1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

2013 DIRECTV Price Increases

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by FrozenAsset, Dec 27, 2012.

  1. Jan 2, 2013 #301 of 467
    FLWingNut

    FLWingNut Godfather

    467
    12
    Nov 19, 2005
    Sorry but HD is the industry standard, since all four major networks broadcast all their prime time programming that way. If there are Podunk affiliates that downrez it, that's too bad, but it doesn't invalidate what I'm saying. All TVs sold now are HD, that makes it standard, too. If 35% of people chose to hang on to their old SD sets, that's their privilege, of course, but that should hold the rest of us back. SD sets can handle HD signals OTA with a cheap converter box. It's time to dump SD duplicates and use those says for HD.
     
  2. Jan 2, 2013 #302 of 467
    HarleyD

    HarleyD Hall Of Fame

    1,357
    62
    Aug 31, 2006
    And how many of the local affiliates of those networks have sub channels that are broadcast in SD? I can only go by the markets I have personal exposure to but my observation is ALL of them. Where I am there are actually more SD digital channels being broadcast than HD digital channels.

    That's not quite an industry standard by any measure. To bill everyone at the same rate even if they don't have the ability to view HD programming would be effectively punishing those people for failing to adopt HD equipment. It would be wrong. It's only been a few years since analog was shut off. Well within the life expectancy of a televsion set. It wouldn't be very well received to punish people for not replacing equipment that is still relatively new. Nor should it be.

    Whether you apply an SD discount or an HD charge there is still a disparity in the cost for the provider to provide the different types of programming that should be reflected in the subscriber rates somehow...at least for a little longer. If the providers choose to eliminate the HD charge...sweet. But to jack up package prices across the board to absorb the cost of HD for all subscribers would be unfair and could get you excoriated in the court of public opinion. Since the public is your subscriber base that's probably not a good idea.

    I do think that at some point it will be the standard and would be analogous to having to pay extra for color TV instead of black and white, but we are not there just yet. Maybe the day after DirecTV replaces all of the owned MPEG2 equipment with MPEG4 equipment.
     
  3. Jan 2, 2013 #303 of 467
    FLWingNut

    FLWingNut Godfather

    467
    12
    Nov 19, 2005
    Sub channels? Who cares? Going by the ones. Ive seen here, they're a waste of a signal -- reruns you can find on other channels, static weather radar, hardly worth the effort. I'm not saying charge SD more, I'm saying drop the HD charge as it is the industry standard now. It's not 3D or something esoteric. By your numbers, 65-75% of us all have HD; at this point the charge is a "because we can" charge.
     
  4. Jan 2, 2013 #304 of 467
    Deftones

    Deftones Legend

    132
    0
    Sep 6, 2006
    Correct. Nobody is immune to price increases. But, a consumer could play provider shuffle and jump ship every few years to lessen the increases, as they would likely be getting promo rates for being a new subscriber. PITA yes, but if people are looking to save money, that's one way to do it.
     
  5. Jan 2, 2013 #305 of 467
    HarleyD

    HarleyD Hall Of Fame

    1,357
    62
    Aug 31, 2006
    Actually it's 60-65% but you stated your position best in your previous post when you said "How SD folks feel is of no interest to me." Everything you have said since backs it up.

    It's all about you.

    You.

    You, you, you.

    Unfortunately, you don't mean quite as much to the rest of the world. You are not the benchmark by which the world is measured.

    It's not a "because we can" fee. There is a greater, significant investment that was put into providing the HD programming. Period. Three satellites and dozens of carriage contracts. That's a lot of money. You just want them to give it away because it's what you want.
     
  6. Jan 2, 2013 #306 of 467
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,247
    490
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    In one of their DirecTV-14 filings with the FCC, they said that 60% of new customers were HD. That means that 40% of new customers were SD, and that wouldn't include ones that had been customers a long time and never upgraded.

