History of E* price increases

[TNGTony]

With the comments Charlie made about price increases being inevitable without the merger and threads in other groups starting up on the subject, BobaBird (the other editor of the EKB that keeps track of everything NOT relating to programming and channels on E*) suggested I use an old out dated page to create the history of E*'s pricing.

Some of the info there is from memory, but most was chronicaled in the EKB itself through the years. Anyway, I invite all to take a look at http://ekb.dbstalk.com/17 or http://echostar.swiki.net/17.

I encourage everyone to send me any corrections, dates, or other pertinant information. I wanted to keep it simple and relevant to most readers so only basic, premium and dishnets/superstation pricing is discussed.

See ya
Tony

[Steve Mehs]

Looks great Tony! My only suggestion would be to add a section about AEP.

[TNGTony]

Hi again,

I just reformatted it to keep prices in a row so it would be easier to see the progression of prices. As suggested by several, I've added AEP to the mix.

Thanks

See ya
Tony

[Steve Mehs]

Awesome! Looks even better Tony :righton:

[BobaBird]

Awesome, indeed! The formatting is much nicer than was possible in the NG post I now only vaguely remember. I thought you might be able to get to it in a few days but it was only 11 hours after I sent the suggestion. Now that's service! :goodjob:

[jeffwtux]

Like I've been saying annual rate hikes at the start of the year with no channel increases are becoming a just as common with Dish as with cable only slightly less. I will also defend my assumption that Charlie was implying a very iminent rate hike(probably in Januare or February). He said that without the merger price increases would occur faster. Nobody disputes that over time there will be rate hikes merger or no merger. So if he is saying that rate hikes will happen faster, he is saying it will be very very soon.
The fact is that Charlie probably feels content with the 8 million or so customers he has. Without the merger, he has little incentive to keep prices down. With the merger, he will make major concessions and have the feds scrutinizing and practically regulating every price increase. He will have far more incentive to keep prices down after the merger due to government scrutiny than without out. Charlie is basically telling the government that if you reject the merger than all bets are off. The government can't tell Dish to do anything.

[Geronimo]

We'll see. I think Charlie knows what will happen if he exceeds the DTV price. I also think he is still pushing the merger publicly. But we will see.

[jeffwtux]

He already has exceeded the DTV price for a number of packages, like AT150. Total Choice Plus is a far better deal at $37.99 than 150 is at $40.99, not to mention the $4 discount off of locals when combining it with Total Choice Plus($39.99 compared to $46.98). I've been screaming for Dish to offer a package like DishPak for AT100 and At150. All I'm asking for is a $1.98 discount for AT100+Starz+locals and a $2.98 discount for AT150+Starz+locals. That still isn't as big of a discount as Total Choice Plus, but would be enough for retailers to work with.

[raj2001]

Originally posted by jeffwtux
Without the merger, he has little incentive to keep prices down. With the merger, he will make major concessions and have the feds scrutinizing and practically regulating every price increase. He will have far more incentive to keep prices down after the merger due to government scrutiny than without out. Charlie is basically telling the government that if you reject the merger than all bets are off. The government can't tell Dish to do anything.

I tend to disagree. Without the merger, Charlie would have less incentive to raise prices because customers can easily switch to the competing service. With the merger, Charlie would have more incentive to raise prices and keep them high because there is no competition to go to (unless you plan to go back to cable).

Government regulation wouldn't mean SQUAT to Charlie because he can always fight them in court, as has been proven with Dish network's distributions of "superstations" which go against the SHVIA.

[tampa8]

"Like I've been saying annual rate hikes at the start of the year with no channel increases are becoming a just as common with Dish as with cable only slightly less."

I have to challange this. Looking at the chart, I see many or most times where a price increase did have channels added. (added since the last price increase) both for premium and regular channels. Were there some increases without adding anything? Yes of course but to say "Only slightly less" than cable is a real stretch. TWC in Pasco FL and Charter in Eastern CT have gone up MUCH more in fact, close to as much PER MONTH as dish did PER YEAR especially if you subscribe to AT150. If your cable has not gone up much more than Dish I think you are the exception not the rule.

