What channel are most suns games on?

[BigRedRage]

Besides TNT and ESPN games, normal regular season games, are they on fox sports AZ specifically or just fox sports? I have a fox sports app I can watch games on but I dont think fox sports AZ has a dedicated app to watch on Roku.

Thx in advance.

 

[Mainstreet]

I get almost all the Suns games, home and away, on Fox Sports Arizona. Occasionally another channel will have rights to televise the games.

 

[BC867]

I get almost all the Suns games, home and away, on Fox Sports Arizona. Occasionally another channel will have rights to televise the games.

And they have their backup, Fox Sports Arizona Plus channel, for when two Phoenix major league teams are playing at the same time. It looks no different. It is just on a different channel.

On Cox in Phoenix, for example, FSA is on channel 34 and FSA+ is on channel 73.

 

[BigRedRage]

ok, thought so. Fox sports AZ doesnt seem to have any apps on anything except maybe android so ill be out of luck until they come back to UPN. Anyone know why its suddenly not on UPN?

If they want to make money, they need to get on broadcast TV, not just cable. The NFL dominates in money and popularity because anyone and everyone can watch football games live.

 

[Shaggy]

I think upn lost or didn't renew their contract with them. That was 3 or 4 years ago... Right?

 

[Azlen]

Both the Diamondbacks and Suns took their games off of broadcast TV and now all local broadcasts are only on Fox Sports Arizona. The primary reason for that is because they bid the most. That's pretty much the way things are going now.

 

[BigRedRage]

Both the Diamondbacks and Suns took their games off of broadcast TV and now all local broadcasts are only on Fox Sports Arizona. The primary reason for that is because they bid the most. That's pretty much the way things are going now.

which makes some sense but you are also alienating a massive market and wondering why your team doesnt have more support when you go on a run. Its because you are only on a specific channel that not everyone has.

I dont have FSN but i know about how the suns did because I am here, I listen to sports radio and follow the print about them.

However, I dont know what half the team even looks like because I didnt catch a single game on network TV.

Oh well, rant over. Maybe some day.

 

[Azlen]

which makes some sense but you are also alienating a massive market and wondering why your team doesnt have more support when you go on a run. Its because you are only on a specific channel that not everyone has.

I dont have FSN but i know about how the suns did because I am here, I listen to sports radio and follow the print about them.

However, I dont know what half the team even looks like because I didnt catch a single game on network TV.

Oh well, rant over. Maybe some day.

That's nothing when you look at the Dodgers and the LA market. The Dodgers are shown only on SportsNet LA which is only on Time Warner Cable and is only available to about a third of the market. The other providers have said no due to the $4.50 cost per subscriber that they are asking for. Those cost per subscriber fees are the main reasons these regional sports networks are able to bid so much on the sports packages. the $4.50 fee is way on the high side but you are still going to get more for each subscriber than a general channel will.

 

[BigRedRage]

That's nothing when you look at the Dodgers and the LA market. The Dodgers are shown only on SportsNet LA which is only on Time Warner Cable and is only available to about a third of the market. The other providers have said no due to the $4.50 cost per subscriber that they are asking for. Those cost per subscriber fees are the main reasons these regional sports networks are able to bid so much on the sports packages. the $4.50 fee is way on the high side but you are still going to get more for each subscriber than a general channel will.

general channel gets better ad revenue though because of higher ratings

 

[Covert Rain]

Ahhh the good old UPN days.

 

[Azlen]

general channel gets better ad revenue though because of higher ratings

If that were the case then the general channels could bid more for the broadcast rights. 90%+ of the time, the teams are going to give the broadcast rights to whoever bids the most amount of money.

What could be a reason for that is that in Phoenix, about 85% of the television homes have cable or satellite. I guess the ad rates to reach that additional 15% isn't enough to outbid the regional sports nets.

 

[Azlen]

Ahhh the good old UPN days.

Anyone remember the real good old days when they put Suns playoff games on pay per view? I believe it was done in the mid 90s. I believe it only lasted a year or two at most but may have been more.

 

[Chaz]

I don't understand the NBA blackout rules either.

