Former Bush Senior Staffer on Comcast's Blazers "Monopoly": "They could make a deal. They choose not to. Two reasons: greed and control."
I always knew Comcast's handling of its Blazers television rights was bad. But I never knew exactly how bad. That changed yesterday when, during a telephone interview, a former Bush White House Senior Staffer slammed the company's greed and decried its lack of transparency. I'm not sure it gets worse than that. When those guys think you've crossed those lines ... you're doing it wrong. Really wrong.
And that's exactly what happened during my Wednesday afternoon phone interview with Brad Blakeman, George W. Bush's Deputy Assistant to the President for Appointments and Scheduling. If you google him, you'll find out pretty quickly that the internet generally dislikes him for his strong conservative stances. Blakeman is also a self-professed sports fan, though, and he is currently a board member for the Sports Fans Coalition, a national advocacy group whose main goal is to further the fan's interests when it comes to issues like publicly-financed stadiums and television availability of games. Blakeman isn't the group's only heavy hitter. David Goodfriend, President Clinton's Deputy Staff Secretary, is the SFC's chairman. Access to sports, Blakeman says, "is a truly bipartisan issue." Word to that.
So what does the SFC have to do with you and the Blazers? Well, they were in Salem yesterday to provide testimony at a hearing called by the Oregon State House, whose Committee on Consumer Protection and Government Accountability is investigating Comcast's eternally shady failure to strike a deal with the satellite companies for distribution of Blazers games.
TheOregonPolitico.com has extensive, excellent coverage of the hearing. They've got video interviews, transcripts, the whole nine yards. They summarize yesterday's proceedings...
Coverage of the state's biggest sports franchise, the Portland Trail Blazers, was the sole topic of conversation at the final House Consumer Protection Committee's hearing Wednesday afternoon.
The informational hearing was held to allow discussion from interested parties on the controversy of Comcast SportsNet's Trail Blazer coverage. The meeting drew testimony from the Sports Fan Coalition, Comcast SportsNet, and John Canzano, one of the state's most influential sports writers.
The controversy erupted after the Trail Blazers entered into agreement with Comcast SportsNet to locally broadcast all of the team's games on either that channel or on KGW, Portland's NBC affiliate. Tempers began to flare when locals not in an area to receive Comcast cable were no longer able to watch the Blazer games at home.
It's great to see Canzano take a break from getting worked by Chip Kelly to continue to speak on the one issue he has gotten completely right from the get-go. It's also great to see Representative Jefferson Smith, who has contributed to Blazersedge in the past, stand up for his fellow Blazers fans. As quoted by Joe Freeman...
"I'm not persuaded that (we) should do nothing," Rep. Jefferson Smith, D-Portland, said. "I'm not persuaded that this is merely a private sector fight and we should leave it up to the private sector. There is a role for us to ask the kind of question that this raises. And if there is nothing an Oregon Legislature can do, then who does?"
But did the hearing matter? I confess that my first thought when I heard about this hearing is that it had every element necessary for a dog and pony show: Politicians, Comcast, and John Canzano. Freeman concludes...
After listening to official testimony about the limited availability of the broadcast of Blazers games, the House Committee on Consumer Protection and Government Accountability walked away unsure, if not uneasy, about what role they could play in stimulating a resolution.
The committee met in an informational meeting and now must decide what, if anything, to do next to help Oregonians in their efforts to watch Blazers games.
All in all, it's difficult to state that yesterday's hearing represents real progress, although a public shaming of Comcast always makes for a good time. With that in mind, why don't you click through for my interview with Blakeman, who gets up on the bully pulpit to:
- Slam Comcast's "monopoly"
- Send a message to the Portland Trail Blazers to stand up for their fans
- Request that the Oregon legislature and its representatives work to hold up approving Comcast's merger with NBC until Comcast gets the necessary deals done here in Oregon.
-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
Blazersedge: Is this a pretty unusual thing for a state government to do? To call a cable company's practices into question like this and to solicit feedback from people such as yourself and other media members? Or is this something that has happened other places around the country?
I think it is probably unique but that's not to say that it's not a good thing to do. I think it's exactly what the doctor ordered. A little transparency and sunshine on these deals that tend to be made behind closed doors.
We're not seeking to interfere with contracts between two entities -- in this case the Trail Blazers and Comcast -- what we're doing is we want to call into question why Comcast didn't do what they said they were going to several years ago in making home teams available to their competitors at a price that can be passed along to the consumers of Dish or any other entity.
