witness the NHL's exclusive agreement with Comcast that allows the cable ISP to stream NHL games. That said, ESPN is the first major network to take a stab at carrying the television fee-generation model over to the Internet.
Lurking in the background is the question of whether consumers will make their choice of ISP based on whether it offers additional premium services like ESPN360. The availability of free, on-demand sports programming seems to be far down the list behind price and speed for most consumers who actually have more than one service provider to choose from. ESPN is a powerful brand, to be sure, but strong enough to make someone select Verizon over Comcast? [/spoiler]
They want to charge ISPs for carrying ESPN360! This means that everyone would have to pay for it! Even those that aren't subscribed! I don't know what else to say but FUCK ESPN! The assholes want to ruin the internet!
Do these stupid corporations hate people?
(I put this on the computer board cause it's about an online RIPOFF service offered by ESPN.)
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060801-7397.html
[spoiler]As broadband becomes commonplace in most homes across America, television networks have boosted their online video offerings and made paid content available for free in many cases. ESPN is taking a different approach to ESPN360, its online video offering, charging Internet service providers (subscription required) for the right to carry the service.
ESPN's attempt to get ISPs to foot the bill is commonplace in the cable and satellite TV world, where the likes of Comcast and DIRECTV pay a per-subscriber fee to ESPN for its programming. On the Internet, it's a different story. End-users are expected to foot the bill for such premium services, either via a subscription or pay-per-view model.
ISPs have mixed reactions about the new service. Some are embracing it, like Verizon and Charter. In particular, Verizon carries it because the company believes it helps them stand out from the competition. "It is sort of like an arms race" right now in the video-online world, said Bill Heilig, Verizon's executive director for portal and content services. With Verizon rolling out its FiOS fiber network in selected areas, having premium content like ESPN360 may help convince some customers to switch.
Other ISPs are standing on the sidelines. Cox Communications, in particular, doesn't like it at all. A spokesperson for the company said that signing on to carry it would require Cox to burden all of its customers with additional costs—even those that don't want the service.
Exclusive deals with ISPs are not uncommon—witness the NHL's exclusive agreement with Comcast that allows the cable ISP to stream NHL games. That said, ESPN is the first major network to take a stab at carrying the television fee-generation model over to the Internet.
Lurking in the background is the question of whether consumers will make their choice of ISP based on whether it offers additional premium services like ESPN360. The availability of free, on-demand sports programming seems to be far down the list behind price and speed for most consumers who actually have more than one service provider to choose from. ESPN is a powerful brand, to be sure, but strong enough to make someone select Verizon over Comcast? [/spoiler]
They want to charge ISPs for carrying ESPN360! This means that everyone would have to pay for it! Even those that aren't subscribed! I don't know what else to say but FUCK ESPN! The assholes want to ruin the internet!
Do these stupid corporations hate people?
(I put this on the computer board cause it's about an online RIPOFF service offered by ESPN.)