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

Gannett Hopping Mad Over 'Hopper' -- Longterm agreement reached!


  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#151 OFFLINE   FTA Michael

FTA Michael

    Hall Of Fame

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

Posted 08 October 2012 - 12:28 PM

Reuters quotes some unnamed Gannett bigwig as saying that Hopper wasn't the main sticking point. What, this wasn't a principled stand to preserve long-term profitability, and it was all about the retransmission fees? :lol:

http://www.reuters.c...E89403I20121008

Bonus: This weekend was the 20th anniversary of the law requiring cable companies to pay for retransmission consent. http://www.tvnewsche...retrans-consent

Edited by FTA Michael, 08 October 2012 - 12:31 PM.
Added ironic bonus note

Yes, FTABlog is active again. Why do you ask?

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

#152 OFFLINE   domingos35

domingos35

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 536 posts
Joined: Jan 11, 2006

Posted 08 October 2012 - 01:08 PM

http://www.fool.com/...reach-deal.aspx

#153 OFFLINE   Nick

Nick

    Keep going - don't give up!

  • Topic Starter
  • DBSTalk Club
  • 21,451 posts
  • LocationThe Beautiful Golden Isles of Georgia
Joined: Apr 23, 2002

Posted 08 October 2012 - 01:12 PM

The essence...

"...The companies have not disclosed the value or terms of the deal, but the Autohopper feature will remain for Dish customers."

.


~ 13 Years on DBSTalk ~
Charter Gold Club Member
DBSTalk Club ~ 21k Club
Top 10 Poster

.


#154 OFFLINE   TBoneit

TBoneit

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,292 posts
Joined: Jul 27, 2006

Posted 08 October 2012 - 01:45 PM

Have you seen an episode of bones ?(among others) lately? If so, that's part of what will happen. :D


At the present time that is just FOX grabbing everything it can, much like the fees it started charging it's affiliates for every subscriber that the affiliate gets revenue for from the cable & satellite companies.

Of the networks FOX is the worst for the way they interact with viewers.

And Yes the blatant plugs on episodes of Bones are way over the top.
Remember when your kids were the TV set's remote control?

#155 OFFLINE   RasputinAXP

RasputinAXP

    Kwisatz Haderach of Cordcuttery

  • Registered
  • 3,141 posts
Joined: Jan 23, 2008

Posted 08 October 2012 - 02:56 PM

So where the blue blazes is Hoosier to come and tell us we're all going to burn for having Autohop?

"Belligerent and numerous."

SlingTV, Tablo and Plex to Roku 3s and Chromecasts on a Vizio 42" in the living room and a Toshiba 32" in my bedroom. Xbox 360 client on a Westinghouse 42" in the game room. Tablets EVERYWHERE!

 

I used to update the Dish Network FAQ but not anymore.


#156 OFFLINE   satcrazy

satcrazy

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 887 posts
  • LocationGreat lakes, NW Pa.
Joined: Mar 15, 2011

Posted 08 October 2012 - 04:09 PM

I guess I'm going to keep better track of my bill, and see when this deal hits home:(

#157 OFFLINE   tampa8

tampa8

    Godfather/Supporter

  • Registered
  • 1,889 posts
Joined: Mar 30, 2002

Posted 09 October 2012 - 06:39 AM

I just don't understand the strategy behind openly inviting/encouraging lawsuits and strained business relationships with things like the Hopper.


I just don't understand the strategy behind openly inviting/encouraging lawsuits and strained business relationships with things like the DVR.

I just don't understand the strategy behind openly inviting/encouraging lawsuits and strained business relationships with things like the VHS recorder.

I just don't understand the strategy behind openly inviting/encouraging lawsuits and strained business relationships with things like Satellite TV.

I just don't understand the strategy behind openly inviting/encouraging lawsuits and strained business relationships with things like Satellite radio.

I just don't understand the strategy behind openly inviting/encouraging lawsuits and strained business relationships with things like the Slingbox.

#158 OFFLINE   odsingCPA

odsingCPA

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 5 posts
Joined: Feb 01, 2012

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:06 AM

All I know is my bill better not increase because of this crap. Don't have the hopper and don't want it. Let the people using autohop pay for it.

#159 OFFLINE   tsmacro

tsmacro

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,325 posts
  • LocationEast Central Indiana
Joined: Apr 28, 2005

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:14 AM

All I know is my bill better not increase because of this crap. Don't have the hopper and don't want it. Let the people using autohop pay for it.