The past two years the Trail Blazers have been sold out. Yet there are 10,000s of fans who are locked out of seeing home games because they don't have Comcast, not by choice in some instances. Comcast isn't a deliverable where they live. They have other ways of getting programming. So why doesn't Comcast do what they originally said they were going to do and make this home game issue go away by providing it to competitors so that every Trail Blazer fan can watch in the comfort of their home or their favorite restaurant or bar?
Blazersedge: That's a question we've asked many times. The answer that always comes from Comcast is "we're negotiating in good faith we just haven't reached a price that we consider fair for both sides." Do you take them at their word when they say that?
Absolutely not. If they wanted to make a deal, they could make a deal. They choose not to. Two reasons: greed and control. They control the market, they control the price. The Trail Blazers are your only professional sports team. In fact they have a monopoly over who sees the games and who doesn't. It's not right and it's not fair for the sports fans. We started this organization to fight for the sports fans. And heretofore they've been on the sidelines and we're here to make sure they take the field and at least be heard.
Blazersedge: "Monopoly" is a word that I think Comcast would probably push back against pretty hard.
It is what it is. It is a monopoly on games and it's deliverable. Yes, they made a contract with the Trail Blazers to the tune of, we believe, 10 years and 120 million [dollars]. They initially made representation that they would provide home games to their competitors at a fair price. That has not been done. Yet now they are seeking Oregon's help in the anti-trust exemption for the merger between Comcast and NBC. Now they want something again from the people.
I think it's up to the people to say, 'Hey, wait a second. Before we seek to grant you antitrust status, we want to find out why it is that you never reached a deal with your competitors to deliver these games like you had promised to do in good faith.' I think it's time for the government now to turn the tables on Comcast and say, "What have you done? You haven't acted in good faith, why do you want us to broaden your business model with now merging with NBC?'
Blazersedge: What do you make of the deals Comcast has announced with some of the minor cable companies in Oregon? Some have painted those deals as a kind of ruse or a distraction from the fact they haven't come to terms with the larger providers.
Of course. It's to say, 'Hey, look, we made a deal! And we can make a deal with our other competitors but we're not there yet.' Well how long is it going to take to make a deal? In the meantime, who is suffering? The fans are suffering. They can't even go to a game because the games are sold out.
It really is a position -- nobody has turned the heat up on Comcast. Now Comcast comes hat in hand to the government of Oregon and says, 'approve our merger. Don't stand in the way of our Merger." Oregonians are saying, 'Wait a second Comcast, you have a lot of explaining to do.'
It's because nobody heretofore has given them a voice and has shed light on what is being done on what directly affects them. We now have a Chapter started here in Oregon and we're going to make sure that the people of Oregon are well-informed about what is going on with the Trail Blazers and Comcast.
Blazersedge: Up to this point, you have been a national advocacy group and now you have a local chapter here in Portland. Has that mostly or almost totally come about because of this unique situation with the Blazers and Comcast or is it something else about Portland that made you start your first local chapter here?
I think this was obviously the catalyst by which to start a chapter here. Our plan and our goal is to have a chapter in every state and then in every major market within the state because sports is a literally 100s of billions of dollars business. In our economy it's larger than the US auto industry. And the fans are directly affected by contracts they are not even a party to. But they're beneficiaries of and they should have a voice. Agreements should be honored when it affects them. Promises should be kept.
Blazersedge: There's a lot of skepticism in Portland about Comcast and how they will continue to stall, stall, stall on the deals so they can continue to gain subscribers. What do you think is a reasonable best case scenario for Blazers fans at this point in terms of when they can expect coverage to open up?
Well, we have a good start. They should write their Congress people. Because the merger that Comcast and NBC are taking is a national merger. They should also be talking to their state legislators and put some heat on. One thing is for sure: the State House Committee on Consumer Protection and Government Accountability has taken note of it. And maybe with the Comcast testimony today it will be a start where this is going to be seen to fruition and Comcast is going to be made to do what they said they were going to do originally.
But now they want something from the people. They want the citizens of Oregon through their government to approve their merger. Shame on the government of Oregon if they give a knee jerk approval to it when Comcast has not honored their agreement to provide games to the thousands of fans who are locked out.
Blazersedge: What kind of scene do you expect in Salem? Do you think this is for show or do you think they are really serious about questioning Comcast?
