So, who is the bad guy in the ABC Family fiasco?

... of course, I don't watch the channel.

I have had a biased opinion against Disney that dates all the way back to the home video taping fiasco. Ever since Walt died, the company has been more greedy than any other company on earth. I have no doubt that Disney is MOSTLY at fault.

I'm with Chris on this one. If you have seen the movie "Dogma", I wish that Loki would REALLY do that to the Disney board of directors. :)

See ya
Tony

Another choice should be FOX. They are the ones who changed the channel to what it is today.

Disney is mostly at fault. IMHO, they overpaid for the channel and want to make up for it by charging more for all Disney/ ABC properties. From some news links I have seen, DISH isn't the only one that has a problem with Disney.

BTW, has anybody else noticed that many D* subs were more upset about E* dropping ABCFAM than they were about D* suggesting they might not carry it anymore. :D

Excuse me? Am I missing something here? The contract stands. I don't recall it being renegotiated, Charlie knows what he signed, and there is no overcharging for anything.

We have a company that has once again changed hands. We have a parent company that has vowed to improve programming and has even publicly stated ways in which they plan to do so. How is that somehow a bad thing? How can a company be blamed for any wrongdoing in that?

I'm also aware of a good deal of Disney's history. The fact is they make me sick. Eisner makes me sick. Walt himself probably turns in his grave knowing the direction this company has gone and the practices they use. That however isn't the point. The poll isn't "Who is the more evil company" the poll is who is most at fault for the dumping of ABC's Family Channel. J

The part is nine days from now, Dish subs might be losing out on ABC Family too. Now, who are the subs gonna gripe to about losing the channel or channels? They wont be peeved at Disney. They will call Dish's CSRs demanding to know why the channel was taken off. The CSRs will state that it was Disney's fault. However, the sub will then state that "Youre the ones who took my channel off, not Disney".

Which is why it is bad form to remove a channel once people, even in small numbers, get used to watching it. To be sure, ABC Family is NOTHING like the old Family Channel. PAX and Odessey are more like the old channel. While I like Alias, for example, it is really not appropriate programming for many grade school kids and is by NO MEANS a show that the family can watch together.

The other point here is that E* made it clear that another reason for dropping the channel is to comply with must-carry. I suspect all this will be resoved when the spot beams are in place.

I didnt vote on this poll, (I think this is the first one ever I didnt place a vote) becasue I honestly dont know who I think whose fault it is.

Steve

OK, logandraven, you win. It's all Dish's fault. Just because there's an escape clause for change of ownership doesn't mean Dish should excercise it.

Mark this isn't about me winning. I'm not out to win an arguement nor am I trying to start one. What I would like to see is some honesty provided by our satellite company.

During the last Charlie Chat Mr. Ergen mentioned ratings. I provided a link that disputed his claim. Mr. Ergen did NOT mention anything related to the cost of the channel during the last Chat. According to at least one dealer here in the group it has been mentioned during Dealer Chats. Again I raise the point that Charlie signed the contract so knew full well what the channel would cost. Then we see E* state that they want to dump the channel to make space for must carry channels. ABC refuted that themselves stating that E* has a great many more slots than it will need to accomodate must carry.

So time after time we've seen E* toss lobs up there and time after time we've seen those lobs spiked right back down their throat. The only people that I've seen that don't agree with that are those that think Charlie can do no wrong and those that simply don't care to know the facts. I absolutely do find it odd that the only channels being dumped are those owned by companies Charlie has had problems with in the past.

As subscribers Mark we should be worried about our interests being served. So I ask how the loss, or potential loss, of ABC's Family Channel, ESPN Classic, and Fox Sports Channels, serves us. I can't come up with a single benefit Mark. I'm seeing no reduction in fees in my monthly bill, I'm seeing those must carry channels being charged for, I'm seeing nothing to replace the lost channels. Again Mark my comments are made in reflection of seeing our interests served NOT the interests of E* or Disney. J

chill guys.....as of yesterday, dish is keeping abc fam.
is it still in your epg????

