Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

My current conversation with Sky Angel


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   quiverof8

quiverof8

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 137 posts
Joined: Apr 05, 2007

Posted 03 February 2008 - 02:00 PM

Lifetimers didn't put them out of DBS, but rather enable them to move on to IPTV. In fact by selling the DBS licenses it appears we have now helped to fund IPTV :(

Why did I pay for lifetime? both to help skyangel and give them a chance as I believe in their original vision as well as a good deal for myself. It helped more than I could imagine as my husband became disabled and its the only tv service we have.

its not a matter of who can afford what though. Those who have multiple satellite programing still have a right to complain. it just hits some harder when its their only service and/or a fixed income.

I think lifetimers cut them a break over the years, not demanding the launch in 2002, etc. trusting that sky angel would honor their word.

Teach onyone a lesson? No I just wanted to know if those who are pro IPTV were lifetimers. Honestly don't feel they should have a say in the outcome if they didn't support the lifetime program.

could it be time for those who want to fight this to do something pro active, be it a web site, yahoo group, or magazine ad?

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#22 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,301 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 03 February 2008 - 02:48 PM

The only people who 'have a say' in this matter are the board of directors at SkyAngel.
Not ANY internet board or site. :)


Perhaps it is fair to say that those who overlooked SkyAngel's actions in the past and failed to hold them accountable were an encouragement to the board ... they were allowed to be unfaithful in "small" things - and it expanded to the complete shutdown of the big thing.

Then again, it seems that the board followed it's own council ... and not the council of it's subscribers, whether they be lifetime or monthly subscribers via the "Viewer Advisory Board" or public internet sites (even their own public forum, which was shut down when they could not handle the complaints).

#23 OFFLINE   Jashobeam

Jashobeam

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 79 posts
Joined: Jul 10, 2005

Posted 03 February 2008 - 03:05 PM

could it be time for those who want to fight this to do something pro active, be it a web site, yahoo group, or magazine ad?


Magazine ad? You do realize there are very few people in the US who have ever even heard of SA. Out of those few, probably less than 1% subscribed to SA either lifetime or monthly. Out of those probably less than 10% even care SA is moving to IPTV. You can take out a national mag ad and MAYBE reach one person in the whole US who reads that ad, and also has a lifetime sub and who would want to be in contact with other disgruntled SA lifetime subs.

#24 OFFLINE   FTA Michael

FTA Michael

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,474 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2002

Posted 03 February 2008 - 04:12 PM

WOW! Michael, some of us sure have a different way of dealing with companies that treat us wrong.

Yeah, I read it in a book. Some guy told his followers to do that whole dust from the sandals thing.

#25 OFFLINE   quiverof8

quiverof8

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 137 posts
Joined: Apr 05, 2007

Posted 03 February 2008 - 08:22 PM

How did most subscribers hear about sky angel in the first place? they had ads in christian magazines. that where you will find current or former subscribers.

#26 OFFLINE   BusyMommyof8

BusyMommyof8

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 25 posts
Joined: Nov 22, 2005

Posted 04 February 2008 - 01:40 AM

Yeah, I read it in a book. Some guy told his followers to do that whole dust from the sandals thing.


Me too. Looking at fta but without $$ it's simply window shopping. It's a sad state of affairs. :hair:
To whomever was asking about those who looked the other way while SA twisted the truth for the last x number of years and whatever, I emailed them on a number of occasions. The first time simply expressing my opinion that the religious programing skirmish with DISH was not furthering the Gospel IMHO. The second time was when they sued. I told them they should consider how it looked from the outside to see them behaving just like the rest of the business world.
What seemed like a fantastic vision and almost too good to be true is still a fantastic vision but alas, really was too good to be true.

God bless,
Cindy
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed here are not those of my employer, my kids, my best gurls, or myself... But they are the opinions of Elvis as revealed to me through the medium of my pet hamster, Lee Harvey Oswald...

#27 OFFLINE   Cloud88

Cloud88

    Cool Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 15 posts
Joined: Jan 30, 2008

Posted 04 February 2008 - 04:28 AM

Cloud88, this is all part of your "current conversation with SkyAngel".
We're not going to have multiple threads on the same issue.


