Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by lparsons21, May 4, 2012.
Depends on who's arguing.
Is there any guarantee that ANY of them will return for a fifth? No.
Will we ever find out what AT&T agreed to pay?
Would be interesting to know if they got better rates than than dish, and by how much.
Never use streaming device with wi fi hard wire is the way to go got my entuire home 8 rooms wired only way i could share media file Blu ray video with out bluffering
Sometimes I worry about this civilization.
Curious about this myself. As I noted earlier, though... AT&T is likely bound by confidentiality and AMC is highly unlikely to want to go public with what they agreed to. It would either be too high and support Dish's claims OR it would be low, and undermine their ability to negotiate with other companies.
IF AMC truly wanted to put the nail in Dish and say how they refused to negotiate, though, AMC could easily come out and say what Dish was paying and what AMC wanted... as well as what they agreed to with AT&T. But don't hold your breath waiting for that info from AMC. It isn't in their best interest to reveal.
The world has too many books- we need to get rid of some of the trash books that are included in these book anthologies that book publishers pawn off on us.
If a niche book cannot survive on its own - let it die.
Book publishers should start pressing book stores to cut the bottom books off of their shelves and keep prices at the same or slightly lower levels.
If there is a demand for a book it will survive - let the others DIE!
I do not want to subsidize trash books with my dollars. I probably read fewer than 15 books all year and the rest of the family maybe doubles that number.
Who needs 200 or 250 million books - NOBODY.
(Sorry, couldn't resist)
When I was at the "negotiation table" back in the 80's and 90's, sometimes that argument held water, sometimes it didn't, but it was always on the table.
But hey, what do I know?
maby they will began to sale it as a stand along or pack like the canadgian packs. maby a package with amc sundancse ifc and we. wisht they wood at leest follow up on the pormise to give qwality replacemants. hdnet hello? they shoud give us lifeitme reel women and new chanels that are repacements for each of these lost. it wood be more pricey this way but at leest them that wont it can pay for it sepreteley. im thanking it wont be back sadley. maby im wrong time will tale.
Personally I could never stand for the endless commercial breaks on AMC. I will only watch movies on a commercial channel. Even if it means fuzzy SD. They are no loss for me.
plus won. i felt like ifc lost alot they ofered when they put comercials in. befour that it was won of our most washed chanels.
That's why I have a DVR. I never set through commercials. I know a lot of people are saying no loss and ha ha but what if next time it's your channel? I hate to say this but I would love to see the people saying no loss and ha ha to lose their favorite channel or channels.
I agree with you on IFC. They added commercials and it seems like they cut the movies. Again I have a DVR so I'm not worried about commercials but cutting a movie sucks.
Can I ask you guys a question? Why are you all bringing up commercial breaks? I would assume most of us have a DVR. It's not hard to FF through them.
How long do you dry your channels after you wash them????
A lot of us did like the programming AMC provided, I my self am a huge fan of The Walking Dead comics (and because of my fanboyism was mostly disgusted with the terrible second season).
AMC was "one of my channels" , except I'm looking at the bigger picture here. AMC over evaluated there product and got what was coming to them. Its not like we wont be able to see the following seasons of our favorite shows.
Because even with the advent of the DVR (and ad-hopper) there are still instances where you might be stuck watching live tv.
People also bring up commercials to point out how far away from the original product Rainbow takes there channels.
AMC is like the MTV of classic movies but with more annoying commercials.
Fair enough! Besides sports I don't really watch live TV. I usually wait 15 or so minutes to watch a show that just started.
I really really want to go with Dish. I am so impressed with the Hopper. I'm just kind of afraid of Charlie. It's like what will he do next? Will he go to war with ESPN or will tell The Discovery Channel and The History Channel to go to hell? I'm also scared some high court will rule against The Hopper and they will lose the commercial skip and PTAT.
Has anyone gotten any deals while currently on the Dish America plan? (Roku, Cinemax, HD for life, etc?)
I for one, think that as long as I am paying for a channel, I do not need to see the Ads, these channels are being paid twice, once is enough!