Here is my example: Since I have had AT150 (since the begining) I believe there has been only one increase of $1 per month = $12 per year. (Per the chart "many channels have been added during this period) Charter has gone up for their package that includes all channels (not all digital by the way) since late 1999 Approximately $10.50 PER MONTH. Yes they have also added channels since 2000, but do not have as many as Dish. (I'm not counting music channels). Now to be fair this includes locals, so if you incude Dish locals they have gone up $1 per month for some, none for others. (If you already got PBS your price did not go up) Remember we are comparing how much each has gone up, not what each costs. But even adding the $5.99 per month to the Dish cost of AT150, their cost per month increase is still much less than cable.

I have to give both DTV and Dish a break on the price increases for HBO. With their popularity HBO has been able to demand much larger cost increases to providers and thus we pay more. But again, I see TWC has gone up much more than Dish for their premiums - and from what I can tell don't offer as many channels. (To be fair in some cases Charter seems to offer a different channel of say HBO than what Dish has, but the total seems less for each Movie provider)

[jeffcarp]

Originally posted by jeffwtux
Like I've been saying annual rate hikes at the start of the year with no channel increases are becoming a just as common with Dish as with cable only slightly less....You seem to be saying that Dish should only raise prices if they provide more channels. You should be making your case to the content providers, not the service providers. When Dish gets a 12% increase from HBO, what choice does Dish have? Prices would go up at a lower rate with a merger because the combined company would have more negotiating power with the content providers than two separate companies do.

[jeffwtux]

I was never talking about HBO. I only concentrated on the basic programming packages. If Dish raises rates again in February, which is about what he is suggesting, he will have raised rates 3 times in 3 years. They will no longer be able to use cable having annual rate hikes as a marketing tool. I don't care what the reason is. BTW: in my city Dish subscribers with AT100 and locals did have a higher price increase February $2 for Dish and $1.90 for TwC

[Geronimo]

Yes DISh is slightly higher than DTV for some packages. But that means there is not much room to go up further. I don't thik DISH is crazy enough to price themselves out of the market. If they do announce an increase it will be a signal that DTV is aboutt announce one as well (or already has).

BTW distribution of superstations is specifically allowed in SHVIA.

[jeffcarp]

Originally posted by jeffwtux
I was never talking about HBO. I only concentrated on the basic programming packages. If Dish raises rates again in February, which is about what he is suggesting, he will have raised rates 3 times in 3 years. They will no longer be able to use cable having annual rate hikes as a marketing tool. I don't care what the reason is. BTW: in my city Dish subscribers with AT100 and locals did have a higher price increase February $2 for Dish and $1.90 for TwC HBO was only an example. Dish doesn't originate any programming. They BUY it. If the suppliers of that programming raise rates and Echostar isn't able to negotiate it down, they have 3 choices: raise rates, drop the station or eat the costs. I can tell you which two they won't do! Cable will have the same rate problems as will Directv, they all have to negotiate with the same content providers. Cable has it worse though as most have to pay for massive infrastructure expansions. Granted satellite companies have to pay for new birds also.

[raj2001]

Originally posted by Geronimo

BTW distribution of superstations is specifically allowed in SHVIA.

But syndicated shows must be blacked out, which Dish is not doing.

[Five Hole]

Originally posted by raj2001


But syndicated shows must be blacked out, which Dish is not doing.

:rolleyes:
So I guess Dish is not allowing the UPN superstations in the LA DMA to make people mad and not because of the SHVIA.