I agree with you. Thanks.

#28 OFFLINE   dahenny

dahenny

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 220 posts
Joined: Apr 16, 2007

Posted 04 February 2008 - 09:16 AM

Me too. Looking at fta but without $$ it's simply window shopping. It's a sad state of affairs. :hair:
To whomever was asking about those who looked the other way while SA twisted the truth for the last x number of years and whatever, I emailed them on a number of occasions. The first time simply expressing my opinion that the religious programing skirmish with DISH was not furthering the Gospel IMHO. The second time was when they sued. I told them they should consider how it looked from the outside to see them behaving just like the rest of the business world.
What seemed like a fantastic vision and almost too good to be true is still a fantastic vision but alas, really was too good to be true.

God bless,
Cindy


E* just happened to get caught in the middle of the whole DayStar/Dominion controversy. E* wasn't completely innocent though. I really believe that SA acted in a very upright manner with Daystar and E*.

A lot of ppl just don't know any details and accuse SA of bad behavior. SA did everything they could privately to resolve the matter. Even the address of the web page was non-published. BTW, the web page wasn't created until after Daystar went public.

I've always liked Daystar, buy they were extremely dishonest in the whole affair. They went public and accused SA of everything in the book.

DS (Daystar) made a deal with E* because they hated not being in more homes thru SA. In their quest to be nationwide, they tried to convince everyone that they were NOT religious, but educational, so that they could get a classification of Public Access/Interest/Educational, or whatever the channels are called.

I agree with you Mom of 8 that SA did not further the cause, but E* signed a non-compete clause and I (IMO) don't think that they had a choice but to seek remedy.

For folks to accuse SA of un-Christlike behavior in the past just don't know. The current IPTV/lifers saga is a whole different animal though.

I sincerely wish SA success, and have released them from becoming a root of bitterness in me. I will not be along for the ride though. Jip me once, shame on you. Jip me twice, shame on me.

#29 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,301 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 04 February 2008 - 10:56 AM

... but E* signed a non-compete clause and I (IMO) don't think that they had a choice but to seek remedy.

My main concern with the non-compete was that SkyAngel signed it. SkyAngel made a decision when they became a satellite system to block another carrier from any expansion of their religious channels. Daystar was on DISH at the time and left for SkyAngel (reducing their distribution). If they would have simply stayed with DISH (like TBN did) the lawsuit would have had no merit. In the end, even after that black eye lawsuit Daystar ended up back on DISH - so who won?

SkyAngel's actions were like as if Family Christian Stores made a deal with WalMart to keep religious products out of WalMart's stores. It is a deal that, IMHO, should never have been signed by SkyAngel. Obviously they signed it to protect their territory and prevent E* from simply uplinking the same channels and undercutting SkyAngel's price. It was a wise business decision. I'm just not convinced it was a wise kingdom decision. But that's another topic.

I sincerely wish SA success, and have released them from becoming a root of bitterness in me.

The best statement in the entire forum.

#30 OFFLINE   Jashobeam

Jashobeam

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 79 posts
Joined: Jul 10, 2005

Posted 04 February 2008 - 02:17 PM

How did most subscribers hear about sky angel in the first place? they had ads in christian magazines. that where you will find current or former subscribers.


Nope, we heard of it word of mouth. We don't read Christian magazines, or any magazines in fact.

#31 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,301 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 04 February 2008 - 05:04 PM

Evie told me about it! :)

I would not be surprised to find out than nearly every customer was signed up through word of mouth (including dealers). Yes, SkyAngel advertised via magazines ... but I don't see it accounting for a major part of their subscription base.

#32 OFFLINE   BusyMommyof8

BusyMommyof8

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 25 posts
Joined: Nov 22, 2005

Posted 05 February 2008 - 07:29 AM

Evie told me about it! :)

I would not be surprised to find out than nearly every customer was signed up through word of mouth (including dealers). Yes, SkyAngel advertised via magazines ... but I don't see it accounting for a major part of their subscription base.