I think they are [serious]. I don't think they would go through this as a dog and pony show. I think they are serious about it and they want to get to the bottom of it and this is a good start. In doing it and shedding some light on a situation that has been pretty much stonewalled the last couple years.
Blazersedge: What motivated you to get involved with the Sports Fan Coalition? A personal sports interest or something else?
It's mainly fairness and equity. I believe that when government funds are used to build arenas that there should be fair stadium pricing. I think fans should not be locked out of their favorite teams being shown on television. I believe that fans need to be more represented when they are the direct beneficiaries and in some cases the brunt of the decisions that are made int heir name. But nobody has ever bothered to consult them. Whether it's the municipality, the team or the television provider. I think they deserve a voice even though they aren't party to the contract legally, per se, they certainly deserve a voice in the decisions that are made on their behalf.
Yeah, I'm a sports fan. But more important than that, I thrive on public policy, good public policy, I've been involved in it all my life. And this is a truly bipartisan issue. Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, I believe fans deserve a right to be fairly.
Blazersedge: What would you tell the Blazers to do from today forward? The past is the past. But what is your message to the team that signed this contract that has left so many of its fans stranded?
They should say, 'Comcast, do the right thing. Our games are sold out, we have an avid sports audience throughout the state and it's hurting our franchise not being able to have games provided. Please make the deal.' Put pressure on. Come to the side of the sports fan. They're in the right here. They're the ones who are aggrieved by the decision by Comcast not to act in good faith.
You can also check out Blakeman's full testimony yesterday here. If you're passionate about the television issue, as I know thousands of you are, you might consider giving the SFC a look-through. Here's their website. For information about their Portland chapter, click here. They've also got a petition to the Oregon State House demanding coverage of Blazers games, which you can sign here.
-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
58 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This statement rarely precedes purposeful action:
“The committee met in an informational meeting and now must decide what, if anything, to do next…”
by Bart King on Feb 25, 2010 11:11 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Ah yes. The familiar statement to set up a meeting to discuss the desire/need/purpose for another meeting
I hope someone brings a powerpoint presentation.
I get the paper, so I don't care!
Comcast
I can understand Comcast’s reluctance to let loose of their Blazer monopoly.
I get internet, cable, and phone service from Comcast. I would probably switch providers on some if not all of that if it weren’t for Comcast being the only provider that I can get Blazer games on.
I doubt they can get away with this much longer, and once the fortress has been overrrun, I will be getting in touch with Directv.
I hope they don't get away with this much longer
This is part of a much larger problem, which is that large corporations like Comcast can pretty much abuse their customers because they hold all the cards in the relationship.
Having to choose between your television content provider and your basketball team is no choice at all.
I wish these people a lot of luck and I am ready to give them my support, for all that is worth. – Elgin
GOP in HD
Hard to credit a former senior-level Bush guy when he cites greed and a lack of transparency.
But he may be uniquely qualified to recognize those things.
A further caveat: he might be a bit disgruntled right now, being a Blake man. The chairman also could be Blake’s good friend.
#52
Former Bush Administration officials and John Canzano
My heroes.
I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.
by hurryup09 on Feb 25, 2010 12:02 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
If that storm rained poop
I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.
by hurryup09 on Feb 25, 2010 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Hehe. Bush's cabinet re: social responsibility.
But look!:
“It is what it is.”
He talks like an athlete.
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Feb 25, 2010 12:07 PM PST reply actions
begging for political jokes...
This might be covered by Bush and Clinton people, but it smells of Obama… absolutely nothing happening.
Sounds like a typical voter.......
Rather than being upset with the people doing the obstructing, blame the folks who are being obstructed.
by upper left corner on Feb 26, 2010 8:29 AM PST up reply actions
lol
Heartbroken..... Our goats have escaped.
by Starvin' Marvin on Feb 25, 2010 12:20 PM PST reply actions
The won't make a deal unless it increases they're overall revenue/profit. Period
So let me get this straight (and correct me if I’m wrong). The small cable companies that they have made deals with don’t overlap their service areas? If so, sure they’ll make those deals, the lose no cable subscribers. They haven’t made deals with providers that overlap their territory (direct tv, dish)? Of course they won’t make those deals because they lose tons of subscribers.
When they say they say they can’t reach an agreement that is beneficial for both sides, they mean that can’t get these providers to buy it for the exorbitant amount that will offset the massive subscriber exodus that will take place in the Portland Metro area when said subscribers can get their blazer coverage elsewhere.
