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

DirecTV/Viacom Dispute?


  • Please log in to reply
3057 replies to this topic

#2651 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,881 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:06 PM

A quick read on Epix at Wikipedia and I have to wonder....it kinda seems like HDNet and their sister channels.

I wonder if thats a sticking point for DirecTV, since they have such long/strong ties with HDNet.


I don't see Epix as HDNET at all. More like HBO a few years ago. Movies, some boxing, just starting series.
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

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

#2652 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:07 PM

I understand what you are saying, we're arguing semantics. . I'm just saying it can also interpreted another way. That they aren't refusing epix just refusing it at $500mm.


That is exactly what this is from what I heard today. The channel(s) aren't worth $500 million, plain and simple.


A couple of points, for those saying this is just about Epix, that is crazy talk. These things are never about one thing. Epix is part.

I'll remind some of you, who here mentioned Epix and Viacom squabble coming up two Sundays ago before it even hit the press? ;) Yours truly. It wasn't until Monday of that week it hit the papers, but those of us in the industry have known about the Viacom deal for a long time.

Rate structure is ultimately what this was about along with Netflix \ digital consumption which is a pain point for everyone in the business on the distribution side. These programmers want to give their stuff away for nothing but want the distributors to pay for them to do it. A good article in the Wall Street Journal a few days ago about this very thing.

#2653 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:07 PM

This is not really new news. They removed most of that, if not all of that around 6am eastern this morning.

Per everybodys favorite whipping boy Swanni on twitter, Directv has removed the mention of Viacom on the on screen guide.



#2654 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:08 PM

Reuters article how people are for once starting to blame the content providers, not the distributors.

PAY TV Distributors no longer seen as the bad guys

http://in.reuters.co...E8IIEFD20120718

#2655 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:13 PM

http://blog.viacom.c...o-sway-directv/. The Viacom response was there was offers for Epix, without Epix, and incentives to carry Epix.



That is what I am hearing, though DTV isn't denying that either. DTV agreed in principle to a rate (you can assume below that 30% number) to put the 17 channels (not 26 - Viacom BS there) back on the air. Viacom wants Epix included because very few majors carry Epix and they need the distribution.

Most likely Viacom wants a flat fee, like $100 million per year for a total of $500 million. The problem with those deals for distributors is the onus of the risk is entirely on them. A per subscriber model is much more preferable because then they only pay if people give a darn about the content. In a flat fee situation, DTV writes a check whether anyone buys it or not. That's not good business, though those deals do happen from time to time. I'd bet if Viacom got that number down to $25 million per year DTV would do it, but that is just a guess.

#2656 OFFLINE   Tubaman-Z

Tubaman-Z

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 511 posts
Joined: Jul 30, 2007

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:14 PM

As a REMINDER, if there is a USER who you find ANNOYING you can always add them to your IGNORE list via the USER CP.

Kevin

My top 5 wishlist: 1) Free MRV HR to HR 2) Fix Channels I Receive so that it is accurate 3) > 50 SeriesLink 4) Usage of both internal and external drives concurrently 5) Support for other video providers as DoD (i.e. Hulu, CBS)   

DirecTV HR21-200, 2008 (DirecTV anniversary gift)
DirecTV HR20-100 (2TB eSATA), 2007
DirecTV since 1995

<><


#2657 OFFLINE   onan38

onan38

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 252 posts
Joined: Jul 17, 2008

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:16 PM

The little ones are already forgetting viacom.

http://www.nytimes.c...rogramming.html

#2658 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:17 PM

While DIRECTV is registered in the US (Delaware of all places), a goodly chunk of its revenues (and some of its employees) are homed in Central and South America. Their hardware products are subcontracted from European and Asian companies operating plants in Mexico and China. You're either in the World Economy or your no longer in business.

DIRECTV is kind of like casinos: they make much better than average money off of a startling number of people that don't know when to quit. I suspect that is what some are bitter about. Others are bitter about their arguable decline in customer service as well as things that aren't within their direct control (crappy content, increase repeats).

