Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Scott Kocourek, Dec 26, 2010.
At least the SD version of OWN takes up less space on your DVR......
If they are continually demanding a outrageous fee then yes the argument applies. Appeasing and bowing to outrageous demands are not good way to conduct business.
Exactly. It's really complicated is such a convenient excuse. It's like when a parent tires of trying to explain something and throws up their hands and says "you'll understand when you get older".
Let's be honest here, 3 years and counting for at least 1 channel that both parties (or at least some customers of one of them) would benefit from and no deal is made? So it's either Directv really has no interest in carrying these channels because they have other plans for the bandwidth (we make more on PPV and sports!), or both parties are incompetent in negotiating.
I would. I'd call that a beat down!
But hey, we have all those PPV and blacked out RSN pro games to watch. :lol:
Said it before, the only channels that matter are the ones you watch.
Is there verifiable information indicating that AMC-HD and BBC America HD are demanding outrageous fees?
Sources I trust completely have told me so. I cannot give you more information than that. If you decide that I am not a source that you trust, I can't help that.
So all other providers that carry the aforementioned HD channels agreed to outrageous demands? :lol: Highly unlikely!
As far as you and I know, DIRECTV is not even in the market for new basic HD. So far, based upon their actions, my theory has a higher probability than your theory.
Different carriers have different standards. The bottom line is that if it doesn't make sense from a profit perspective for that particular carrier than it's not going to happen. And why do you think that the content providers offer the same deal to "XYZ Cable" that they offer to DIRECTV? For all we know DIRECTV's prices may be higher or lower, or simply because DIRECTV has 18 million subs while "XYZ Cable" might have a few thousands, it's easier for DIRECTV to see tiny incremental charges turn into massive costs.
Is there verifiable information indicating that they are not? Without DirecTV publicly stating their reasons for not carrying channels some of us want all we can do here is "speculate", not accuse.
As much as I would love to get Turner Classic Movies and AMC in HD I am not expecting them anytime soon. Directv must think that more people watching films on those channels equate to fewer people paying for premium channels.
I would also add that one person's "outrageous" is another person's "reasonable".
To some non sports fans, ESPN charging $5.00 a month is not reasonable.
We need to know what Directv's idea of reasonable and outrageous is to have this discussion, and likely we will never know this.
If Directv is offering $0.20 for the channel and AMCHD wants $6.00, Directv may feel that's outrageous and most would agree. If Directv is offering $0.02 and AMCHD wants $0.20, Directv may feel that's outrageous but I would bet most of us would disagree.
I hear you, but every HD channel? When was the last time DIRECTV added a basic HD channel?
I know some channel owners can play hardball. What is the likelihood that they're ALL playing hardball? Highly unlikely.
Their past several HD additions all came with an extra price tag if you wanted to watch them. I doubt that was just a coincidence. My theory still has the highest probability. I'd love to be proven wrong by DIRECTV. However, I'm still waiting.
Oh, I trust that you were told that by people in a position to know and thus it accurately represents D*'s internal position. And that makes me sad.
Whether that is objectively true is of course a different kettle of fish.
One of these days Congress is going to get tired of all this churning and games of chicken and mandate no-bundling and published price lists (i.e. all carriers pay the same price per customer for a given channel based on contract start date --take it or leave it; length of term will be the only variable). Then all these whisper games will be a thing of the past.
As everyone knows I have posted my desire for the following to be added in HD. BBCA, FMC, TCM and the Military Channel. I've dropped AMC from my list because of the amount of commercials and infomercials they are airing. My TV has been professionally calibrated making SD watchable. The lack of these channels not being added to HD does not outway the rest of the reasons why I prefer DirecTV. Customers are not leaving DirecTV in hordes. They must be doing something right.
The two year contract was a great idea. Kind of hard to leave when you're in a contact.
I'm only half joking. We all know DIRECTV is a very successful company. Hence the billions of dollars. We're not questioning their success, we're questioning the reasons for no new basic HD.
I agree with you completely. I have explored the other options available to me and will stay with D* for those other reasons, mrv, large hd in the dvrs and relatively decent equipment. Then again we continue to wonder why no new basic hd channels added. Sure it may be cost that D* does not think is reasonable, but enough of us have posted the willingness to pay more to get them.
Come next month, we will be paying more.
Hard to remember that the few thousand who frequent this forum are not representative of the 18 million subscribers. I wish we were, for then we would get everything we wanted.
There isn't really any channels that I need right now. The only one that would be nice is E!, kinda strange that even my local cable has that and DirecTV doesn't.
It is also kinda strange to go through all the trouble of launching a new sat only to leave it half empty. Not sure of the business case for that!