As long as that’s not against the law, it just won’t happen. They’re not going to voluntarily act against their financial interests. It sucks super duper hard, but when the blazers signed a long term contract with no requirements for assured access…well, that’s the big ten-year lemon we all get to suck on.
“Good Faith” is just buzz phrase in big business when they don’t want stipulations in the contract. It’s also use by politicians to complain when there’s really nothing they can do about it. Ask Sonics fans how that phrase worked out for them.
I don't think that is quite right
Verizon does overlap Comcast’s coverage area and was one of the 1st providers to add CSN, on the other hand ….Charter cable (coast, southern oregon), who doesn’t have any direct competition with Comcast at all ….has not. This tends to indicate that that motivation of “massive subscriber exodus” is not the driving factor at all. If it was, Comcast wouldn’t have signed a deal with Verizon….and that motivation wouldn’t have had any impact on Charter at all, since Charter cannot take even a single one of Comcast’s customers (the only way for Comcast to make any money from Charter customers is to sign a deal ASAP). There is more to this than meets the eye
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 25, 2010 1:15 PM PST up reply actions
southern oregon is the only person who has charter cable?
"Your best?!?!! Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and &^%@ the prom queen"
Super Rodgers Bros.
#52
"coast" does too
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 25, 2010 1:44 PM PST up reply actions
Well, you have "corrected me if I'm wrong," sir
So should we wonder then if it may very well be these other providers who are holding out for an unreasonably “low” prices then, if we are to believe they are being offered similarly scaled deals to the one signed by Verizon? Is the deal Comcast is offering fair?
I still have a hard time believing that Comcast is motivated to strike deals with the big dish networks, because it really does seem they’d lose a lot of subscribers in that case (a situation exacerbated by the Comcast hate in the air, the “now we REALLY can’t sell it to Dish/Direct” situation, I’ll call it).
As for the coast, etc., maybe it’s the Charter folks that are holding their customers hostage, and not Comcast after all. Since moving to Direct or Dish doesn’t help blazers fans in the area with their blazer problem, maybe Charter has no fear of losing customers for lack of CSN. If the people aren’t revolting and cancelling their Charter subscriptions, why would Charter pay unless they get it from Comcast for dirt cheap?
I'll break it down again . . .
COINCAST wants Charter to pay an additional $ 2.00 per month for
EVERY subscriber on their system. Does EVERY subscriber care if Charter
adds a regional Sports Channel ? NO. Only the sports fan cares. Will COINCAST
allow Charter to offer COINSportsNet to a special sports tier with each subscriber
paying $ 10.00 extra per month ? NO. COINCAST wants every subscriber to pay.
Why settle for 20,000 or 30,000 paying extra, when you can make 120,000 to 200,000
subscribers pay. Hence the holdup. Charter realizes that many subscribers would
switch to Sattelite if they charge an extra $ 2.00 per month for a single regional sports
channel, when the majority of subscribers don’t care about sports. Once again,
COINCAST SUCKS !!!!
It's GO time !
That is WRONG.
Comcast does not want every Charter subscriber to pay an extra $2.00 per month. Look at Bend Broadband as an example. They have 4 tiers of cable service, Limited ($17.95 per month), Family ($29.50), Essentials ($43.75), and Preferred ($49.75). The ONLY tier that includes the Blazers is the Preferred tier.
Bendbroadband said EXPLICITLY on their website during negotiations with Comcast that only their top tier customers would have to pay $2 more. Then after they added CSN to that tier I don’t believe they even raised the price.
Canzano has repeatedly made this false claim – even when Bend Broadband said otherwise right on their web page. Now you are repeating the same false claim.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Feb 25, 2010 4:12 PM PST up reply actions
Besides, I don't see what's to get up in arms about it
Everyone pays for a ton of channels they don’t use anyways. I’d like to be able to not get charged for Lifetime, Oxygen, BET, CNBC, FNC, etc., but I don’t have the option. An a la carte business model would be nice and preferable, but getting enraged about something that’s SOP for cable content providers is a little much.
#52
Enraged ????
I don’t get enraged. I just don’t like COINCAST. In researching
this company, they have done this sort of business all over the
country. They pay for the exclusive rights to sports team cable games,
then Monopolize those games, primarily to areas where the parent
dosen’t have systems. Having no option to watch/ purchase the cable
games is still a BLACKOUT.
COINCAST STILL SUCKS!
