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

Carry Disputes


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   Rduce

Rduce

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 307 posts
Joined: May 15, 2008

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:10 PM

For any one who feels that Dish selfishly or greedily pulls channels or refuses to “just pay what the provider wants” I would point out that Direct is currently in the same situation that Dish was recently in with Gannett broadcasting. With the deadline tomorrow night, while three stations in my DMA are slated to disappear from Charter’s lineup this afternoon at 5.

These disputes are only going to become more numerous as ad revenues dry up as content providers scramble to cover their over priced costs in an era where savvy consumers are cutting the cord and finding alternate means to satisfy their entertainment means.

While, I find it amusing that many continually bash Dish’s stand on these disputes, I can only imagine how much they would complain if the services were to just agree to whatever the provider asked for and passed the costs on without a care about their customers.

The next time your favorite channel is about to go missing just remember this is only television and in the grander scheme of things it is meaningless...

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#2 OFFLINE   rocat1997

rocat1997

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 32 posts
Joined: May 17, 2011

Posted 29 November 2012 - 03:57 PM

While I want to agree I cannot. They used their customers as a negotiating tool. The paying customer should never be involved. I paid to see AMC. I was never compensated for the loss. When you pay for a product, you expect it to be delivered or your bill adjusted. Both Directv and Dish as well as any broadcaster never look at the outcome but the bottom line. It's all a out money. I shouldn't be put in the middle of the dispute. I pay for a service, I should get what I pay for. No excuse.

#3 OFFLINE   SayWhat?

SayWhat?

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 5,586 posts
Joined: Jun 06, 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:00 PM

I paid to see AMC.


No, you didn't. You pay Dish a monthly subscription rate for a package of channels that are subject to change at any time. Short of any of the premium or ala-carte optional channels, you are not paying for any specific channel if your package.
Help stamp out Twits and Twitterers!

HD, SchmacHD!! Just be glad you've got a picture at all.

#4 OFFLINE   runner861

runner861

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 859 posts
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:50 PM

Write to Congress. Get them to change the law regarding carriage of local stations. Make all local stations must-carry, rather than retransmission consent. Of course, be prepared to face off against the NAB, which has a lot more money to line the pockets of our members of Congress than anybody here does.

#5 OFFLINE   rocat1997

rocat1997

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 32 posts
Joined: May 17, 2011

Posted 29 November 2012 - 07:27 PM

You can twist the words however you like, but, I bought a package for a single channel. So yes I paid for that channel. Disputes should never use the customers as leverage. We missed an entire season of a show. The least they could have done is re-aired it. They didn't. Once again. Made the consumer pay for their problem. This is not good business. I'm in a business that customer service is serious business. I expect no less than I provide.

#6 OFFLINE   tampa8

tampa8

    Godfather/Supporter

  • Registered
  • 1,812 posts
Joined: Mar 30, 2002

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:28 PM

You can word it any way you want, but you bought a package, not a channel. That you only want that specific channel means nothing, Dish, Direct, Comcast - whoever does not guarantee you will get any specific channel. And I think you know that. You have a choice, you don't have to sign a contract, and you can still get the services then drop them anytime you would like.

#7 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,596 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:21 PM

You can twist the words however you like, but, I bought a package for a single channel. So yes I paid for that channel. Disputes should never use the customers as leverage. We missed an entire season of a show. The least they could have done is re-aired it. They didn't. Once again. Made the consumer pay for their problem. This is not good business. I'm in a business that customer service is serious business. I expect no less than I provide.


No. You pay for a service. You have received that service. The service provider is paying for the right to retransmit specific channels, while you are merely paying the service provider for access to what content they have available at any given time. If you were paying for individual channels, your bill would have gone up instantly every single time a channel was added to a package you subscribe to. No particular channels were ever guaranteed to you. If you believed they were, then that is an error on your part. This has only been the way it works for about 30 years now...so it's well known.

How exactly was Dish Network supposed to re-air an entire season of a show they do not own the broadcast rights to? Something they have no legal right to do.
DTV = Digital Television

#8 OFFLINE   Slamminc11

Slamminc11

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,328 posts
Joined: Jan 27, 2005

Posted 30 November 2012 - 05:09 AM

...We missed an entire season of a show. The least they could have done is re-aired it. They didn't...


Seriously?!? You do know that Dish has no control over what program a channel shows right? If you are pissed because you didn't see whatever show and you want it replayed then your complaint needs to be with the owner of the channel not Dish.

