I wouldn't be surprised if Steele hasn't been deposed under oath with video cameras and appropriate text transcription all stored in multiple ways. This, just in case Steel drops dead. Of course it's tough to confront a dead witness.
It seems a good test would be whether anyone who requested FiOS service in NYC been told by Verizon that it's not available. Of course Verizon may just stumble around and just never manage to get the install done which may or may not indicate lack of availability. There likely will be places where folks either don't want it or can't afford it and never have asked for FiOS so it can't be concluded it's not available in those areas.
The assertion here seems that ad revenue is down because the number of subscribers to ESPN has dropped rather than the number of viewers is down. Just because the number of subscribers has dropped certainly has impacted ESPN's revenue and the posting shows the numbers but if the subscribers that dropped ESPN rarely or never watched the channel then viewer numbers could be somewhat static. We need those numbers to have a complete picture and Nielsen should have them. Furthermore costs for contracted programming has increased as pointed out in the post, so without increased revenue from whatever source something must give. ESPN needs to be better at bargaining these contracts and maybe forgoing some contracts. The sports leagues may need to realize they're not as valuable as they think they are.
Re: Re: I don't understand travelling with huge amounts of cash
Perhaps my point was off topic. I agree with what you and others have said: asset forfeiture as practiced should be declared unconstitutional. Just possessing a lot of cash should not be the only probable cause that it was obtained illegally. My point was traveling with huge amounts of cash is dangerous and there's perhaps other ways to avoid problems. Besides, if someone knows you're doing it you might have more to worry about than the police seizing it, like folks with guns who are not afraid to use them.
I don't understand travelling with huge amounts of cash
I've never understood the need to travel with hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash. One case IIRC involved someone who claimed he was a gambler was traveling with ~$800,000 and had it seized. Maybe going from Las Vegas to some other place with legal casinos. Anyway, why not deposit the cash in a national bank and take out what's needed at the destination. I know that if more than $10k is removed, the IRS is informed, but if everything is on the up-and-up, so what, especially if taxes are paid. There may be other ways of legally moving large amounts of cash without transporting it as paper money. Business do this all the time, but then it's just numbers in spread sheets.
Restitution will probably rely on records of receipts held by Steele and Hansmeier which are likely not to be available. How many folks will come forward to claim compensation considering the embarrassment and perhaps small rewards?
I assume ESPN makes its profit from advertisements
What fraction of ESPN's income comes from subscriber fees? If Nielsen has good data on the number of folks that actually watch ESPN, and if those numbers are steady, then ad revenue should be steady and revenue from subscriber fees is responsible for any drop in income. If those fees are $8 per month and 10,000 subs drop per day - 300,000 per month - there is $2.4 million per month in dropped revenue. Seems big to me, but I'd guess ad revenue much, much more. If ad revenue is down because of lost eyeballs, as well as their huge payouts to sports leagues, then they are in trouble.
1- I thought there was a big brouhaha about a cabinet officer using a non government email server during the recent political campaign. Actually, I haven't heard it wasn't secure as I never heard any emails were captured by folks who shouldn't have gotten them. My guess that server was more secure than the government server which might have been about as secure as a colander at holding water.
2- A bit off topic, but now we hear about the possibility of the CIA re instituting foreign torture chambers because "torture works." Works at what? All this reminds me of a situation that occurred in a foreign place beginning in 1933. Individuals in the US might not want to use secure communications or data storage because that means one might have something to hide and the government might want to find out what that is and assume, since torture works, find out what it was you want to hide.
It's not just football. My wife and I watched quite a few College Women's Volleyball games this fall as she has a cousin on one of the Div IA teams that ended up in the NCAA tournament. These were streamed live on Watch ESPN. There were time-outs, and the announcer mentioned before some that the time-out was a "media time-out". IIRC, the rules allow two time-outs per set in volleyball but now now there are extra "media time-outs" in women's volleyball. Where will it end?
Maybe I don't get it, but if news providers don't put their information on the Internet, Google can't index it and a search won't find it. Simple: force folks who want their product to pay for it in printed form or direct viewing of its videos. Problem solved. Then again, maybe no one wants to read or view their news output.
Compare the situation Manning suffered compared to that of Petraeus. Petraeus, a retired four star general and CIA director, revealed to his mistress in an extra marital affair something like 30,000 classified documents. Petraeus was convicted of misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified materials. It's not clear to me where these documents went or what judicially happened to the mistress. He was given a two-year probationary period and a fine of $100,000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal). It's not clear when the extramarital affair started, but if it was when he was still in the army then, the military has severe penalties for such behavior. But then, he was a four star general.