I would pay the NBA directly for league pass but I can't watch the Suns even after the game has aired because of my location. I have tried the trial through a proxy but that is a pain.

It is like they are trying to punish people that don't have cable or satellite.

 

[Covert Rain]

If that were the case then the general channels could bid more for the broadcast rights. 90%+ of the time, the teams are going to give the broadcast rights to whoever bids the most amount of money.

What could be a reason for that is that in Phoenix, about 85% of the television homes have cable or satellite. I guess the ad rates to reach that additional 15% isn't enough to outbid the regional sports nets.

UPN outbid FOX in previous years for the rights to broadcast most of the Suns games. I have no doubt the Suns had more viewers showing on a network channel versus FOX sports. More people have the network station versus FSN.

Maybe UPN had seen the writing on the wall with the Suns. I don't think it's coincidental the timing of letting those rights expire and those rights going over to FOX when the Suns were on the downswing. FOX very well could have been the only major player bidding for the rights or willing to put up money. FOX has deep pockets so it's not like it's much of a risk. I have no doubts the Suns games would still be on network TV if the team was still on the upswing.

I guess we shall see what happens if and when the Suns get hot again. I would think the Suns would probably prefer a network station to get more local exposure and drive up ticket sales and that sort of thing. Sure ad revenue is great but I bet they get more indirect revenue with local broadcasts. I know die hard fans who watched every game on UPN that have not seen a single game because they don't have cable. Now factor in chord cutting trend which is growing big time! That's going to continue to erode FSN viewership.

I am trying to find an article on why UPN did not re-up by I can't find one yet.

 

[Mainstreet]

UPN outbid FOX in previous years for the rights to broadcast most of the Suns games. I have no doubt the Suns had more viewers showing on a network channel versus FOX sports. More people have the network station versus FSN period.

Maybe UPN had seen the writing on the wall with the Suns. I don't think it's coincidental the timing of letting those rights expire and those rights going over to FOX. FOX very well could have been the only major player bidding for the rights or willing to put up money. FOX has deep pockets so it's not like it's much of a risk. I have no doubts the Suns games would still be on network TV if the team was still on the upswing.

I guess we shall see what happens if and when the Suns get hot again. I would think the Suns would probably prefer a network stations to get more local exposure and drive up ticket sales and that sort of thing. I know die hard fans who watched every game on UPN that have not seen a single game because they don't have cable. Now factor in chord cutting which is growing big time! That's going to continue to erode FSN viewership.

And keeping Fox Sports makes me spend extra money on Direct TV to keep them plus 200 other channels I never watch.

 

[BigRedRage]

If that were the case then the general channels could bid more for the broadcast rights. 90%+ of the time, the teams are going to give the broadcast rights to whoever bids the most amount of money.

What could be a reason for that is that in Phoenix, about 85% of the television homes have cable or satellite. I guess the ad rates to reach that additional 15% isn't enough to outbid the regional sports nets.

Where do you get these percentages though? 2014 has had the largest decline in cable subscribers so far and that decline will conitue to grow as cord cutting become more prevelant. I have ZERO interest in paying over $100 a month just so I can watch suns games, I am not a TV watcher beyoned network TV, hulu and netflix. I have way more TV than I know what to do with but I do watch live sports and every cardinals game. If the suns were on UPN, I would also watch every suns game.

I know die hard fans who watched every game on UPN that have not seen a single game because they don't have cable. Now factor in chord cutting trend which is growing big time! That's going to continue to erode FSN viewership.

.

Yup.

 

[Azlen]

UPN outbid FOX in previous years for the rights to broadcast most of the Suns games. I have no doubt the Suns had more viewers showing on a network channel versus FOX sports. More people have the network station versus FSN.

Maybe UPN had seen the writing on the wall with the Suns. I don't think it's coincidental the timing of letting those rights expire and those rights going over to FOX when the Suns were on the downswing. FOX very well could have been the only major player bidding for the rights or willing to put up money. FOX has deep pockets so it's not like it's much of a risk. I have no doubts the Suns games would still be on network TV if the team was still on the upswing.