On another note, people will pay $4.00 for a cup of coffee and not think anything of it but will complain about a $1/mo increase in tv programming :rolleyes:

[scooper]

Syndicated shows need be blacked out IF and ONLY IF a local broadcaster holding the local rights requests such blackouts. If a "local" station decides to enforce this syndex (by notifying Dish), Dish so far has decided to simply stop offering the affected Superstations in that city. What this means to subs right now - if you can get the Superstations (or some subset of them), your local stations have not requested the Syndex protection. Enjoy them while you can...

[Marcus S]

I agree with Scott, SuperStations will probably be history in a few years leaving only a different mix of channels in the comparable programming tiers between E* and *D. That will only leave international channels and sky angle choices vs NFL ticket and who offers your local nets.

For Charlie to raise prices would be incredibly stupid. Though I wouldn't expect to see many E* defections if E* matches *D price package, an increase exceeding current *D prices would be suicide for E*, especially since they are still trying to recover from their new sub promo's that dragged their revenue down this quarter.

All said and possible posturing, Charlie has managed to allienate existing subs. Once you loose sub confidence it could cause longer term damage than Charlie considered. I have not been happy with Charlie's advisement team that seems to get him into more and more hot water publically.

These are the same morons who advise MCI, Sprint, AT&T, and Xerox all off which have managed to loose huge market share with their threat tactics, reduction in product offerings, customer support, and lack of upgrade paths. Perhaps effective in the 90's not so anymore. Consumers are tired of being manipulated while watching CEO's cash cow at their expense.

[Geronimo]

DISH blacks out syndicares shows when locals in a given area request it. In fact thewy do not sell a given supser when syndex is requested. They are in compliance with SHVIA on this point.

[Richard King]

Cable will have the same rate problems as will Directv, they all have to negotiate with the same content providers.Ah, but cable (and Rupert if he gets hold of DTV) are heavily invested in the content providers, so they are taking money from one pocket and stuffing it in another pocket in the same pair of pants in many cases. DBS doesn't have this advantage (until Rupert gets DTV). The cable companies can continue to blame the programming providers for their rate increases, while happily feeding the programming providers (themselves) every time the providers (themselves again) decide to raise prices. THAT is why I feel vertical integration in the cable/dbs industry needs to be done away with. Once Rupert gets DTV, Dish will be one of the few distribution companies with NO programming division and their REAL costs will increase faster than the rest of the industry.

[Richard King]

By the way, nice work Tony (as usual). :D

[Marcus S]

Originally posted by Geronimo
DISH blacks out syndicares shows when locals in a given area request it. In fact thewy do not sell a given supser when syndex is requested. They are in compliance with SHVIA on this point.

I have yet to be blacked out Super's or distant nets and I think that is the problem. Syndex wants E* to enforce black outs better. Currently only seems to happen to local DMA subs while my *D neighbor has to come over to my house to watch certain sports events. :)

[Geronimo]

You have yet to be blacked out because no broadcaster in your area requestes a blackout. They are not automatic. They have to be requested.

[Marcus S]

As I stated why can I get it when my neighbor cannot. Where not talking across the street or around the block. You either qual for distants or not at all in this town. E* is not enforcing Syndex requests for black outs to rural subs period. Live in Denver, that is another matter.

[TNGTony]

Marcus,

Dish has negociated deals with some markets to specifically allow SyndEx programming in certain markets. If Dish has to black out one program in a market, they do not allow that station in that market. So Dish essentially had bought off some station's SyndEx demands.

Also, each station has to request SyndEx for EACH programmer coming in. So there is a possibility that a station has ASKED direcTV to block a program, but neglected to do so from Dish.

See ya
Tony

[JohnL]

Originally posted by raj2001


But syndicated shows must be blacked out, which Dish is not doing.

Raj,

Wrong again, Dish is not required to blackout syndicated programing. Dish is required to blackout specific or all syndicated programing within a market IF and ONLY if a DMA's local rights holder petitions Dish to do so.

With that said Dish has received very few blackout requests. In fact there are only a few markets on Dish that have some syndicated Superstations blackouts because of request syndicated protection.