Hey Tink....might we still have the channel because ABC sought and got an injunction that stopped E* from dropping the channel? BTW ESPN Classic still shows up on my EPG though all that shows up is a Dish Network logo 8-) J

Remember when Charlie has always stated that cable is the competitor?? Well....with the dropping of ESPN Classics and probably ABC Family soon in 8 days, Charlie is making Dish look more and more like the cable company that we all hated in the past. Makes one wanna hum 'Double Vision' (Foreigner) now with all this thats happening. This reminds me of when my cable system was formerly United Artists Cable. It got taken over by TCI. United Artists got along so well with the Prime Sports/Fox Sports Midwest programming that had the Indiana Pacers games on TV along with WTTV-4. Well, when TCI came by and took over, they didnt see eye to eye about Fox Sports Midwest and other channels, like Comedy Central, TV Land being on their system. Was there a survey out to subs asking whether or not they wanted those channels yanked or kept? Nope. Basically, they yanked out the channels and gave the old excuse "Those providers are asking for way too much money".

Guess what other channels were on the chopping block because "the channel's providers are asking for too much money"? VH-1, WGN, and even....The Weather Channel!! Viacom told TCI that if they took VH-1 off, then MTV and Nickelodeon would have to come off too. What a dumb PR move that would be. Imagine the protests by parents losing a channel that their kids love. WGN even got Cubs fans from Indiana, Illinois, and Ohio to write in TCI and protest. Those channels, btw, were never taken off of TCI's systems.

Quote: "During the last Charlie Chat Mr. Ergen mentioned ratings. I provided a link that disputed his claim. Mr. Ergen did NOT mention anything related to the cost of the channel during the last Chat. According to at least one dealer here in the group it has been mentioned during Dealer Chats. Again I raise the point that Charlie signed the contract so knew full well what the channel would cost.."

You provided a link that paints a picture of the CURRENT ratings situation. This tells nothing about the past, nor does it tell anything about the trend in ratings nor the demographics of those ratings. The trend and demographics is what is important. If Dish is locked into paying for this channel as though it is in the top 7 of all cable channels (which I would speculate that it was when the contract was signed, but have no documentation to prove it) and it is now tied at 13, then they are in fact paying too much for the channel and the ownership clause should be used to dump it. Also, it is far from being the same channel that Dish signed a contract for back in 1995. Programming has changed to the point where some of it is no longer "family friendly". Some (and I suspect MUCH) of the programming carried there now would never have made it on the channel back when the contract was signed and the channel was owned by Pat Robertson, etc.

Quote: "Then we see E* state that they want to dump the channel to make space for must carry channels. ABC refuted that themselves stating that E* has a great many more slots than it will need to accomodate must carry."

This just goes to show your total bias on this subject. You would rather believe a comment like this coming from Disney than comments from the owners of the slots and comments posted right here about picture quality. Many comments about the drop in picture quality since must carry posted RIGHT HERE refute the comments of ABC (unless of course you belive that Dish is intentionally destroying picture quality for some reason). The comments on picture quality are a direct result of NOT having the room to "accomodate must carry" at the moment. ABC is NOT in a postion to refute anything related to Dish and must carry and the comments were made simply to drop something in front of the judge on the 10th of this month.

LOL Looks like we are going to split some more hairs.

"You provided a link that paints a picture of the CURRENT ratings situation. This tells nothing about the past, nor does it tell anything about the trend in ratings nor the demographics of those ratings. The trend and demographics is what is important. If Dish is locked into paying for this channel as though it is in the top 7 of all cable channels (which I would speculate that it was when the contract was signed, but have no documentation to prove it) and it is now tied at 13, then they are in fact paying too much for the channel and the ownership clause should be used to dump it."

Lets cut through the BS and get to the heart of it. Charlie signed a long term contract. He knew what he was getting into, knew what the costs were going to be, and ANY long term contract is a risk. I've only been a Dish Network subscriber for two and a half years but in that time it has been damned hard not to come away with the impression that Charlie is a blame game playing, pass the buck, whiner of biblical proportions.