I guess we shall see what happens if and when the Suns get hot again. I would think the Suns would probably prefer a network station to get more local exposure and drive up ticket sales and that sort of thing. Sure ad revenue is great but I bet they get more indirect revenue with local broadcasts. I know die hard fans who watched every game on UPN that have not seen a single game because they don't have cable. Now factor in chord cutting trend which is growing big time! That's going to continue to erode FSN viewership.

I am trying to find an article on why UPN did not re-up by I can't find one yet.

Check out most of the NBA local broadcast deals and you will find a vast majority of them on the regional sports networks. Of the top ten richest, only one, Chicago, shows some of theirs on broadcast television.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christinasettimi/2014/01/22/the-nbas-richest-local-television-deals/

 

[Azlen]

Where do you get these percentages though?

http://www.tvb.org/research/media_c...ble_dma?ads_archive=&sort_by=field365442&pg=0

The OTA% for each DMA shows the number of people who only get OTA television.

 

[Covert Rain]

Check out most of the NBA local broadcast deals and you will find a vast majority of them on the regional sports networks. Of the top ten richest, only one, Chicago, shows some of theirs on broadcast television.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christinasettimi/2014/01/22/the-nbas-richest-local-television-deals/

Good article. What is interesting is this part:

Last season the 30 NBA teams collectively generated a combined $628 million from regional sports networks and over-the-air stations. That is just 33% of the total $1.9 billion the league earns from all media revenue, in comparison to the 54% generated from national television partners ESPN/ABC and TNT.

So Regional Sports coverage (like FSN) and over-the-air stations combined for 33% while 54% was generated from national television partners. Many of which have local affiliations with local stations (for example ABC).

So it doesn't sound like FOX is as lucrative as say ABC. Which leads me to believe that FOX probably got the contracts because nobody else was very interested. Also, so what do they consider ABC local affiliates? For example, in our market we get ESPN broadcasts simulcasted on our local ABC stations for some games. So are local networks affiliated with major networks not counted in "over-the-air" revenues? UPN was a spinoff from Viacom and CBS so it had a local broadcast partnership with channel 45 but still a national affiliation. I am sure it gave them the clout to compete with the likes of FSN.

Sounds like the most lucrative deal for the Suns would be to get a local station with a major affiliation to a national network verses FSN if possible. It just may not have been possible this time around because of the Suns being in rebuild mode. The business side of things when it comes to Television and movies has always interested me. It's crazy! I should ask my brothers fiance. She works in television marketing and FOX is one of her accounts.

 

[Azlen]

Good article. What is interesting is this part:

Last season the 30 NBA teams collectively generated a combined $628 million from regional sports networks and over-the-air stations. That is just 33% of the total $1.9 billion the league earns from all media revenue, in comparison to the 54% generated from national television partners ESPN/ABC and TNT.

So Regional Sports coverage (like FSN) and over-the-air stations combined for 33% while 54% was generated from national television partners. Many of which have local affiliations with local stations (for example ABC).

So it doesn't sound like FOX is as lucrative as say ABC. Which leads me to believe that FOX probably got the contracts because nobody else was very interested. Also, so what do they consider ABC local affiliates? For example, in our market we get ESPN broadcasts simulcasting on our local ABC stations for games. So are local networks affiliated with major networks not counted in "over-the-air"? UPN was a spinoff from Viacom and CBS so it had a local broadcast but a national affiliate.

There are two sets of contracts. The national contracts and the local contracts. The national contracts get stuff like the playoffs, the really big games shown nationally etc. Those are more lucrative. ABC/ESPN and TNT currently have the national contracts.
The other contracts are negotiated by each team individually in their local market. They can be very lucrative in bigger markets but are less so in smaller markets. The article was focused mainly on the local contracts not the national ones.

 

[Covert Rain]

There are two sets of contracts. The national contracts and the local contracts. The national contracts get stuff like the playoffs, the really big games shown nationally etc. Those are more lucrative. ABC/ESPN and TNT currently have the national contracts.
The other contracts are negotiated by each team individually in their local market. They can be very lucrative in bigger markets but are less so in smaller markets. The article was focused mainly on the local contracts not the national ones.

