He also made this statement which might make some Dish subs upset:
Maybe that's why Dish doesn't carry the NYC RSN channels
It only makes Dish customers upset because it is out of context... I've seen several news outlets quoting snippets from Charlie out of the conference call... but I finally found a transcript of the call which reads entirely different in context!
All quotes below are from Charlie in the conference call and sheds light on several things we have discussed in addition to clarifying the farmers vs zombies quote...
"So then you look at AMC and you look at the fact that -- the critically acclaimed series are critically acclaimed, and I don't want to take anything away from them. But our -- they're critically acclaimed, but they're not viewed as much by our particular audience as one might believe based on the critical acclaim that the channel gets. It's kind of like a movie gets critical acclaim and then does $12 million at the box office. I mean, that's great that it won Academy Awards, but only did $12 million.
"And then the third thing is, that when our customers can go to iTunes or get Mad Men the same time it's on, the economics is we could pay for every customer -- we could pay -- for every customer who would watch Mad Men, we could pay their entire iTunes bill and it would be cheaper than burdening our customers who don't watch those channels with that cost.
"Our customers -- just read the blogs. Go read -- our customers are not looking at zombies in New York City. They live in farms and ranches. They have no clue about zombies in New York City marching around saying where is my AMC? I mean, they're watching a Saturday night movie with their husband or their wife or their kids with no commercials, and they're ecstatic, and their price didn't go up.
"Well, there's a lot of -- there is a lot of disconnect between Nielsen and our customers. I can't speak to anybody else. But it's not a huge issue with most of our providers today, as long as they don't make us -- as long as we're not forced to carry channels we don't want to carry, right? So obviously, AMC discussion might have gone a different way if IFC, Sundance and WE weren't in the equation, right, because then you can talk about value of one particular thing versus the value of 4 channels.
"Full article here
In summation then...
1. Charlie wasn't insulting Dish customers... he was saying that he doubted most Dish customers knew about the zombie thing in NY promoting Walking Dead. I have to say, I like the Walking Dead and I didn't know about this zombie march until well after the fact myself!
2. Charlie says the AMC programming is good, but not getting the viewers that some other programming does... and value/price is tied as much to the eyeballs as it is the quality. This is not new, you see it all over movies/tv where quality programs don't make the money that inferior product does.
3. Charlie says the AMC negotiation would be completely different if he could take just AMC and not also be forced to take IFC, We, etc. that nobody was screaming for... We have speculated this, and here it is from the horse's mouth... AMC might still be on Dish IF Dish could negotiate for AMC independent of the other channels.
4. Charlie explains the rationale behind the offers to pay people's iTunes (and probably the Rokus as well) that it is actually cheaper to do that than pay what AMC wanted for all the channels, including ones nobody wants that badly.