Should the NFL Lose Its Tax-Exempt Status? (motherjones.com)

{politics}

7504 ups - 4769 downs = 2735 votes

851 comments submitted at 23:27:20 on Dec 16, 2013 by BlankVerse

  • [-]
  • Codeshark
  • 1 Points
  • 13:50:32, 17 December

What are you talking about? Most games are televised on basic channels or ESPN. No matter who you are, I think there are channels in your basic cable package you hate.

  • [-]
  • Raiju
  • 1 Points
  • 13:59:03, 17 December

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/207457/sports-fees-dominate-cable-due-to-espn-nfl-netwo.html

  • [-]
  • Codeshark
  • 1 Points
  • 14:45:55, 17 December

While that is accurate (I assume), the number of channels people don't want outweighs the number of channels they do. I know people who have cable only because of sports, so all those other channels are inflating their bills. It is the downside of cable.

  • [-]
  • Raiju
  • 1 Points
  • 15:04:50, 17 December

Then they should have no problem paying for it as a premium channel. But they will holler foul if it does. Why? Because it costs too damn much.

  • [-]
  • Codeshark
  • 1 Points
  • 15:13:58, 17 December

You are not thinking about it the right way. It is more profitable to bundle ESPN in with a bunch of channels than offer it as a premium channel because the people who only have cable for sports would pay much less. They would "holler foul". They'd actually pay much less. Your Lifetime and Oxygen package would end up costing more because the sports guy wouldn't be supporting those channels anymore.

  • [-]
  • Raiju
  • 1 Points
  • 16:13:02, 17 December

The sports channels costs the lion share but if they are premium channels everything would cost more? The "sports guy" would be paying for the basics plus his over priced sports. I would only pay for the basics. Sounds more than fair.

And iirc it was suggested some years ago to make the sport channels all premium but sports nuts hollered foul about paying the actual costs. There are already a nice chunk of channels that don't come as a basic package. The sport channels are quite able to be among them.

The real problem is all the different ways everyone is paying for these teams. Taxes, inflated channel prices, etc. When is enough enough?

  • [-]
  • Codeshark
  • 1 Points
  • 16:19:54, 17 December

No. The sports guy would only pay for the sports channels. He'd buy the basic package (channels 2-15 roughly) and the sports package.

Anyway, you are a disrespectful piece of shit so I am done talking to you.

  • [-]
  • Raiju
  • 1 Points
  • 17:07:53, 17 December

And f|_|ck you too. Take your ESPN, a shotgun and blow your freaking brains through the back of your skull.

  • [-]
  • Codeshark
  • 1 Points
  • 17:12:25, 17 December

I don't have either of those, kid. Also, you can say fuck or you could if you didn't have a dick in your mouth.

  • [-]
  • Raiju
  • 1 Points
  • 17:21:36, 17 December

I thought your contrary ass was done talking. While you're at it shove that NFL channel up it.

More Comments - Not Stored
  • [-]
  • Raiju
  • 1 Points
  • 20:06:44, 17 December

You don't have any brains? HAHAHAHAHA! Stupid fucker.

  • [-]
  • iwearatophat
  • 1 Points
  • 16:05:43, 17 December

If I had the option to drop basic cable but still get espn I would do it. I think a lot of sport fans would.

ESPN would be fine if cable went a la carte. It would be the death of all but a handful of channels though.