John

[Marcus S]

And that is really the rub, Dish is following Syndex, but obviously *D is simply blacking out everything in the region while *E is focusing on the specific request within the local DMA. The exact same thing is occurring for local networks as well... As a rural you may be close to a DMA but not within that DMA and beyond distance restrictions setup by the sports lobbies, the Super's and net's can suck on that big lemon. :)

I have never understood an industry that wants to loose subs the most, networks... NFL better get over it or just pull the plug and that is what it's all about. Advertisers just want the largest bang for their buck. That will sit well with the general public who has already shunned the NHL and NBA. Ms Cleo says you have to go to your local sports bar to watch any sport events. The nets and supers just setup to loose more and more subs but so stupid not to recognize the backwash that will occur and continuing to loose market share for programming that no one seems to watch. :wave:

[jeffwtux]

Originally posted by Rking401
Ah, but cable (and Rupert if he gets hold of DTV) are heavily invested in the content providers, so they are taking money from one pocket and stuffing it in another pocket in the same pair of pants in many cases. DBS doesn't have this advantage (until Rupert gets DTV). The cable companies can continue to blame the programming providers for their rate increases, while happily feeding the programming providers (themselves) every time the providers (themselves again) decide to raise prices. THAT is why I feel vertical integration in the cable/dbs industry needs to be done away with. Once Rupert gets DTV, Dish will be one of the few distribution companies with NO programming division and their REAL costs will increase faster than the rest of the industry.


HMMM.....
Comcast now owns 42% of the cable market. What national channels do they own? AOL is the main culprit of a vertical monopoly. However, these conglomerates have been bashed by Wall Street Analysts(of course that's not the same their leverage on carriage for satellite companies). Notice how AOL's stock has plummetted. They may even have to sell off some of this vertical monopoly.
However, Comcast does own a couple of regional stations that are an outrage: Comcast SportsNet in Baltimore and Philly. The Philly station broadcasts the majority of Phillies, Flyers, and 76ers games, and Comcast has refused to give Dish rights to carry ComcastSportsNet in Philly. If the Bush FCC and DOJ isn't completely bought and paid for by the cable lobby, they would've been demanding that Comcast offer COMPLETELY FAIR RIGHTS of carriage to Dish and Direct. HECK YOU WANT THE MERGER? PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS. I SAY MAKE COMCAST OFFER IT TO DISH AT THE SAME PRICE THEY CHARGE THEIR FRANCHISES. DON'T LIKE IT? TOUGH! DON'T MERGE.
If I lived in Philly, I would be ruthlessly harassing my US House Rep, until they filibustered congress over this issue.

[jeffwtux]

The point is that the Philly situation isn't nationwide. Plus, AOL is in a far worse situation that Dish right now.

[BrettR]

Originally posted by jeffwtux


If I lived in Philly, I would be ruthlessly harassing my US House Rep, until they filibustered congress over this issue.

Problem is Comcast is a big employer in the Philly and PA region also. They hosted the Republican Convention, and contribute to the right people. It was no surprise FCC went 3-1 and approved the merger and the 3 that were for the Comcast AT&T merger were Republicans.

They own Comcast Spectator that owns the stadium and the Sixers and Flyers also. As for national channels, they own or majority own/control QVC, E!, Style, Outdoor Life Network, Golf Channel. For regional content there is CCSN-Philly (2/3 of the channel), the CN8 channel(they own 100%), CCSN-Midatlantic however they do not own the pro D.C. teams just the channel. They partially own some channels with other cable providers in the South that show minor league teams.

Not that many channels. Their biggest thing they have is the vertical monopoly of sports in the Philly region.

I'm okay with some vertical integration(Comcast and E!, QVC is fine), but not a monopoly with professional sports where there is only 1 pro team per city and the pro team claims the city in terms of local rights. NewsCorp and Cablevision also have RSNs they could use to play unfairly.