In the end, DIRECTV continues to raise their rates consistently at the same time that they are bemoaning the declining value of the content that they deliver.


I don't disagree that they have business interests elsewhere, but they are still an American company that employs American people that pay American taxes. It used to be a good thing for American companies to make a profit, sadly many people now are anti American companies which is really sad.

DTV has to raise their rates to keep up with the increase cost of the programming, of course they are going to bemoan that because at the end of the day few are blaming Disney, Viacom, NFL, etc, they are blaming Comcast, Time Warner, Dish, etc. They have every right to bemoan, especially when these content providers then go and sell the very same content for nothing on Netflix or somewhere else. Eventually that is going to bite them very hard where enough people leave the pay tv guys but the content online generates almost no revenue and then everyone is screwed. No content, no money, no subscribers.

#2659 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:18 PM

everyone has to be right once in a while. Just the law of averages.

Also - media outlets are saying talks have broken down. Just saw it in the LA Times.
http://www.latimes.c...0,4060953.story


A broken clock is more accurate than Swanni, and that is no exaggeration.

#2660 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:21 PM

I have question: Directv signs a contract for x amount of $ to carry lets say HBO channels x amount of years.Directv pays the money for the contract regardless of how many subs pay extra for those channels. Directv makes $ trying to get more subs to pay for HBO and pockets anything over the contract amount. Am i right or close?


DTV pays HBO based on the number of subs that sign up for HBO. The risk, therefore, is shared by HBO and DTV. So to answer your question, you aren't right or close. :D

What Viacom is likely asking for is a big check for $500 million and then tells DTV to do whatever they want with the programming, but all the risk is on DTV to find a way to get the money back. DTV would be stupid to sign up for that, then again Viacom is the same outfit saying 17 = 26 so I wouldn't put anything past them.

#2661 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:22 PM

this is going to drag on at least another 7-10 days.
and if another provider does not meet my needs I dump them too.
I hold no loyalty to a company, I owe them nothing.

if I get through to them we'll see, I will be sending some equipment back no matter what.



I'll take a wager on that. 48 hours, tops. Tipping point today. Deal was basically done, Viacom went public with the Epix stuff, DTV called BS. Viacom is getting absolutely obliterated in the ratings right now. OBLITERATED and it is costing them dearly.

48 hours.

#2662 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:24 PM

Interesting article. Once people learn this is just endless game with these distributors, they will learn to stop changing companies just to get channels.

Reuters article how people are for once starting to blame the content providers, not the distributors.

PAY TV Distributors no longer seen as the bad guys

http://in.reuters.co...E8IIEFD20120718



#2663 OFFLINE   ChicagoBlue

ChicagoBlue

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 303 posts
Joined: Apr 28, 2011

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:25 PM

This EPIX battle PROVES thast DIRECTV does not give a dang about what the CUSTOMER WANTS.

You have out of touch executives telling us what channels we will get, they never send out electronic surveys and/or paper ones with ALL NATIONAL CHANNELS they do not carry and ask the CUSTOMER (WHO PAYS THEIR SALARY) WHAT CHANNELS WE WANT and then add some of them yearly.

I belive if you are A NATIONWIDE provider of video service you MUST CARRY EVERY AVAILABLE NATIONAL CABLE CHANNEL.


You wouldn't stay in business very long. Don't you think there is a reason that NO NATIONAL PROVIDER HAS IT ALL? Cost my friend. Cost. If there was a true a la carte model, you would be right, but their isn't because the content providers don't want that.

#2664 OFFLINE   cjrleimer

cjrleimer

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 481 posts
Joined: Nov 16, 2004

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:25 PM

The little ones are already forgetting viacom.

http://www.nytimes.c...rogramming.html



Oh the joy of competition. Of course we have a bunch of media conglomorates in America.

