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

Here's what we dreaded:$6 lease fee for new 211HD etc. receivers

Discussion in 'DISH™ High Definition Discussion' started by Rraspy, Jan 26, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rraspy

    Rraspy AllStar

    70
    0
    Oct 9, 2003
    If you check out the other threads under general discussion, this seems to be what we all dreaded if you have an HD receiver, like 6000 or 811 and your thinking of upgrading under their deal to get a 211 etc. to get your HD locals through dish instead of using your off air antenna to get your HD locals etc.

    This is for people without the HD package. The dreaded monthly lease exists[/B]
     
  2. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,751
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    $6 instead of $5 for a SD receiver ... one dollar more. Don't panic.
     
  3. thxultra

    thxultra Godfather

    479
    23
    Feb 1, 2005
    Sounds fair to me. If you want HD you should get the HD package.
     
  4. tomcrown1

    tomcrown1 Hall Of Fame

    1,576
    0
    Jan 16, 2006
    Add up the fees $5.00 more for the everything pack $1.00 more for HD lease and the big draded rumor $2.00 more to use the VIP622 DVR feature so that adds up to $8 increase, now comstat in the SF Bay area is cheaper as they offered me a 1 year permium HD plan for $96.00 per month. As cable gets more competitive with rates and dish continues to raise rates this can hurt dish in the behind:nono2:
     
  5. Link

    Link Hall Of Fame

    1,802
    4
    Feb 1, 2004
    Our local company Mediacom has dual tuner HD DVR and the package with all premium networks is about $95 a month with HD feeds of HBO, Max, Showtime, TMC, and Starz. Cable and Dish cost about the same now. Dish is no longer a savings at all. Plus with cable we can at least get the analog 2-78 in all the other rooms in the house with no extra cost.
     
  6. Rogueone

    Rogueone Hall Of Fame

    1,133
    0
    Jan 29, 2004
    yeah, but those 2-78 are old cable quality and not digital quality like they would be from dish or via digital cable, so the picture quality will be significantly worse :)
     
  7. Link

    Link Hall Of Fame

    1,802
    4
    Feb 1, 2004
    True its not as good, but on the bedrooms TVs and the kitchen TV it doesn't really matter much because they are smaller. Our Living Room and Family Room both have a digital box. For some reason the digital boxes make the analog channels look better than usual.
     
  8. Rraspy

    Rraspy AllStar

    70
    0
    Oct 9, 2003

    It's zero if you own your receiver and are holding on to it and not trading it in.
     
  9. BFG

    BFG Hall Of Fame

    2,118
    0
    Jan 23, 2004
    The retailer chat I watched said they were raising the additional receiver fee for HD receivers by $1.

    The lease fee was staying the same $5 for additional receivers, free leasing for 1st receiver
     
  10. Slordak

    Slordak Hall Of Fame

    1,476
    0
    Dec 17, 2003
    This is soooo screwed up, i.e. the new rates and how everywhere you look, there's a new charge being levied. This is in addition to the package rate increases! Why do all the other fees have to go up simultaneously, i.e. fees on DVRs (which are already borderline illegal), fees on leases, fees on HD receivers, etc.? It's getting to the point that adding a single receiver to an existing account with new no programming is adding an extra $15/month to the bottom line!

    I can see myself easily getting screwed on some technicality simply by moving from a 921 to a 622 and having my monthly rate go up, say, $11/month, for essentially no reason (i.e. swapping one dual-tuner HD receiver for another should have no net monthly cost change, right?).
     
  11. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,751
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    We have more heat than light at the moment.
     