I'm not arguing the fact that Charlie should be able to deliver what programming he chooses to via HIS company....contract language and clauses not withstanding. What I am arguing is that his reasons have been poor, despite your guesses as to ratings, and that dumping channels be them individual or groups of channels doesn't serve US in any way, shape or form.


"Also, it is far from being the same channel that Dish signed a contract for back in 1995. Programming has changed to the point where some of it is no longer "family friendly". Some (and I suspect MUCH) of the programming carried there now would never have made it on the channel back when the contract was signed and the channel was owned by Pat Robertson, etc."

I don't disagree on this point but you are putting it in the most negative light. I see most of the programming changes as being positive.

"This just goes to show your total bias on this subject. You would rather believe a comment like this coming from Disney than comments from the owners of the slots and comments posted right here about picture quality."

That isn't what I said at all. Charlie didn't say "We are dumping ABC's Family Channel because we need to free up space to provide must carry locals at optimum picture quality". They stated as one of their reasons that they were dumping the channel to free up space for must carry not mentioning PQ at all. I stated, based upon what was released from the court filed papers, that ABC refuted their arguement by pointing out that E* _can_ provide a good many more channels than they currently do even with must carry channels included. PQ sucked BEFORE the addition of must carry so spare me the lambasting.

"Many comments about the drop in picture quality since must carry posted RIGHT HERE refute the comments of ABC (unless of course you belive that Dish is intentionally destroying picture quality for some reason). The comments on picture quality are a direct result of NOT having the room to "accomodate must carry" at the moment. ABC is NOT in a postion to refute anything related to Dish and must carry and the comments were made simply to drop something in front of the judge on the 10th of this month."

Whoa back up. I suggest you reread the forum. Reread the comments on PQ. They came BEFORE the must carry channels were added. LONG BEFORE! What's more the comments I've seen have been made SPECIFICALLY talking about locals NOT ALL CHANNELS. Big difference bub.

As for the Family Channel.....If I were to provide links showing that they haven't dropped in rankings or are even ranked more highly now than they were will it change your opinion? Hell no it won't you'll just find something else to argue about. As I've said before the dropping of these channels doesn't benefit us at all. No way, no how. As I've also said an issue like this doesn't really matter to those who don't watch the channels. If it were a channel that you watched with any frequency and enjoyed I'm sure your opinion would be quite different. J

tinkywinky2, no need to chill, I'm not hot about this.

Sure, Charlie signed a long term contract. In that contract it said if the channel is sold(it has been TWICE) or if programming changes, E* was allowed to cancel that contract. They are legally able to cancel the contract.

Disney bought FAM and probably paid too much for it. Disney can't afford to lose 6 million pairs of eyeballs watching their channel. So they are going to do everything they can to stop E* from dropping it.

I don't want channels dropped all over the place, but these two channels I haven't watched an hour of in 2 years. I guess if it was something I cared about I'd be upset but FAM and ESPNCL just don't bother me.

Remember, Disney planned to pay for the purchase of the Family Channel by raising the rates. Dish just said no.

I don't recall Disney ever stating that they were going to raise the rates on the Family Channel. It would be nearly impossible to do considering that there is a contract in place.

One of the best ways for them to make their money back is to sell advertising space. They are already porting over content run on ABC, they have secured the rights to other decent shows as well. If successful and if they keep improving, which btw they HAVE been, then they will be able to charge top dollar for advertising.

As for whether or not they overpaid.....I suppose that is a matter of perception as many in the industry didn't seem to agree on it. Keep in mind that the deal was for far more than one channel. The deal included a channel in Mexico, a stake in Fox Kids in Europe, ownership of Saban's library of programming etc.

Oh btw....I did start doing some digging into the rankings and specifically into the ranking of the Family Channel. The archive only goes back to June but I did contact the site and they have given me some leads on where I can find some additional info.

On the same subject he added the following which was to be somewhere on their site today.......

"EchoStar claims its 10-year carriage
contract with the former Family Channel is no longer valid because ABC substantially changed the content, and ratings have fallen (although ABC Family reported a 13% improvement in its 4Q prime to a 0.9)."

That probably doesn't surprise some people at all....I'm sure the detractors will take issue with it in some fashion or another. J

This poll is now closed.