People w/ the Hopper are paying more. $4 more for DVR service plus each Joey costs them an additional $7, so most people with that set up end up paying about an extra $11/mo as compared to someone w/ the older equipment.


"The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." - Douglas Adams

"Who would rule a nation when he could have easier work, such as carrying water uphill in a sieve?" - Robert Jordan


#160 OFFLINE   jdskycaster

jdskycaster

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 272 posts
Joined: Sep 01, 2008

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:20 AM

odsingCPA,
So you watch all ads then? I have autohop and do not use it for even 10% of my viewing. When I do enable it I still manually forward past the delay that is now part of every commercial break. I also forward past the end of the commercial break which is usually some kind of announcement prior to the show beginning again. So it is not fully "automatic" in my case if that is what everyone is getting all worked up over. I still use my remote when watching shows with autohop enabled.

#161 OFFLINE   tampa8

tampa8

    Godfather/Supporter

  • Registered
  • 1,889 posts
Joined: Mar 30, 2002

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:35 AM

All I know is my bill better not increase because of this crap. Don't have the hopper and don't want it. Let the people using autohop pay for it.


You will undoubtedly pay more if Dish does not stand up now. As I alluded to above, the the VHS and DVR did not go away, as much as has evolved. Technology does not stop because a company wants to be greedy. Protecting your assets of course, but ask the music industry and movie industry how trying to stop technology worked out. All the copy protection etc.. was a waste of their money and time. Had they just focused on what the consumer was looking for - downloading songs without having to get the whole album from the start, they would not have wasted their resources. Seems the models that evolved are working quite nicely. And the strong resistance to having video recordings in the home, along with movies? Turned into a bonanza for the movie industry, and it evolved from Betamax/VHS to DVD, to Blue-ray and streaming.
If the skip feature were to go away, there is no question something similar will show up somewhere else. (Direct TV it is said has a similar feature in the wings)

And for the record, this "dispute" was never ever about the Hoppa it was about money, and Gannett used the skip feature as a ruse.

Edited by tampa8, 09 October 2012 - 11:40 AM.


#162 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,828 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 09 October 2012 - 02:01 PM

Keeping Hopper for these channels is definitely a win for Dish.
[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.

#163 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,649 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 09 October 2012 - 03:39 PM

People w/ the Hopper are paying more. $4 more for DVR service plus each Joey costs them an additional $7, so most people with that set up end up paying about an extra $11/mo as compared to someone w/ the older equipment.

It depends on what the customer had. On a single receiver the Joey is an additional cost they would not have ... but $7 per outlet (beyond the first) has been a part of DISH's calculations for a couple of years.

EG: Two Duo DVRS would cost $17 in equipment costs (first one free - second one $7 per output plus $3 because it is a DVR). Two hoppers and a Joey would cost $14 ($7 for each receiver beyond the first). The whole home fee needs to be added to pay for that technology ... which is similar to what DirecTV charges for whole home. PTAT and AutoHop are a bonus.

Keeping Hopper for these channels is definitely a win for Dish.

It is better to lose the channel than to allow stations to opt out or charge extra to be hopable. If stations were allowed to opt out and stay on DISH most would. Making the decision a choice between accepting the technology or not having the station's programs seen at all makes the decision "no hopper or no carriage". Most stations want carriage.

#164 OFFLINE   fudpucker

fudpucker

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 727 posts
  • LocationNW Iowa
Joined: Jul 23, 2007

Posted 09 October 2012 - 03:48 PM

Agh, having a hard time trying to figure these costs out (in an airport, delayed flight, so pretty tired/stressed.)

So, I currently have a 722 and two 612s. If I replaced these with a Hopper and two Joeys, how much more a month would my bill be?

#165 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,649 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 09 October 2012 - 03:53 PM

So, I currently have a 722 and two 612s. If I replaced these with a Hopper and two Joeys, how much more a month would my bill be?

Currently: 722 free, each 612 $10 = $20
New: Hopper free, each Joey $7 = $14 + $4 whole home fee = $18
+ DVR fee and programming ...you pay $2 less

I'd recommend two hoppers and a joey instead. Same monthly cost, more tuners.