  12. larrystotler

    larrystotler Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,582
    0
    Jun 6, 2004
    Someone else pointed out that if you only have 1 HD receiver, make it the primary and you won't have to pay the extra $1. That said, I saw another thread that was closed for trying to subvert the additional outlet fee on the 622. While i agree that the phone connection is needed, and that Vonage shouldn't be supported since the phone conenction is for proof of location, I haven't had a home phone in 8 years, and I disagree with that additional outlet fee in principal just like I disagree with the fact that they want to charge $1 more a month for an HD receiver as an additional receiver. If it ONLY applied ot the new ones, I could see that, but rasing it on the current ones is BS. If I can save money on my bill legally, then I will do so. Those who are pirating E* by sharing accounts should be punished, but I shouldn't be partially punsihed along with them because I choose not to have a home phone. Heck, I can now get DSL without a phone line and # (part of Verizon's buyout of MCI) and save that money, so the reasoning is less and less. Just wait till they tie the receivers to the siwthces and LNBs, and you will have to call them if you make ANY change like with WinDoZe XP and changing out a motherboard and having to reactivate it. That doesn't stop piracy. You can download a no code version of XP off the net and not have to worry about it. The people that are hurt are the end users with the kind of garbage, not the bad guys......
     
  13. kb7oeb

    kb7oeb Icon

    631
    0
    Jun 16, 2004
    Vonage works well enough for my friend to avoid the $5 fee on his 522.
     
  14. Harmeister

    Harmeister New Member

    9
    0
    Jan 6, 2006

    It works for me (vonage and a 942), so you now have first hand experience that it works.
     
  15. larrystotler

    larrystotler Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,582
    0
    Jun 6, 2004
    Yes, some people can get it to work, but E* does not want it to work because of the fact that you can move it around and still have it on a phone line. With a regualr land line, they know where it is at. Plus, once again, Vonage is useless for me since I have relied exclusively on a cell phone for 8 years and see no reason to pay $25 for something I would not use. I already get all the feature of vonage, but since I am always on the go, the cell phone is the better choice even with the higher monthly price. If I wanted a home phone, I would just get Verizon's cheapest package without long distance since I have free long distance on my cell already and can get a basic line for $12 a month.
     
  16. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,751
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    They have the POTENTIAL of knowing where it is at ... I seem to remember people 'moving' and still connecting the phone line - with E* not bothering to verify if the check in calls are coming from the service address or some other place. As long as the check ins are coming from the phone number on the account they seem happy. (E* is less worried about the location of the boxes and more worried about not having all boxes on the account at the same location.)

    Since you can port your current number over to Vonage I don't see how E* could keep track of the difference. Is 773-555-0131 a phone number served by AT&T (formerly SBC, formerly Ameritech, formerly Illinois Bell/AT&T) or a competitive reseller or Vonage? E* doesn't know.

    The only issue with Vonage is that E* receivers have modems in them that require a certain quality of service. Modems don't always work on voice quality lines. (I believe E* has improved their modems to handle poor quality lines and Vonage has improved their service to get past the VoIP quality issues.) There may also have been an issue in the past with Vonage not passing the ANI of the caller correctly (ANI is basically unblockable Caller ID that traces back to the line the call is coming from and is commonly used on toll free services to identify customers).

    If Vonage offered a service where the SAME phone number was available in multiple locations it would present a problem. Joe's Vonage box in LA and Jack's Vonage box in NY both giving the ANI of 733-555-0131 would be a bad thing. I don't believe that Vonage offers that service or plans to.
     
  17. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I wouldn't think so either... especially when you consider that it means a phone call TO that box would have to ring in multiple locations!
     
  18. invaliduser88

    invaliduser88 Welcome to Torchwood DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,602
    0
    Apr 23, 2002
    I agree, there is no justification for this. Why should you be punished if you can get good OTA reception of your local HD's?
     
  19. invaliduser88

    invaliduser88 Welcome to Torchwood DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,602
    0
    Apr 23, 2002
    If all the HD that someone cares about can be obtained OTA, why should Dish have the right to penalize them?
     
  20. invaliduser88

    invaliduser88 Welcome to Torchwood DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,602
    0
    Apr 23, 2002
    Guess I'll replace my 6000 with my mothballed 3700.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page