#9 OFFLINE   MysteryMan

MysteryMan

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 6,679 posts
  • LocationUSA
Joined: May 17, 2010

Posted 30 November 2012 - 05:24 AM

For any one who feels that Dish selfishly or greedily pulls channels or refuses to “just pay what the provider wants” I would point out that Direct is currently in the same situation that Dish was recently in with Gannett broadcasting. With the deadline tomorrow night, while three stations in my DMA are slated to disappear from Charter’s lineup this afternoon at 5.

These disputes are only going to become more numerous as ad revenues dry up as content providers scramble to cover their over priced costs in an era where savvy consumers are cutting the cord and finding alternate means to satisfy their entertainment means.

While, I find it amusing that many continually bash Dish’s stand on these disputes, I can only imagine how much they would complain if the services were to just agree to whatever the provider asked for and passed the costs on without a care about their customers.

The next time your favorite channel is about to go missing just remember this is only television and in the grander scheme of things it is meaningless...


As hdtvfan0001 posted on another thread, "The DirecTV model seems to be go toe-to-toe for the best settlement. The DISH model seems to be try for a cheaper price and if not successful...pull the channel". Need you be reminded of the DISH vs AMC fiasco? :sure:

DirecTV customer since 1995.


#10 OFFLINE   david_jr

david_jr

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 415 posts
Joined: Dec 10, 2006

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:17 AM

As hdtvfan0001 posted on another thread, "The DirecTV model seems to be go toe-to-toe for the best settlement. The DISH model seems to be try for a cheaper price and if not successful...pull the channel". Need you be reminded of the DISH vs AMC fiasco? :sure:


I think you would have to agree that DISH vs AMC fiasco was a lot bigger than just trying for a cheaper price for a channel.

#11 OFFLINE   fudpucker

fudpucker

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 649 posts
Joined: Jul 23, 2007

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:38 AM

The next time your favorite channel is about to go missing just remember this is only television and in the grander scheme of things it is meaningless...


Although, if you are one of those for whom "It's only television" you're probably not spending time in forums like this. ;)

#12 OFFLINE   sregener

sregener

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 592 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2012

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:17 AM

As hdtvfan0001 posted on another thread, "The DirecTV model seems to be go toe-to-toe for the best settlement. The DISH model seems to be try for a cheaper price and if not successful...pull the channel". Need you be reminded of the DISH vs AMC fiasco? :sure:


Dish seems to be more willing than DirecTV to pull channels, but I seem to recall DirecTV pulling Viacom earlier this year for a few weeks (which is a far more popular channel group than AMC/Rainbow), so that reputation may be shifting. Anyone involved in the AMC debate knows that there was a lot more going on than just a simple channel transmission dispute, and the exceptional nature of that dispute does not make for a good example of how Dish conducts their business.

However, in general, if you absolutely need a specific channel and want to play the odds, pay the extra amount DirecTV charges over Dish for similar programming packages that come from the "settle first, control costs second" approach.

#13 OFFLINE   Rduce

Rduce

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 307 posts
Joined: May 15, 2008

Posted 30 November 2012 - 11:03 AM

Dish seems to be more willing than DirecTV to pull channels, but I seem to recall DirecTV pulling Viacom earlier this year for a few weeks (which is a far more popular channel group than AMC/Rainbow), so that reputation may be shifting. Anyone involved in the AMC debate knows that there was a lot more going on than just a simple channel transmission dispute, and the exceptional nature of that dispute does not make for a good example of how Dish conducts their business.

However, in general, if you absolutely need a specific channel and want to play the odds, pay the extra amount DirecTV charges over Dish for similar programming packages that come from the "settle first, control costs second" approach.


Neither Dish, Direct or Charter “pull” channels from their lineups. They are not permitted to carry these channels once an agreement has expired and there is no agreement to continue in place or in some cases an extension during negotiations. The channel owner is the one that “pulls” the channel in these disputes.

#14 OFFLINE   Max Mike

Max Mike

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 97 posts
Joined: Oct 18, 2008

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:05 PM

First Dish should refuse to pay what amounts to a extortion fee for a channel and we will all regret it long term if they do not do that.

Second there are two parties, if the provider refuses Dish's offer they not Dish are de facto pulling the programming... apply heat to them.

Thank goodness Dish is willing to try and hold the line on programming price increases.

#15 OFFLINE   Orion9

Orion9

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 197 posts
Joined: Jan 31, 2011

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:08 PM

I've always been on Dish's side in these disputes. The price of TV is high enough already I can't keep up with all the stuff my DVR records. It's very annoying when one of my favorites disappears for awhile, but if Dish avoided this annoyance across each customer's favorite channels, they and we would be paying much more. Then we'd be faced with the question of whether to leave Dish entirely instead of just doing without a channel or two.

