Another Distant Cut-off Question...

[jgoggan]

We just got a letter from Dish that "due to a recent Federal Court ruling," they will be dropping our distant Fox out of NY soon.

I'm confused about this. You see, we didn't qualify for a distant Fox BEFORE the court case stuff either. According to our zip code, we don't qualify because we should get them with an antenna. However, due to the terrain around our house, we don't -- even with a decent antenna.

So, I called the local Fox affiliate (about 50 miles away) and explained the situation to them back in April of 2002. They said no problem and gave me a waiver.

So, I don't see how the court ruling applies here. I thought that adjusted where people were eligible for the distant networks. If we weren't eligible before by the location/zip -- and we still aren't now -- then what has changed?

In other words, I would understand it if we qualified by location before -- but we didn't. The waiver was obtained personally by me. So I don't see how any change of zips/location eligibility should have any affect on our situation.

Thoughts?

in the meantime, I just emailed the affiliate again and asked if they would re-issue the waiver if their signal strength has not changed since they granted one in April of 2002. We'll see what they say...

- John...

[IMISSMYDISTANTNETS]

in the meantime, I just emailed the affiliate again and asked if they would re-issue the waiver if their signal strength has not changed since they granted one in April of 2002. We'll see what they say...

- John...

cHANCES ARE DISH HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED A WAIVER TO YOUR fox STATION.

tHEY HAD TO REQUALIFY ALL DISTANT NET SUBSCRIBERS.

yOU SHOULD CHECK YOUR ACCOUNT AT THE DISHNET WEB SITE. iT WILL TELL YOU THE STATUS OF PAST/PENDING WAIVERS.

[hokie94]

Did they give you a date? If they did, you should contact them and they should be aware that the 11th circuit court stayed the lower courts' order pending appeal. The lower court actually ruled in a manner that contradicts the SHVIA Act of 2000. The 11th circuit court probably won't hear the appeal until November or December and hopefully they'll take their time in making a ruling, long enough for Football season to be over.

I'm one of those grandfathered customers in a Grade B area but I might end up loosing my distant NBC & CBS.

For more info on the ruling:
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/030813/135519_1.html

[jgoggan]

Ok -- I just checked online and here is what the waiver status says:

Date Req'd # Station # Network Feed # Waiver Status # Date Rec'd
04/22/2002 # FOX # NY # Approved # 04/22/2002
05/07/2003 # CBS # NY, LA # Denied # 05/13/2003
07/03/2003 # FOX # # Denied # 07/18/2003

Ok, so, as you can see -- my original waiver for Fox was on April 22nd. It was requested and received on the same day because I had it faxed in myself -- they didn't actually do the request. So, all was fine.

It looks like on May 7th, Dish tried to get distant CBS for me (which I also "should" get locally, but can't due to terrain issues, but I didn't want to pay $100 to have some guy come out to check the signal strength -- which is what the CBS affiliate wanted me to do). In any case, it was denied again -- no biggie.

What I want to know is -- why did Fox request another waiver for Fox on July 3rd? Was that because of the court ruling? Why would that be affected -- since it was Grade A BEFORE too. In other words, did the ruling say that they had to re-verify ALL distant networks? Or just the ones that they had done before on their own?

In other words, I still don't understand why Dish started a new request with Fox -- when it wasn't based on location in the first place. It was a waiver that I had to request and obtain myself. So, unless my local affiliate revoked that waiver, I don't see how it all fits together.

If someone could fill me in, I'd appreciate it. I tried calling customer service, but that was pretty much a joke. She had no idea, was rude even though I was being polite about the situation (since I realize it isn't Dish's fault -- I don't blame them really), and was pretty much a wasted phone call...

In any case, it was denied on the 18th -- and I still have it so far -- and it still shows as an allowed distant network in my Locals choices on the web site... So I'm not sure what is going on -- if it is just going to go away one day, or if the court stay has anything to do with it...

- John...

[jgoggan]

Ok -- I just got a response back from the local affiliate. They told me that they did not revoke my waiver and that their signal strength has not changed since April of 2002, when they granted me the waiver previously.

In other words, it appears that this whole thing occurred because either Dish submitted a new waiver request for no reason -- or because of the court case. But, I just don't see how the case is tied to this -- since I was in Grade A BEFORE when I got this waiver. From a quality standpoint, nothing has changed. I was NOT in the section that would get it based on location/zip before -- and I am still not now. Therefore, I see no reason for the court case to have any affect on this.

What am I missing here? Did Dish screw up and re-request a waiver that they should not have? Or did the court case actually force them into this?

As for the affiliate, their "chief engineer" is out of town this week -- they said when he gets back, they'll fill me in some more and see about either a new waiver -- or if they aren't allowed to grant a new one...

- John...

[Greg Bimson]

Of course the distant network delivery case against Echostar is tied to this.

Echostar was forced to requalify everyone. It is possible that Dish Network screwed up by requalifying everyone that had a waiver, but is is also possible that Dish Network was forced to requalify everyone, whether or not a waiver was on file.

Let us know how everything turns out.

[jerryez]

Why don't you ask Dish. That would be the logical solution, since they sent the letter.

[jgoggan]

Why don't you ask Dish. That would be the logical solution, since they sent the letter.

:lol: :lol:

I did, of course. That was the first thing I did. I called and asked if this was because of the court ruling (even though my letter said it was). I was very polite to the person on the phone -- as I said, I wasn't think at all, at the time at least, that it was Dish's fault. She was immediately hostile toward me (I assume because lots of people are getting these letters -- and some maybe not so pleasant). In any case, I explained that I had gotten that waiver personally the first time -- and that it shouldn't have changed due to any requalifications based on zip/location. She said that it wasn't because of the ruling -- that it "must be" because the local affiliate that granted the waiver had contacted them and "REVOKED" the waiver specifically.

She said that "must be" the case because I wasn't in an area where I would qualify for an automatic waiver before either (which makes some sense).

However, my local affiliate assures me that they absolutely did not revoke my waiver. They said that they haven't revoked ANY waivers EVER. (It is a fairly small affiliate -- people that I tend to know and grew up near since it happens to be in my home town -- so I tend to believe them when they tell me they didn't revoke anything.)

So, my best guess is that Dish requalified me for some reason. I would really like to know if the ruling means that they have to requalify EVERYONE. Even those that got their own waivers. It isn't like I got an auto-waiver because of my location. That wasn't the case at all -- so requalifying me for a waiver that was granted directly to me due to terrain makes little sense, IMO...

- John...

[jgoggan]

[...]it is also possible that Dish Network was forced to requalify everyone, whether or not a waiver was on file.

Let us know how everything turns out.

Agreed. It could be that they had to requalify everyone -- and that the affiliate just denies all such requests (since they wouldn't have any situational details to go along with it -- they could only base it on location -- which, of course, they would deny a waiver based just on that).

So, that could be what happened. When the guy returns next week, I'll find out more and let you know. Hopefully, if that IS what happened, they'll be willing to give me a new waiver (even though the angry CSR told me that she "doubted it").

- John...