Signed Disgusted (Not Enraged)
P.S. – When I start to feel RAGE, I breath . . .
or go to the heavy bag.
It's GO time !
Bendbroadband has it's own problems
Besides being high priced compared to other areas, (I have comcast in Eugene but suffer with BB while there.) The good educational type channels on the preferred package too.
I would switch to a dish system that with the NBA package. that carries all the teams if it were available. All teams except the Blazers are available but comcast has put themselves in a position to economically prohibit the ‘NBA League Pass’ providers from broadcasting.
I am a little surprised that the NBA doesn’t have anything to say about this situation.
Spike
by SpikeMurders on Feb 26, 2010 2:54 PM PST up reply actions
The NBA is actually the entity that sets the blackout restrictions
not Comcast or Blazers
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 26, 2010 3:25 PM PST up reply actions
What does Bend Broadband have to do with Charter ???
Charter dosen’t have four tiers. They have always had Basic &
Expanded Basic. Even in the old days, you couldn’t get any of the good
channels on Basic and you couldn’t just subscribe to Extended Basic.
The only way you could get Extended was to have or get Basic. I realize
Bend has a small mark, but Charter serves a much larger geographic
area and more subscribers.
It's GO time !
agreed except canzano did not get worked by CK
I'm going on a Dave boycott until AK1984 is brought back.
"Did they really expect me to bow down to Jesus?!?" ~Sophia
"At first glance, I saw a fairly unremarkable penis." ~Sophia on Greg Oden
Come back to normal tv!
I’m SOOOO tired of watching the games online. I want it back on my tv without having to get comcast
I pay for comcast inernet and basic cable
after the switch to digital, i lost CSN37 because i only pay for “basic cable” and comcast does not provide internet streams of the games, they are tyrants.
Why isn't Cable a public utility?
There are hundreds of cities that have public electric utilities (unlike stupid Portlanders). Why can’t a city have a public cable utility? All Comcast does is facilitate the service.
This would solve the problem of getting the Blazers, provide a revenue stream for the city, and lower our cable bills (assuming the city doesn’t take as much as Comcast does).
Or you could franchise out cable like Eugene
And then you wouldn’t even have the option of FIOS because your city council sold you out.
by dwaynebillybob on Feb 25, 2010 1:39 PM PST up reply actions
If Brad Blakeman
thinks your argument doesn’t hold water, it really doesn’t hold water.
Did you seriously say....
That Canzano got owned by chip Kelly? Are you serious? If so I want some of what your smoking. Chip is a joke and he and what he is doing about the Ducks football program is down right embarrassing……I listened to that interview live just like the rest of you and Chip sounded like a little kid on the defensive against his parents, he knows he is wrong, everyone in the state knows hes wrong. If a DUI = off the team for a year, and abuse on a woman= nothing, there is a huge problem. That being said Ill get behind my wall to avoid getting hit by all the tomatoes that are surly to be thrown by hack duck fans.
by przybillafan2001 on Feb 25, 2010 1:41 PM PST reply actions
Przybilla would turn over in his grave to hear you besmerch a man for doing the right thing
All he’s said is, when I have the facts I’ll make a decision based on those facts. The entire argument against this seems to be whether or not to suspend James for being accused of something. James, like the courts, is using due process. Anybody who argues otherwise has an agenda.
by Blazersaurus on Feb 25, 2010 2:20 PM PST up reply actions
Neither Beaver nor Duck
But regardless if he is right or wrong or awful or whatever, Kelly definitely came out looking better than Canzano in that interview. The very end of that interview was priceless. You can hear it at oregonlive.
by almost awesome on Feb 25, 2010 8:45 PM PST up reply actions
I wish I was missing only the home games
but it is most of the season including the road games on comcast! Thankfully I have season tickets.
The facts are that the police had enough evidence to place him under arrest, and now under electronic surveillance, this is some pretty serious stuff people……I hate the police, wait let me rephrase that I HATEE the police, but when they are monitoring your every move, they have enough evidence to do so, they would not go to those extreme measures for something that might not be true or not. Note how it took a whole day for the arrest to happen after the incident, it called gathering evidence.
Bottom line, the superstars on this team are being treated differently for the reasons of college football and its an embarrassment to the state and to all Oregonians.
I seriously cant believe that people are still showing up to Blazer games in ducks gear, like seriously they have a $10 T-Shirt deal every game, buck up and support a team that does not disgrace the state.
by przybillafan2001 on Feb 25, 2010 2:42 PM PST reply actions
Viva La Revolution!