    Some other carriers if they don't have a HD fee like DirecTV does may have an increased fee per month for HD boxes, etc.

    It's definitely true that these satellites aren't cheap, and ones like DirecTV-10-12 and 14 are pretty much only for HD.
     
  7. Jan 2, 2013 #307 of 467
    pdxBeav

    pdxBeav Godfather

    447
    35
    Jul 5, 2007
    Pretty much everything is a "because we can" fee. And I don't mean that in a negative way. The price of an item usually has nothing to do with the cost to produce it. Any company wants to maximize profits and will charge whatever the market will bear. Even though there isn't a lot of competition in the cable/sat market there is still enough to keep prices from being artificially high.

    If DirecTV could get away with charging an extra $100/month they would. And they would "because they can".
     
  8. Jan 2, 2013 #308 of 467
    JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    4,578
    28
    Jul 21, 2008
    all systems have loads of old SD boxes out there.
     
  9. Jan 3, 2013 #309 of 467
    HarleyD

    HarleyD Hall Of Fame

    1,357
    62
    Aug 31, 2006
    Good point. If the HD access charge was per box there would be a lot of subscribers here paying a lot more than $10.

    When I have investigated other providers that is where they have always fallen down. The hardware.

    OK, the package price is appealing but when I add up the equipment charges that would come with an installation comparable to what I currently enjoy with DirecTV it always ends up costing more to switch.

    The exception might have been FiOS. Since I already get phone and internet via FiOS I could upgrade to a triple play package pretty cheaply but the equipment charges end up making it a horse race in the end and only for the first two years...they want another $105/mo for the 5 DVRs and 2 STBs I have now with DirecTV.

    I would end up saving a whopping $5 a month for the first 18 monts. I save nothing in months 19 - 24 Once the promotions end it costs me $25 more per month.
     
  10. Jan 3, 2013 #310 of 467
    hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    I'm a huge HD fan if you hadn't noticed. :D

    But even I must admit there are simply too many overall channels out there (many have very low viewer ratings), and the cost of producing, distribution, and delivering Hd channels continues to grow.

    I anticipate that we'll see a market-driven reduction in the overall number of channels (SD and/or HD) based on viewer ratings, followed by a shift in investment toward the surviving channels (including new HD ones that currently are not offered).

    Supply and demand will drive all this - and the prices will continue to grow each year until there is some form of regulatory governance on the models in place today. The only other possibility is reduced viewership based on channel availablity or price saturation.
     
  11. Jan 3, 2013 #311 of 467
    FLWingNut

    FLWingNut Godfather

    467
    12
    Nov 19, 2005
    Ok this was a nasty reply totally out of whack with what I posted, and the tone is not appreciated.

    My point is not that I don't care about SD only customers, my mother is one -- although not of D*. My point is that HD is the norm now, your own numbers back that up. Therefore we -- all of us, not just me --- shouldn't have to pay a separate fee to get it. If I use rabbit ears, I don't get a bill from my locals for an extra fee for HD. Those satellites were budgeted for years ago I would expect and probably paid off by now.

    You're correct in that all fees are "because we can." This one just galls more than most to me. It's like a car dealer who charges a paperwork fee. I won't pay it -- paperwork is part of the cost of doing business, and should be reflected in the price of the car.

    I'm not saying SD customers should pay for the HD birds either. I'm saying D should be able to drop this by now. I mean how many years will we be paying extra for HD? I'm sometimes surprised they don't try to charge us for color.

    I say this as a longtime -- since 1998 -- subscriber. D has been pretty good to me over the years and I enjoy their service, this fee just irritates me. Maybe I'd they fooled us by calling it something else it wouldn't bother me.

    Have a nice day.
     
  12. Jan 3, 2013 #312 of 467
    HinterXGames

    HinterXGames Godfather

    313
    4
    Dec 20, 2012
    And this thought process is the reason the Networks have the power, because they know what you just stated.
     
