Versus off of DirecTV
With the August 31 deadline having passed Versus has been removed from DirecTV. The LATimes wrote about the reason for the dispute between the satellite giant and the sports network last week:
Robert Mercer, director of public relations for DirecTV, said: "Versus' overall ratings are poor and have not increased nearly enough to justify what we're paying them, let alone the significant increase they're asking for.
"It is a significant rate hike and the deal is discriminatory because Versus is not offering the same package options as other distributors."...
On DirecTV, Versus ranks 61st among 74 English-advertising supported cable networks.
Obviously to MMA fans the story is the fact that WEC shows are going to become unavailable for a large percentage of viewers. The loss in eyeballs will no doubt result in a loss of cash for the promotion, but also for fighters who are given sponsorship deals based on the number of eyeballs that will be on their fights.
From an overall sporting perspective the coverage change comes just days before the start of the college football season. With Versus having a deal with the Big 12 as well as carrying a small number of Pac-10 and Mountain West games the pressure to work out a deal will increase with every passing day.
0 recs |
26 comments
|
Comments
The rescheduled wec date wasn’t a coincidence… by then a deal will be worked out.
A baby can only hold its breath for so long.
by mmalogic on Sep 1, 2009 9:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I needs my Sports Soup and Fanarchy
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Sep 1, 2009 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
my red white black and blue summer is RUINED.
by woooburn on Sep 1, 2009 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Why should they be fair and balanced?
that’s a confusing thing to say. They ARE one side of the issue…why would they be like “due to equal responsibility…”
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Sep 1, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
They obviously can say whatever they want, but it’s definitely a biased statement. I’m sure most folks see that, and it may hurt them in the long run b/c it’s so obviously one sided.
by Patrick79x on Sep 1, 2009 10:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would you think that?
People only tell their side of the story all the time.
If people actually cared that they were getting biased info, lots of cable channels wouldn’t exist right now.
by Phildo on Sep 1, 2009 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
When my local cable company
decided to play hardball with ESPN, ESPN decided to run commercials saying essentially “Oh, by the way, your cable company may drop ESPN. You might want to give them a call about that.” It didn’t take long for the cable company to crumple. If MMA fans are really concerned about this issue with DirecTV, maybe a united front would help resolve any differences.
by rzor on Sep 1, 2009 9:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
There are a number of problems...
one of which is that Versus is owned by Comcast…a direct competitor of DirecTV. Comcast has proved in the past to be pretty damn stubborn on these things (see the length of time it took to get the Big 10 Network negotiations done)…etc
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Sep 1, 2009 9:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
espn>versus…
This is something comcast has to work out – they are in no position with versus to play this game with Direct TV.
DIrect TV called their bluff now comacast needs to face reality.
by mmalogic on Sep 1, 2009 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The same thing happened in my town with a local television channel.
by Patrick79x on Sep 1, 2009 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just wish this would persuade the WEC/Zuffa to get off Versus and onto a more prevalent channel. Or at least onto one I can get here.
by pr0cs on Sep 1, 2009 10:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
These things always suck.
2 huge companies playing hardball and the people that want to watch the channel get screwed over.
by Phildo on Sep 1, 2009 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This makes me sad. My two obsessions are mma and hockey.
by SplitBreast on Sep 1, 2009 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Just one more stick in the pile of reasons why, UFC needs to absorb the WEC and get off of VS all together.
www.knees2thehead.com
Check it out!!
by BJJDenver on Sep 1, 2009 11:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
WEC on spike. I’m all for that.
'Ello G'vnor!
by IHateMMA on Sep 1, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is it possible for Zuffa to use this to get out of its commitment to WEC on Versus?
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Sep 1, 2009 12:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
They did it in the UK.
What was it Setanta?
by zeroword on Sep 1, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Setanta went off the air completely. Different story.
by Phildo on Sep 1, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No… but the versus deal is a very good deal.
Way better than the showtime deal.
by mmalogic on Sep 1, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Grammar Alert
There’s no such as “off of” in English.
That headline should say “Versus off DirectTV”
by klown on Sep 1, 2009 3:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So sad.
Anybody know the % of homes in the US that use Direct TV? I’m one of them.
by !claw on Sep 1, 2009 10:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

