Repeat after me…DOWN WITH COMMIE-CAST…DOWN WITH COMMIE-CAST!!!
"I was surprised, I was listening to the coach on the bench and behind me, she touches me and says, ‘Rudy, I love you. Nice to meet you. Good game.’ - Rudy
by The Mallorcan Rocket on Feb 25, 2010 4:57 PM PST via mobile reply actions
If they were actually commies
They would be down with sharing blazer games like they share everything with the proletariat
That is one awesome caption, Ben.
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Business
I have no real knowledge of the numbers so I will use the ones mentioned above. (Please excuse the approximations and assumptions.)
Comcast wants about 200000 subscribers to pay $2 a month for Blazer games. This has been going on for 3 years. If they had asked for $1 and been excepted three years ago rather than getting $0, they would be ahead of the game today.
There appears to be other ways to negotiate than: Take it or leave it!
Obviously, I have no understanding of big business or perhaps it is the tall BV and water I just finished.
I am no longer "young" enough to know everything!
Not everybody hates Comcast...
OK, I’m not a huge fan either, but I live in a valley with a mountain to the south… I actually had DirecTV for a few years, but the trees got taller, and I had to go back to Comcast… The only good thing about it, I now finally got to watch all of the Blazer games…
So don’t worry Comcast, even though you suck, I’ll still be a subscriber.. (Until we can really pull off that internet TV thing, then you’re outta here…)
What about Blazersedge?
hmm.. so Comcast is wrong and the Blazers should stand up for their fans…if blazersedge really believes all of this then why don’t they allow their visitors to post links to streaming games. Seems like the right thing to do.
by the glide on Feb 25, 2010 9:53 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
No kidding!!!
The best question and point made in this entire thread. Where’s your support B.E.?! Oh okay, you get the broadcasts anyway so you’re just playing the politically correct game. Very noble.
If this Blazer team doesn't light your fire, then your wood is wet!
Those feeds aren't really legal
I am sure this is why Dave has prohibited them
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 26, 2010 3:26 PM PST up reply actions
a good question, which could have a good answer,
or not. Is there really a legal liability for an open public blog having some member posting a link ?
Is BE really required to POLICE all comments for ANY link to a possible game presentation ??
I don’t know, but it seems questionable.
Re-sign Travis Outlaw !
It is particularly irritating to be living outside of the Comcost service area,
and have them “hoarding” the game broadcasts. Whoever signed that contract for the Blazers dropped the ball. They should have worked out the details for global access up front. Don’t know what can legally be done, but I don’t know how you fault anyone for watching “pirated” games on line when that is the only option available to them. No creating any “good will” toward the social consciousness of Comcost..
Re-sign Travis Outlaw !
Comcast's blunder
While it may have seemed to be a good business strategy to force people to get Comcast to watch the Blazer games I think it was a mistake in the long run. What they have succeeded in doing is getting a large number of people bitter and angry at them for their greed.
Now they have put themselves in the position of having people jump ship as soon as they can get their Blazer games anywhere else. If they had been true to their word from the start they probably would have lost less clientele…I for one hope they suffer for it.
"He's just so big and strong and he overpowers everybody on our team," ~ Kurt Rambis
So true
I know that I am not the only Comcast subscriber who will leave for Dish or DTV the moment they offer Blazer games, which is why I believe Comcast will never willingly let Dish or DTV have the channel.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
What pisses me off is that I get blacked off from Blazer fans
And while this doesn’t effect me most of the time, it does piss me off that I get blacked out from a team that, on a good day, would take me 3 hours to drive there from where I live in Seattle. I’ve made this complaint (and so have other Blazer fans) before, and it’s essentially stupid to black people off broadband because you have the “right” to.
Even though I have no respect for NewsCorp, at least DirecTV doesn’t black out their customers on a wholesale basis.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I'm not sure Donald Sterling is a human being. He had to have been manufactured by someone, possibly David Stern, so that one team could solely just make profit for the NBA while doing nothing good for themselves. -- Aykis 16
blacked out from Blazer games^
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I'm not sure Donald Sterling is a human being. He had to have been manufactured by someone, possibly David Stern, so that one team could solely just make profit for the NBA while doing nothing good for themselves. -- Aykis 16

by 


