I first read an ad in Charisma magazine and called the toll free number for more info. Then I got online and researched everything. I have 50+ pages printed from their website. I wanted to be sure I was spending my small inheritance from my beloved Grandmother in a wise and thrifty manner. Basically, I wanted to make sure it wasn't a PTL type scam. I wanted to be sure that Lifetime meant Lifetime.
Oh well.
Have a blessed day!
Cindy
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed here are not those of my employer, my kids, my best gurls, or myself... But they are the opinions of Elvis as revealed to me through the medium of my pet hamster, Lee Harvey Oswald...

#33 OFFLINE   ragamuffin

ragamuffin

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 8 posts
Joined: Feb 14, 2008

Posted 14 February 2008 - 02:06 AM

take another look at the letter, it also has no date......

I wrote too, if this fails, shouldn't we get a class action lawsuit?

fine print may be on their side, but common sense and fair play are on our side

.....it's also extremly impractical for them to anger all the lifetime subscribers, currently few people don't know about SA, but after this, they will have be more well know, but in a bad way.

it's bad all the way around, for lifetimers and for SA

I too received the letter from SkyAngel regarding the wrongful termination of lifetime subscribers. How peculiar: I noticed that in their letter they sent, it had no return address and no phone number. In other words, no way to contact them. How many business have you seen that send you a letter with no return address or contact phone number? Only the envelope contained a return address.

Doesn't this smell fishy to you? Anyway, here's their address for you Lifetime Subscribers if you feel you want to write to them:

Attn: Rob Johnson, CEO
Dominion Sky Angel
3050 Horseshoe Dr. N, Ste 290
Naples, FL 34104-7910


Sky Angel
P.O. Box 7609
Naples, FL 34101

I sent them a letter telling them that they must complete their obligation to us lifetime subscribers.

Bye.



#34 OFFLINE   ragamuffin

ragamuffin

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 8 posts
Joined: Feb 14, 2008

Posted 14 February 2008 - 02:32 AM

We want fair treatment
We signed up for a lifetime membership with Sky Angel programming.

If we have to buy new equipment to receive the signal that is one thing,

But this is not much more than signing up a bunch of people for a lifetime membership for a health club, closing that one and opening a new club.

If Sky Angel went under, that would be one thing, but they aren't going under, they are only transmitting their signal another way
That SA is going to use a more cost effective method to transmit their programming should not alter our memberships.

If it take a lawsuit to get SA to fulfill their commitment, that is because we are forced to.

If someone is negligent and runs their car into you, you do not seek to have your car repaired because you want vengeance, you want your car fixed or replaced and compensation for your bodily injury.

Am I to assume if a drunk driver totaled your car you would not get an attorney because you only wanted vengeance?











SkyAngel does not have the ability to force EchoStar to carry their signals.

SkyAngel signed a specific deal with EchoStar, for TEMPORARY use of the EchoStar 3 satellite. Now over 10 years later EchoStar 3 IS being taken out of service and per the terms of the contract they signed WILL no longer be available for their use.

Without EchoStar's satellite SkyAngel would have never been a satellite service in the first place. SkyAngel NEVER met an FCC construction deadline, built a satellite or built an uplink center. They got waivers from the FCC to use a satellite that was not theirs. Ten years later they have no satellite.

Unless EchoStar made the CHOICE to offer SkyAngel space on a new satellite (cooperation that should not be expected in light of all the trouble that SkyAngel gave them as a tenant) it is true that their only other option was to get their own satellite. Perhaps they could have bought one used, but there are not that many out there. Probably the best deal for them would be to get DirecTV to lease them a satellite - which would have bumped DISH off of several transponders. But for that to work DirecTV would have to be interested.

You have to have a satellite to be a satellite company and there is only two ways to get a satellite ... buy one or lease one. Both options require MONEY. SkyAngel should consider itself blessed that they had the opportunity to be on E3 at 61.5° for the past 10 years. Having basically free satellite carriage for 10 years is NOT typical.