Re: Re: Some people seem not to understand or learn
Very good point.
The better advice is don't make explicit videos ever then there will be nothing to safeguard. In the original situation here, I presume the the partner of the complainant had a copy and posted them, but in other situations the female could do the same thing to a male. In that part of our society that's sexist, such videos might enhance the reputation of the male unless he's married or in a serious relationship with another, but who knows.
Perhaps a bit off topic, but if you make videos of very intimate interactions or any thing else and put them on a Web site, much less YouTube, they're likely to be there forever and available for anyone to see via a link. If you want those videos to be truly private, record them using a device that uses removable storage, not a device connected to the Internet like a smart phone, and never attach that storage to a device connected to the Internet - never! Of course this advice is almost useless because the folks who need it don't read techdirt and those who read techdirt already know it.
On the post: Garage Door Opener Company Bricks Customer Hardware After Negative Review
Re: God help the complaining user with a "smart" iron lung!
On the post: Things Looking Even Worse For Prenda's Paul Hansmeier: Bankruptcy Fraud On Deck
Re: Trump
On the post: Things Looking Even Worse For Prenda's Paul Hansmeier: Bankruptcy Fraud On Deck
Re: Steele's guilty plea
On the post: New York City Sues Verizon For Fiber Optic Bait And Switch
Has anyone in NYC been refused FiOS service?
On the post: General Franco Is Still Dead And Michelle Lee Is Still Director Of The US Patent Office
Jeff Danziger's cartoon of today says it all
On the post: ESPN On-Air Talent About To Care About The Cord-Cutters The Execs Aren't Concerned About
Number of Subscribers vs. Number of Viewers
On the post: Supreme Court Won't Hear Case, But Justice Thomas Questions Constitutionality Of Asset Forfeiture
Re: Re: I don't understand travelling with huge amounts of cash
On the post: Supreme Court Won't Hear Case, But Justice Thomas Questions Constitutionality Of Asset Forfeiture
I don't understand travelling with huge amounts of cash
On the post: Prenda's John Steele Pleads Guilty, Admits To Basically Everything
Re: Re:
On the post: After Losing 10,000 Viewers Per Day, ESPN Finally Buckles To Offering Standalone Streaming Video Service
I assume ESPN makes its profit from advertisements
On the post: Court Orders Small Ohio Speed Trap Town To Refund $3 Million In Unconstitutional Speeding Tickets
One of the first things to do...
On the post: Trump Orders The Cyber To Be Fixed In The Next Sixty Days
2 days tops. And 58 days lolling in the sun with a margarita.
On the post: Lock Them Up! Trump Staff Still Using Private Republican National Committee Email Accounts
Non Government Tech & Transfer to Foreign Torture
2- A bit off topic, but now we hear about the possibility of the CIA re instituting foreign torture chambers because "torture works." Works at what? All this reminds me of a situation that occurred in a foreign place beginning in 1933. Individuals in the US might not want to use secure communications or data storage because that means one might have something to hide and the government might want to find out what that is and assume, since torture works, find out what it was you want to hide.
On the post: Baltimore Ravens Owner Has Ingenious Solution For NFL Ratings Drop: Stop Annoying Fans With Too Many Ads
Re: Re: Be careful what we wish for
On the post: Baltimore Ravens Owner Has Ingenious Solution For NFL Ratings Drop: Stop Annoying Fans With Too Many Ads
Re: 2 minute warning
On the post: Baltimore Ravens Owner Has Ingenious Solution For NFL Ratings Drop: Stop Annoying Fans With Too Many Ads
Re: Who is old enough
On the post: Struggling Canadian News Agencies Ask Government For A 'Google Tax'
Google can't index news if it's not on the Web
On the post: Surprise: President Obama Commutes Chelsea Manning's Sentence
Manning compared to Petraeus
On the post: Destined For Failure: Woman Sues Search Engines Over Revenge Porn Search Results
Re: Re: Some people seem not to understand or learn
The better advice is don't make explicit videos ever then there will be nothing to safeguard. In the original situation here, I presume the the partner of the complainant had a copy and posted them, but in other situations the female could do the same thing to a male. In that part of our society that's sexist, such videos might enhance the reputation of the male unless he's married or in a serious relationship with another, but who knows.
On the post: Destined For Failure: Woman Sues Search Engines Over Revenge Porn Search Results
Some people seem not to understand or learn
Next >>