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

Sinclair Status: Resolved

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by compubit, Jul 31, 2005.

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

    compubit AllStar/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    143
    0
    Jun 8, 2004
    Per the Sinclair Website: You won't be losing you Sinclair stations on Dish...

    http://www.sbgi.net/misc/dish.shtml

    Jim
     
  2. BFG

    BFG Hall Of Fame

    2,118
    0
    Jan 23, 2004
    But that page says folks will only continue to receive the quality programming. So what will they be getting? :D
     
  3. Aug 1, 2005 #3 of 23
    JohnH

    JohnH Hall Of Fame

    7,802
    0
    Apr 22, 2002
    A long term agreement. :)
     
  4. Aug 1, 2005 #4 of 23
    JonBlack

    JonBlack Legend

    190
    0
    Feb 24, 2005
    Good news for those affected by this! :)
     
  5. Aug 1, 2005 #5 of 23
    kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    Who caved in?
     
  6. Aug 1, 2005 #6 of 23
    Slamminc11

    Slamminc11 Hall Of Fame

    1,347
    12
    Jan 27, 2005
    Really doesn't matter because according to the people around here, no matter what it will be Charlie that caved. Even if he had gotten a deal where he didn't have to pay sinclair a dime to carry the channels, you would still get people around here pissed at him for not making a deal to where sinclair ended up paying their bill for them. So I guess your question is rather moot! :nono2:
     
  7. Aug 1, 2005 #7 of 23
    TNGTony

    TNGTony Hall Of Fame

    5,345
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    LOL! I censored myself earlier today from saying the same thing. :)

    See ya
    Tony
     
  8. Aug 1, 2005 #8 of 23
    James Long

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

    45,749
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    It is not legal for stations to pay to be carried. So the best case scenario for E* would be not having to pay Sinclair a dime.

    JL
     
  9. Aug 1, 2005 #9 of 23
    juan ellitinez

    juan ellitinez Icon/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,982
    0
    Jan 31, 2003
    How do Home Shopping stations(that are broadcast on regular tv stations) get around that law ? They seem to get very good channel posistions. Atleast on the comcast system in my neighbehood
     
  10. TNGTony

    TNGTony Hall Of Fame

    5,345
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Local channels that have shopping networks cannot be charged to be carried. HOWEVER...the national shopping channel can make a deal with the cable and satellite companies to bypass the local channel. Satellite and cable companies can charge satellite channels for carriage. It's local channels that they cannot charge.

    See ya
    Tony
     
  11. James Long

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

    45,749
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The channel placement rules are different for cable. It is possible that they were cable channels before they were broadcast. It is possible they got "good placement" when they were real channels. :) IIRC broadcast stations cannot pay cable for carriage either. My comments were based on satellite carriage of locals.

    Satellite and cable CAN charge stations the cost of getting the signal to the point of presence / headend. Generally that is done over the air. If the stations OTA signal isn't received good enough to be carried and stations still want carriage (or if they want their signal to be clearer than OTA would be) the stations can pay. But that is not for carriage itself.

    JL
     
  12. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I think you are about half right...

    Because there will also be a bunch of people who would blame Charlie if the channels went away, but next time the price increases they will blame him for paying more to keep channels.

    He will not win for losing.
     
  13. Slamminc11

    Slamminc11 Hall Of Fame

    1,347
    12
    Jan 27, 2005
    Maybe if Charlie played the game like some people suggest here. You b*tch about the service, the cost, the channels then shut them off. Terminate the contract and send them on their way. I bet that would shut them up! :hurah: :eek2: :lol:
     
  14. BobMurdoch

    BobMurdoch Hall Of Fame

    4,009
    0
    Apr 24, 2002
    I'm guessing Sinclair caved. Charlie's rep for switching off the stations may be bearing fruit after all......

    With most of the channels in reruns, Charlie could have gone weeks with the screams being only half as loud as normal when they went dark....
     
  15. UHF

    UHF AllStar

    64
    0
    Jan 10, 2005
    Sinclair is looking to charge cable 50 cents per sub to carry the digital channels. They never said what they wanted for their analog to be carried on Dish, but if I had to guess, I would say 50 cents a sub. It would be a ripoff at half that price.
     
  16. garn9173

    garn9173 Icon

    530
    2
    Apr 4, 2005
    Just wondering if there will be a time when a station's HD feed will become "must carry" for the cable companies?

    Sinclair owns the Fox affiliate in DSM and at the time of the Super Bowl, Sinclair was playing hard ball with Mediacom about the carriage of FOX HD and to this day, FOX HD isn't on Mediacom.

     
  17. UHF

    UHF AllStar

    64
    0
    Jan 10, 2005
    I don't believe there is any HD must carry, or at least not before the analog sunset date. I do know that there is no must carry for the full ATSC stream, meaning that cable companies will never be required to carry a stations full multicast stream if they have subchannels.

    Sinclair owns the CBS in Cedar Rapids/Waterloo also, and manages the FOX station in the market via a local marketing agreement.
     
  18. BFG

    BFG Hall Of Fame

    2,118
    0
    Jan 23, 2004
    Except that this has nothing to do with must carry.

    Must carry is where cable must carry a channel without the cable company charging the station for them to be carried.

    Must carry is not a station forcing a cable company to pay their station $X amount and making them pay and carry them
     
  19. James Long

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

    45,749
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Sorry Bryan, but you are not correct.
    The station CANNOT be charged to be carried. Period. End that thought!

    Must Carry is the way that the station forces the cable system or satellite provider's system to carry their signal. A station that chooses must carry cannot charge the cable/satellite system. They DO have to provide a useable signal to the headend/point of presence.

    (On cable a certain number of channels must be set aside for locals depending on the total number of channels carried. If the cable system has met the quota they don't have to carry all the must carry stations. On satellite if the provider carries any station in a local market they must carry all, regardless of how many other local channels they are carrying. Certain stations do not qualify for must carry.)

    The other option stations may elect is Consent to Carry - this is the one where they refuse to allow cable/satellite to carry their signal without payment from the cable/satellite provider. Stations may elect Must Carry or Consent to Carry on a per provider basis - in otherwords they could be Consent to Carry on one provider and Must Carry on another.

    JL
     
  20. BFG

    BFG Hall Of Fame

    2,118
    0
    Jan 23, 2004
    Myabe it was bad wording but that's exactly what I said...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page