#166 OFFLINE   fudpucker

fudpucker

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 727 posts
  • LocationNW Iowa
Joined: Jul 23, 2007

Posted 09 October 2012 - 04:55 PM

Currently: 722 free, each 612 $10 = $20
New: Hopper free, each Joey $7 = $14 + $4 whole home fee = $18
+ DVR fee and programming ...you pay $2 less

I'd recommend two hoppers and a joey instead. Same monthly cost, more tuners.


Huh, would have expected it to be more, thanks.

#167 OFFLINE   inazsully

inazsully

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 781 posts
Joined: Oct 03, 2006

Posted 09 October 2012 - 05:02 PM

Is there any reason to trade in my 722 with OTA hooked up and a 1.5TB EHD for the Hopper?

#168 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,649 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 09 October 2012 - 06:27 PM

Is there any reason to trade in my 722 with OTA hooked up and a 1.5TB EHD for the Hopper?

Probably not. If you have a second HD TV location the Hopper/Joey setup works nice (single Duo DVR like the 722 to Hopper+Joey is workable). At the moment having OTA vs having PTAT/AutoHop and the third tuner is the decision point.

As setups get more complex the decision becomes more personal ... what are you doing with it.

#169 OFFLINE   tsmacro

tsmacro

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,325 posts
  • LocationEast Central Indiana
Joined: Apr 28, 2005

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:52 AM

It depends on what the customer had. On a single receiver the Joey is an additional cost they would not have ... but $7 per outlet (beyond the first) has been a part of DISH's calculations for a couple of years.


Yes my comment was based on anyone that has two or more tv's (most customers) will pay on average $11/mo more for Dish service with a Hopper system than without because the DVR cost is $4/mo more and there'll be one additional outlet fee ($7) over a typical install using previous equipment as most installs that have two or more tv's usually start with a *22 receiver which powers two tv's with one receiver. So yes obviously there are scenarios where it wouldn't be exactly $11 more for Hopper customers but that is the most common one.


"The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." - Douglas Adams

"Who would rule a nation when he could have easier work, such as carrying water uphill in a sieve?" - Robert Jordan


#170 OFFLINE   yogi

yogi

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 124 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2006

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:35 AM

You will undoubtedly pay more if Dish does not stand up now. As I alluded to above, the the VHS and DVR did not go away, as much as has evolved. Technology does not stop because a company wants to be greedy. Protecting your assets of course, but ask the music industry and movie industry how trying to stop technology worked out. All the copy protection etc.. was a waste of their money and time. Had they just focused on what the consumer was looking for - downloading songs without having to get the whole album from the start, they would not have wasted their resources. Seems the models that evolved are working quite nicely. And the strong resistance to having video recordings in the home, along with movies? Turned into a bonanza for the movie industry, and it evolved from Betamax/VHS to DVD, to Blue-ray and streaming.
If the skip feature were to go away, there is no question something similar will show up somewhere else. (Direct TV it is said has a similar feature in the wings)

And for the record, this "dispute" was never ever about the Hoppa it was about money, and Gannett used the skip feature as a ruse.


WOW, Thanks for straightening that out for me.
I thought the music companys lost money due to file sharing.
and since when was running a buisness greedy?
If go to work and ask for a raise in pay. Would that make you greedy?

And yes, the"dispute" was about the hopper. The lost revenue in commercial sales.

#171 OFFLINE   Omahabrownie

Omahabrownie

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 4 posts
Joined: Jun 12, 2012

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:17 AM

Please show me the proof that there is lost add revenue and if there is a lose, how much of that is because the networks have said there is going to be a lose. Kind of a self serving don't you think. All companies and individuals are allowed to make money but there is a point were they are to greedy and I think that point has been reached by networks and performers both.

#172 OFFLINE   tampa8

tampa8

    Godfather/Supporter

  • Registered
  • 1,889 posts
Joined: Mar 30, 2002

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:47 AM

WOW, Thanks for straightening that out for me.
I thought the music companys lost money due to file sharing.
and since when was running a buisness greedy?
If go to work and ask for a raise in pay. Would that make you greedy?

And yes, the"dispute" was about the hopper. The lost revenue in commercial sales.