#2665 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:28 PM

I suspect the offer they wanted to get was the one with the extra incentives in it they cheapened the price of what we have, but in return they needed to pay 500 million for Epix. I suspect every deal without that station had the current stations costing a lot more than that offer did.

That is what I am hearing, though DTV isn't denying that either. DTV agreed in principle to a rate (you can assume below that 30% number) to put the 17 channels (not 26 - Viacom BS there) back on the air. Viacom wants Epix included because very few majors carry Epix and they need the distribution.

Most likely Viacom wants a flat fee, like $100 million per year for a total of $500 million. The problem with those deals for distributors is the onus of the risk is entirely on them. A per subscriber model is much more preferable because then they only pay if people give a darn about the content. In a flat fee situation, DTV writes a check whether anyone buys it or not. That's not good business, though those deals do happen from time to time. I'd bet if Viacom got that number down to $25 million per year DTV would do it, but that is just a guess.



#2666 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:33 PM

I wish I was as optimistic as you are, but I think it will probably be next week at the earliest. I think, if Viacom is telling anything true, the talks probably did break down so to speak. I had seen one article in the last 24 hours state they went back to the drawing board. I think certain issues are keeping them far enough apart that Viacom isn't desperate enough to make a deal yet. If they were, it would have happened by now and not more arguing back and fourth about who is telling the truth.

I'll take a wager on that. 48 hours, tops. Tipping point today. Deal was basically done, Viacom went public with the Epix stuff, DTV called BS. Viacom is getting absolutely obliterated in the ratings right now. OBLITERATED and it is costing them dearly.

48 hours.



#2667 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:36 PM

It sounds more like the setup that they have probably for NFL Sunday Ticket, which is why in the past it had cost those who purchased the package so much to get it.

DTV pays HBO based on the number of subs that sign up for HBO. The risk, therefore, is shared by HBO and DTV. So to answer your question, you aren't right or close. :D

What Viacom is likely asking for is a big check for $500 million and then tells DTV to do whatever they want with the programming, but all the risk is on DTV to find a way to get the money back. DTV would be stupid to sign up for that, then again Viacom is the same outfit saying 17 = 26 so I wouldn't put anything past them.



#2668 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:40 PM

I could live with that, but I think would kind of be fun to try out for a trial run to see what it was like.

No more Viacom channels ever again.



#2669 OFFLINE   The_Geyser

The_Geyser

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 167 posts
Joined: Nov 21, 2005

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:00 PM

I don't miss these channels at all!

#2670 OFFLINE   darkpowrjd

darkpowrjd

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 43 posts
Joined: Jul 10, 2012

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:01 PM

I'll take a wager on that. 48 hours, tops. Tipping point today. Deal was basically done, Viacom went public with the Epix stuff, DTV called BS. Viacom is getting absolutely obliterated in the ratings right now. OBLITERATED and it is costing them dearly.

48 hours.


I don't know. Viacom DID get DTV to admit that Epix was the issue (it was DTV that brought Epix up first, not Viacom), one way or another. Now everyone on the Facebook page is commenting about the channel itself as it relates to this ordeal. I think people are going to be willing to at least have a trial of the channel to see if it's actually worth it. I would agree that DTV should at least let us see the channel to and let us make up our own minds on it. It wouldn't be practical or fair for them to refuse to add it period without seeing it first. Not understanding how people are saying "we don't want it" without seeing what it is first or what they show on it. I'm hoping, again, that this doesn't become DTV saying "we don't care for the channel, so don't include it or we don't deal" like they did with G4.

Honestly, too, I'm beginning to think this might've not been the first time Viacom has tried to get Epix up there with no avail. If so, and this keeps going, I'm going to think that public opinion might go in Viacom's favor. Though the greedy ******* thing will stay, people could see DTV's stubbornness to add a channel even when people might be willing to let them come to a middle ground compromise about the price of it work against them. Remember that others might see that DTV is unwilling to compromise and is too hard nosed, and might not even bother to negotiate with them. DTV is in a tough boat, too, if this keeps going.