Hell, I think many of these channels should PAY to be carried, as I assume the shopping channels must have to, right? Who would pay for them? Not me!
Some channels I am completely willing to pay for, but ONLY in HD, SD should be dropped completely, don't watch them at all!!
(1 exception, ESPN-U during college basketball season, DTV has it in HD!!).
Billionaires in a P|*ssing contest, Charlie you have enough money buddy, stop being a chump & settle some of these disputes!!
No one can get HD free for life while on a Dish America plan, it would be redundant.
Sure it does. Take the various source numbers we have and do the math.
The production budgets for 2011 was published in an article complaining about AMC slashing their productions. Divide by 12 and you get $14.55 million.
Based on numbers noted in previous lawsuits DISH has approximately 10 million customers at AT200 or above (AMC's tier). Based on AMC getting an average 25c per subscriber that's $2.5 million. Some media reports say DISH subscribers were 15% of AMC's subscriber base ... which puts AMC's subscription based revenue (before losing DISH) at $16.66 million and after losing DISH at $14.14 million - which is below the production cost for 2011.
I don't know if large providers pay more than small, but using an industry average for what AMC gets should still come out to the $16.66 million. And if large providers like DISH are paying more that just makes the lost of their subscribers even more painful for AMC.
Ad revenue that you note could drop due to advertisers reaching 15% less households.
I don't see how losing $2.5 million plus each month helps AMC. Do you? ~15% of subscriber revenue is not something that any network would want to see go away.
A couple of years ago The Weather Channel thought better of losing DISH subscribers. They took their carriage for granted and when they wanted more money they found out they could be replaced. Looking at losing nearly ALL of DISH's customers (being in AT120 and other basic packages) and the percentage of their households they would use they came to an agreement - and that agreement helped other providers as well as TWC dropped their il-advised movie nights (featuring any movie with weather in it) and got back to providing the weather. (It is hoping too much to get MTV to return to music videos at the next negotiation. )
When is one of AMC's few good shows back on AMC with new episodes? Breaking Bad with eight episodes starting a week from Sunday? Walking Dead off until October? Mad Men done until next year? Perhaps Breaking Bad will be the test ... AMC can see how it does with 15% of their households gone.
If Dish loses 50k subs, canceling or refusing to sign up, due to AMC at an ARPU of $75 that's 3,750,000 a month loss for them. Then add in the retention offers to placate those who may or may not care, probably around 5 million budgeted, and it's not necessarily a huge savings then.
It's not going to be good for either company compared to what could be and neither company will go out of business for it. It's easy to vilify companies but in the end it's just business. If AMC got their price increases and created 3 more shows that had the ratings and reviews that Mad Men, BB, and Walking Dead do then people would say that it was a great thing.
Of course the people who stick around in this thread are going to be the supporters because the people who really care that much about losing AMC will just leave anyways. The glaring difference in this dispute is the simple fact that DISH refused to even bother to negotiate with AMC.
While I can appreciate, the passion of the handful of people that want to watch their programs like “Mad Men” the bottom line is VIEWERS and AMC just does not pull in viewer numbers.
While Mad Men is perhaps, a critical success it is far from a ratings powerhouse and neither are any of the other programs that have been mentioned here, with the exception being The Walking Dead.
While the final episode of MM ended on a high note (2.7 million viewers), the program routinely placed in the mid-20 for cable programming on Sunday nights. Last Sunday night at 9 pm finds that HBO’s True Blood had 4.5 million, TNT’s Falling Skies had 3.3 million, while The History Channels Ice Road Truckers drew 2.7 million. Moreover, in what can only show that the survival of the human race is in doubt 2.6 million watched E’s Keeping Up with the Kardashians.
TNT’s new show Dallas had 3.3 million viewers last week, a rerun of NCIS on USA brings in 2.6 million or a rerun of The Big Bang Theory on TBS has 2.5 million. Therefore, critical appeal and awards garnered offer little in the way of defense as to why a carrier should or should not offer programming.
In the end, it is only a television program. I would hope that the human race could show as much fervor over something that really mattered in the world!