  13. Jan 3, 2013 #313 of 467
    LoopinFool

    LoopinFool Icon

    876
    0
    Aug 31, 2007
    Sorry to reply to my own post...

    I am on Choice XTRA Classic and can not tune to PBS 389. I strongly suspect that's because I do get my local PBS (even in HD).
    Just thought I'd post it as an FYI.

    - LoopinFool
     
  14. Jan 3, 2013 #314 of 467
    Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
    Yup, and just because a new customer takes "HD", doesn't mean every receiver they take is HD. There are many new and old customers that may have HD in one room, two rooms, or whathever, but still have SD in other rooms for their non HD televisions.
     
  15. Jan 3, 2013 #315 of 467
    Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
    Most likely that is the reason.
     
  16. Jan 3, 2013 #316 of 467
    Dude111

    Dude111 An Awesome Dude

    737
    20
    Aug 6, 2010
    Yes and for NOTHING BETTER THAN WHAT YOUR GETTING NOW!!

    I guess we can blame all the ppl who want trash like MTV carried as to why the prices are getting higher... VIACOM WANTS MORE $$$$$ FOR CRAP!!


    Your right,its been getting out of hand along time now!
     
  17. Jan 4, 2013 #317 of 467
    HarleyD

    HarleyD Hall Of Fame

    1,357
    62
    Aug 31, 2006
    My words were over the top.

    Some of the statements you had made left me with the impression that you were only interested in your own viewing habits and equipment with regard to how the packages are priced. I took umbrage with that and responded in an inappropriately aggressive tone.

    For that I apologize.

    Nuance of meaning is often lost in the written word and I should be more reserved in how I perceive and respond to things sometimes.

    Now, I actually tried to get some numbers to crunch. Not only for the costs to build and launch DirecTV 10, 11 and 12 but 14 and 15 as well because by the end of 2014 when the last of those goes up I think it will probably be time for special charges for HD to fade away so if those funds are going to come from a "luxury tax" of sorts, it needs to be now or never.

    Unfortunately those numbers appear to be a closely guarded secret, along with what additional charges were incurred to secure the carriage rights for the HD signals. Although I am pretty confident that they pay more to carry both HD and SD than they do for SD only, but that too will probably change in the next several years when the contracts come up for renewal.

    I agree that separate HD charges will need to go away and that it will become analagous to charging extra for color. I guess I just don't think we're there yet with new HD birds yet to fly and channels that aren't even available in HD yet.

    With respect to your comment about the fee under a different name, how would you feel about paying a "premium receiver" charge as opposed to an "advanced receiver"? It would be hard to deny that an HR24...or even an HR21 is a premium receiver compared to the D12 that is still in wide use.

    And again, my apologies.
     
  18. Jan 4, 2013 #318 of 467
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,247
    490
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    Well, very soon we're getting more HD, maybe even before the increase goes into effect.

    My biggest surprise, still waiting for my email.
     
  19. Jan 4, 2013 #319 of 467
    Mike Bertelson

    Mike Bertelson 6EQUJ5 WOW! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    14,040
    94
    Jan 24, 2007
    Just a reminder to keep it Civil.

    Mike
     
  20. Jan 4, 2013 #320 of 467
    FLWingNut

    FLWingNut Godfather

    467
    12
    Nov 19, 2005
    Apology accepted. You're right in that it is difficult at times to pick up nuances in the written word.

    At any rate, if there are more birds to fly, I suppose the charge won't be going anywhere soon, but it already seems to me to be like charging for color. Those new HD transmitters cost a bundle for our locals, yet they didn't expect me to pay for them. Plus I'm paying an HD fee, yet still have to deal with SD channels. Where's GSN, TV Land, H2, and Military in HD, to name a few?

    The HR-24 is advanced compared to a D12, but a D12 is advanced compared to an OTA converter box, so it's all in how you phrase it I guess.

    Whatever I think, the fee is here to stay I suppose,
     

Share This Page