I wouldn't mind having Spike TV back so I can see how "improved" TNA is, myself. And I'm willing to try out Epix if they do add it. I don't want DTV to force us to either have the channel or to go without. Do the ala carte thing like the Sony Movie Channel package thing (don't know the name of it) where, if you want it, you can pay an extra, say, $5/month to have it, and if you don't want to, then you don't have to and can pay the same thing you do now. Viacom gets paid what they want, but then DTV can turn around and make a profit out of those that want Epix (assuming they can). Everyone wins.

But yeah, I think momentum switch to Viacom a bit because now the Epix thing is out in the open, enough for people to be curious about it.

#2671 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,881 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:08 PM

I suspect the offer they wanted to get was the one with the extra incentives in it they cheapened the price of what we have, but in return they needed to pay 500 million for Epix. I suspect every deal without that station had the current stations costing a lot more than that offer did.


I am sure.
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#2672 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:11 PM

As long as they are not losing a lot of subscribers, the momentum will be in Directv's hands. Advertisers and ratings on Viacom's channels are putting pressure on them to get it done faster than the dropping of Directv is by a few.

I don't know. Viacom DID get DTV to admit that Epix was the issue (it was DTV that brought Epix up first, not Viacom), one way or another. Now everyone on the Facebook page is commenting about the channel itself as it relates to this ordeal. I think people are going to be willing to at least have a trial of the channel to see if it's actually worth it. I would agree that DTV should at least let us see the channel to and let us make up our own minds on it. It wouldn't be practical or fair for them to refuse to add it period without seeing it first. Not understanding how people are saying "we don't want it" without seeing what it is first or what they show on it. I'm hoping, again, that this doesn't become DTV saying "we don't care for the channel, so don't include it or we don't deal" like they did with G4.

Honestly, too, I'm beginning to think this might've not been the first time Viacom has tried to get Epix up there with no avail. If so, and this keeps going, I'm going to think that public opinion might go in Viacom's favor. Though the greedy ******* thing will stay, people could see DTV's stubbornness to add a channel even when people might be willing to let them come to a middle ground compromise about the price of it work against them. Remember that others might see that DTV is unwilling to compromise and is too hard nosed, and might not even bother to negotiate with them. DTV is in a tough boat, too, if this keeps going.

I wouldn't mind having Spike TV back so I can see how "improved" TNA is, myself. And I'm willing to try out Epix if they do add it. I don't want DTV to force us to either have the channel or to go without. Do the ala carte thing like the Sony Movie Channel package thing (don't know the name of it) where, if you want it, you can pay an extra, say, $5/month to have it, and if you don't want to, then you don't have to and can pay the same thing you do now. Viacom gets paid what they want, but then DTV can turn around and make a profit out of those that want Epix (assuming they can). Everyone wins.

But yeah, I think momentum switch to Viacom a bit because now the Epix thing is out in the open, enough for people to be curious about it.



#2673 OFFLINE   onan38

onan38

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 252 posts
Joined: Jul 17, 2008

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:12 PM

Epix schedule.

http://www.epixhd.co...annel/schedule/

#2674 OFFLINE   darkpowrjd

darkpowrjd

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 43 posts
Joined: Jul 10, 2012

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:13 PM

As long as they are not losing a lot of subscribers, the momentum will be in Directv's hands. Advertisers and ratings on Viacom's channels are putting pressure on them to get it done faster than the dropping of Directv is by a few.


I was only thinking about public opinion, and what they might want DTV to do (stand firm or give Viacom what they want to have).

#2675 OFFLINE   Mariah2014

Mariah2014

    Breaking the mold

  • Registered
  • 836 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in Washington
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:16 PM

I think the only thing public opinion is doing is helping keep the topic important to both companies, where as versus kind of got left alone for awhile tell comcast and directv decided to deal again.

I was only thinking about public opinion, and what they might want DTV to do (stand firm or give Viacom what they want to have).






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