#16 OFFLINE   sregener

sregener

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 592 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2012

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:44 PM

The price of TV is high enough already I can't keep up with all the stuff my DVR records.


Considering what I paid for satellite service in 1995 - $29.95 - and the number of channels I got, without a DVR or HD, satellite programming today should cost at least double what it does, according to official inflation numbers. That's not double $29.95, but double the package prices you pay today.

Nobody wants to pay more for anything, but the reality is that we're getting a whole lot more for an inflation-adjusted dollar now than we were then, even as the price has tripled on a dollar-figure basis.

#17 OFFLINE   sregener

sregener

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 592 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2012

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:55 PM

Neither Dish, Direct or Charter “pull” channels from their lineups. They are not permitted to carry these channels once an agreement has expired and there is no agreement to continue in place or in some cases an extension during negotiations. The channel owner is the one that “pulls” the channel in these disputes.


When contracts expire, they expire. Both parties must abide by the terms and conditions laid out in the contract. Now, in theory a channel owner could decide to permit Dish to continue to provide programming without compensation, but it is hard to imagine a copyright holder choosing to eschew their compensation rights. They could sign a contract extension that retains the compensation under the previous contract for a set period of time, but no one is required to sign an extension.

Dish sells packages of programming. When they remove a channel from that lineup (by choice, or due to an expiring contract agreement), they are pulling the channel from that package. They are choosing not to renew the contract under terms then offered by the programming provider. They may be right to do so, or they may be stubborn, bull-headed and anti-consumer, but they are no longer providing the channel that they once did in the package. Thus, I stand by my wording that Dish is pulling the channel by declining the contract offer of the channel, and the channel company is simply refusing to give away their copyrighted product.

#18 OFFLINE   Max Mike

Max Mike

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 97 posts
Joined: Oct 18, 2008

Posted 30 November 2012 - 04:13 PM

Considering what I paid for satellite service in 1995 - $29.95 - and the number of channels I got, without a DVR or HD, satellite programming today should cost at least double what it does, according to official inflation numbers. That's not double $29.95, but double the package prices you pay today.

Nobody wants to pay more for anything, but the reality is that we're getting a whole lot more for an inflation-adjusted dollar now than we were then, even as the price has tripled on a dollar-figure basis.


Baloney, inflation on anything but food and fuel has been dang near flat for the last ten years and negative for electronics and such.

We are not getting a lot more in terms of value what we are getting is a lot more of nothing but worthless derivative crap.

Rates for TV programming have more than doubled in last 10 years most of those 10 years inflation was 2-3% or less, way less on anything but food and fuel while average incomes. In the last few years incomes are down and down big.

These price increases are not sustainable and the programmers had better figure that out quickly before cord cutting turns from a trickle in to a flood. Pricing half your customers out of the market is just stupid.

#19 OFFLINE   Orion9

Orion9

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 197 posts
Joined: Jan 31, 2011

Posted 30 November 2012 - 05:39 PM

Considering what I paid for satellite service in 1995 - $29.95


DirectTV was launched in 1994, and Dish Network in 1996, so you were a fairly early adopter. Early adopters generally pay more - usually a LOT more. Can I interest you in my $1500 Betamax? I do still have it - I keep it around to remind me how much I used to blow on being an early adopter. ;)

But not anymore. These days I agonize over a Blu-Ray player even though it looks orders of magnitudes better and costs less than a tenth as much.

#20 OFFLINE   Davenlr

Davenlr

    Geek til I die

  • Registered
  • 9,090 posts
Joined: Sep 16, 2006

Posted 30 November 2012 - 05:42 PM

DirectTV was launched in 1994, and Dish Network in 1996, so you were a fairly early adopter. Early adopters generally pay more - usually a LOT more. Can I interest you in my $1500 Betamax? I do still have it - I keep it around to remind me how much I used to blow on being an early adopter. ;)


I only paid $1200 for mine, and like you, it still works. Paid $800 for my first DirecTv 18" dish and RCA receiver too.

Tivo Premier XL4, Tivo Premier, Tivo HD whole home on Xfinity HD, DirecTv Whole Home with 39" high gain KaKu dish, Roku3,SageTv 8 TB Win8 Server -> DVDO Edge-> Denon AVR, Klipsch KB15's/Panasonic 55ST60 plasma"





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