My brother's fiance works in television marketing and FOX is one of her accounts. I will have to ask her about this stuff. I know she mentioned to me before that local stations compete with the big dogs via their affiliations so it does matter who they are nationally affiliated with. You might be right about there being separate contacts but it sounds like local stations benefit from those affiliations when it comes to securing broadcast rights and competing for them.

It's not like FSN could not have competed for the then hot Suns contracts with channel 45 (UPN affiliation). Yet 45 held on to those rights for years and renewed them multiple times.

No wonder this field has an army of lawyers and marketing firms that work on this stuff.

 

[Azlen]

My brother's fiance works in television marketing and FOX is one of her accounts. I will have to ask her about this stuff. I know she mentioned to me before that local stations compete with the big dogs via their affiliations so it does matter who they are nationally affiliated with. You might be right about there being separate contacts but it sounds like local stations benefit from those affiliations when it comes to securing broadcast rights and competing for them.

It's not like FSN could not have competed for the then hot Suns contracts with channel 45 (UPN affiliation). Yet 45 held on to those rights for years and renewed them multiple times.

No wonder this field has an army of lawyers and marketing firms that work on this stuff.

On the local level who they are affiliated with matters less unless they are a network O&O (owned and operated). Most are owned by station groups that have different network affiliations in different cities. For example both channels 3 and 5 are now currently owned by the Meredith Corp, while channel 12 is owned by Gannett. However, in this case Fox owns channels 10 and 45 so if Fox wants them on their regional sports nets, they aren't going to bid against themselves.

 

[AzStevenCal]

And keeping Fox Sports makes me spend extra money on Direct TV to keep them plus 200 other channels I never watch.

October 2nd, I cut the cord. No more Direct TV (or Dish or cable etc). It's a little scary because unlike most of you, I can't receive any broadcast channels. I'm just going to rely on NFL Game Rewind and NBA League Pass for my sports. Thanks to the Pac 12/DTV war, I've already adjusted to life without college sports. I have Apple TV, Amazon Fire TV and a Roku 3 so I won't lack for entertainment but if somebody blows up the Internets, I'll be pretty bored for awhile.

Steve

 

[Covert Rain]

On the local level who they are affiliated with matters less unless they are a network O&O (owned and operated). Most are owned by station groups that have different network affiliations in different cities. For example both channels 3 and 5 are now currently owned by the Meredith Corp, while channel 12 is owned by Gannett. However, in this case Fox owns channels 10 and 45 so if Fox wants them on their regional sports nets, they aren't going to bid against themselves.

That is true now but not then. See below:

Under United Television ownership, the station carried programming from the Prime Time Entertainment Network programming service from January 1993 to January 1995.[2] In the fall of 1994, United Television and Paramount Pictures announced the formation of the United Paramount Network, lining up independent stations that were owned by both companies at the time as charter affiliates

So sounds like the FOX acquisition was more recent and had no bearing on previous contracts obtained by Channel 45. So that makes sense now why they wouldn't be betting against themselves today but evidently Channel 45 has plenty of clout in the past to compete with FOX. I seriously doubt there is a high demand for Suns games now which might have prevented other local affiliated networks from putting in serious bids.

That might change rapidly though and be a major win for FOX. Especially with a young core like we have and rebounding much sooner versus what people thought.

October 2nd, I cut the cord. No more Direct TV (or Dish or cable etc). It's a little scary because unlike most of you, I can't receive any broadcast channels. I'm just going to rely on NFL Game Rewind and NBA League Pass for my sports. Thanks to the Pac 12/DTV war, I've already adjusted to life without college sports. I have Apple TV, Amazon Fire TV and a Roku 3 so I won't lack for entertainment but if somebody blows up the Internets, I'll be pretty bored for awhile.

Steve

I wish I could do it. I love HBO like an addict loves CRACK. What about a HDTV Antenna? I have heard some are pretty good. You could get local that way and get more no?

 

[Covert Rain]

P.S. I wish I could find a way to get online only subscriptions to some of these channels. If I could I would drop DIRECTV in a hot minute. I might still next year anyway as much as it will pain me.

I will probably have an OTA combined with a Roku or Apple TV. I already have Hulu Plus and Netflix. The only way Cable TV or SAT will be able to keep me as a customer is to go a la carte someday. Maybe it will happen.