In a couple of months SkyAngel will be off the bird closely followed by the bird being put out to pasture. These are facts that SkyAngel cannot change. We've seen them 'spin' the truth for the past 10 years. Many turned a blind eye to it - as long as their personal needs were served. Now SkyAngel isn't going to serve their personal needs (by no longer being free or no longer being satellite) the noise level has risen.

Have fun with your class action suits ... although it seems that the only point of suing is vengance. Putting them completely out of business and punishing those involved? Isn't that Someone Else's job?

At any rate, I'm not sure we're even discussing the SkyAngel DBS service anymore. No one can sign up for the service and nobody anywhere seems to be discussing the channels themselves (only the impending doom).



#35 OFFLINE   Jashobeam

Jashobeam

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 79 posts
Joined: Jul 10, 2005

Posted 14 February 2008 - 09:32 AM

Fine print is common sense. It's called an explanation of the contract. When SA put in the fine print that they could change programming and service at any time and you didn't call and cancel your subscription, you agreed to those terms. You hate fine print? Never buy a car, house or even a box of crackers. They all have fine print.

#36 OFFLINE   quiverof8

quiverof8

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 137 posts
Joined: Apr 05, 2007

Posted 14 February 2008 - 08:54 PM

they never mailed lifetimers updated terms. those terms of service clearly applied to monthly subs, not lifetime members.

No matter what "deal" they had with echostar they had a separate "deal" with its members. that included launching a new satellite by 2002!

#37 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,301 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 14 February 2008 - 09:02 PM

The 2002 "terms" posted here in December included:

The SkyAngel lifelong subscription entitles you to receive all of the SkyAngel channels which are a part of the basic Sky Angel package of programming, including special events, as modified from time to time, with no additional charge or monthly fee. You also have access to future pay-per-view, special pay channels, and distance learning that may be carried on the SkyAngel system, however, there would be various additional charges for some of these specialized services. Programming, channels, number of channels, pricing and schedules are subject to change without notice.


They labeled the religious channels as "basic" and called the expensive (non-free) secular additions a specialized service and asked for $5 more.

#38 OFFLINE   quiverof8

quiverof8

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 137 posts
Joined: Apr 05, 2007

Posted 15 February 2008 - 12:16 AM

Only problem with that logic is that there were NOT 2 different packages for monthly subs. There was one basic package, $14.99, NOT 2. In order for there to truly be a multiple package service monthly subs would have also had to pay extra for the "secular/special" channels. I know of a few who wanted to opt out and sky angle told them "no".

I was told, and it was originally advertised that any additional channels added later would be included at no charge. I just wish someone could find an old tape of the sky angle ads for lifetime subs...

#39 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,301 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 15 February 2008 - 12:35 AM

True, SkyAngel did not offer the basic religious channel only service to monthly/annual subscribers. Those who were not lifelong members were required to immediately pay for the secular channels regardless of offensive content or duplication by other service providers. SkyAngel wronged the non-lifelong subscribers when they dropped religious channels for secular as well.

But alas, we live in a world where "Programming, channels, number of channels, pricing and schedules are subject to change without notice."

#40 OFFLINE   Cloud88

Cloud88

    Cool Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 15 posts
Joined: Jan 30, 2008

Posted 05 March 2008 - 01:07 AM

Well, everybody, I've read your emails, and I see it's a tug-of-war regarding opinions. As I see it, Sky Angel, offered a VERBAL and VISUAL contract to anyone who would accept it. "Pay $399.00, and you will HAVE Sky Angel for a lifetime."
Period. I said, P-E-R-I-O-D !!

Sky Angel didn't ad contractual clauses like "If a new technology comes along, we might switch. Therefore, your contract will end".

They didn't say that. To this day, Sky Angel says, "It was for the LIFETIME of the sattelite."

Well, guess what? THE SATTELITE STILL HAS LIFE !!!!

It seems Sky Angel wants to change to CHEAPER Iptv, and drop the Lifers to boot. What needs to be done is the old Infomercials need to be re-examined.

Bye.




Protected By... spam firewall...And...