You are just plain wrong on the hoppa being the issue. It's money, always is. You fell for their ruse. If it was being against the skip feature Gannett would not have settled. Do you see the networks trying to settle with Dish on that? No, because for them it is about the technology,(and as they see it loss of money - so still about money) it never was for Gannett. Gannett already has a fight for the skip feature, it's being done by the Parent networks. This was not about that. And one last thing on that, Gannett, fwiw, is saying the dispute was not about the Hoppa
"A person at Gannett with direct knowledge of the talks, who did not want to be identified because the discussions are not public, said that while the business implications of the Hopper were part of negotiations, the DVR was not at the center of the dispute." Another words, about money.
http://www.chicagotr...0,6404076.story
What does my comments have to do with businesses making money. Take a look at my posts here and the other site (been at both sites from their very beginnings) and I do usually have the business thoughts in mind when posting. It has nothing to do with a business making money, they have to or I can't buy from them. This is about once again fighting the inevitable technology rather than analyze it and take advantage of it.

Your example exactly supports what I said, so thank-you. File Sharing. Not legal, hurting the industry. But why? Because they were trying to artificially stop legitimate technology and at the same time not give the customer what it wants. Out of the file sharing came exactly what the customer wants, downloading a song, not a whole album. What has changed? The business model. I and apparently most are willing to pay in the range of 99 cents to about $129 for a song, to have it easily downloaded to all my devices, have cloud use, etc.... It gave the customer what it wants, and for the most part ended the file sharing problem.

You really can't see the skip feature being the same thing just as the fight against VHS or DVR's functions? And the quicker settlement when Dish always lets channels walk, indicate it was about money for Gannett? The Hoppa and the skip feature are still there, and what do you know, so is Gannett.

Edited by tampa8, 10 October 2012 - 11:25 AM.


#173 OFFLINE   Paul Secic

Paul Secic

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,222 posts
Joined: Dec 16, 2003

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:50 AM

People w/ the Hopper are paying more. $4 more for DVR service plus each Joey costs them an additional $7, so most people with that set up end up paying about an extra $11/mo as compared to someone w/ the older equipment.


I'll stick with my trusty 722.

Enjoying AT 250 HBO, 

 

Equipment: VIP 722 reciever


#174 ONLINE   Henry

Henry

    Retired Member

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 3,289 posts
  • LocationPine, CO
Joined: Nov 15, 2007

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:57 AM

Please show me the proof that there is lost add revenue and if there is a lose, how much of that is because the networks have said there is going to be a lose. Kind of a self serving don't you think. All companies and individuals are allowed to make money but there is a point were they are to greedy and I think that point has been reached by networks and performers both.


Welcome aboard, Omahabrownei!

All businesses take advantage of market conditions to improve their bottom line – no smoking gun there. If conditions were right, I would expect to pay more for what I’m getting at today’s prices. It’s just the way it is. Dish will eventually charge more to cover for the cost (and perhaps a little extra) of what they have to pay the programmers for content.

I’m OK with that.

If I have to pay a little more for the privilege of zapping those infernal commercials, so be it. I don’t own a Hopper, but I do have a couple of DVRs equipped with Skip buttons, and there is no greater pleasure than being able to select which commercials (if any) I care to watch. Even if there exists a tacit commercial covenant between the networks and me, I opt to selectively honor it. If they go out of business because of it (which I really doubt), there are always cable and premium channels. Besides, I don’t care for the notion of paying for a service that is already making premium profits from advertisers – are you listening, Cable?

I’m further of the thinking that in time all television will be subscription-based and that commercials will be limited to product placement or other forms of embedding. By the time the commercial channels join the game, the cost of subscription will be comparable to today’s satellite service cost. The good news is that we will be rid of the commercial ad model once and for all.
VIP722kDVR (Living Room)
VIP211 (Bedroom)
VIP622DVR (Art Room)

DMA 18 (Denver)

#175 OFFLINE   tampa8

tampa8

    Godfather/Supporter

  • Registered
  • 1,889 posts
Joined: Mar 30, 2002

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:15 AM


I’m further of the thinking that in time all television will be subscription-based and that commercials will be limited to product placement or other forms of embedding. By the time the commercial channels join the game, the cost of subscription will be comparable to today’s satellite service cost. The good news is that we will be rid of the commercial ad model once and for all.


That goes along with my post above. Not giving the customer what it wants, AND fighting technology does not work. It might be smart for the networks to move towards something like your model. Take use of the technology, give the customer what it wants, and still make the money. But your idea or another, fighting progress and change when it's what the customer wants just does not work.




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