1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

D* Announces New Rates Starting 2/9/2010

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by riprecked, Dec 27, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jan 6, 2010 #501 of 849
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    Of course it would. This whole argument is ridiculous. There is one way to get NFLST. If you don't like that way, then you don't get NFLST. If you don't like the restaurant that has the exclusivity on the awesome hot sauce, then you don't get the awesome hot sauce. Simple.
     
  2. Jan 6, 2010 #502 of 849
    Beerstalker

    Beerstalker Hall Of Fame

    3,556
    70
    Feb 9, 2009
    Peoria, IL
    Yep, no different than the iphone only being available on AT&T. Apple said they were designing a phone and went out to all the cellular providers. Verizon wanted to make certain demands that Apple wouldn't agree to so they went to AT&T, who didn't make those demands. They signed a contract and AT&T is the only one to have the iPhone. When that contract is up Verizon will probably have the ability to get the iPhone, as long as they don't try making more demands that Apple won't agree to, or as long as AT&T doesn't offer Apple more money to keep it on their network only.

    When DirecTV's contract for NFL Sunday ticket is up, Comcast, Dish, everyone will be able to bid on it. If one company bids higher than the others and says it wants exclusive rights, then the NFL may sign a contract with them only.

    I would much rather have it this way than the total chaos of some other sports like hockey/baseball where certain companies own a team and a channel and only offer that teams games on that channel and then don't allow all services to carry that channel.
     
  3. Jan 6, 2010 #503 of 849
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    Bingo! It's like people think Directv is forcing them to buy ST.
     
  4. Jan 6, 2010 #504 of 849
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    AT&T already tried that, and Apple told them where they could stick their money. :lol: They're tired of having their brand damaged by AT&T's incompetence.
     
  5. Jan 6, 2010 #505 of 849
    Justin23

    Justin23 Hall Of Fame

    1,218
    1
    Jan 10, 2008

    Question...how hard is it to move the gun that D* is holding to your head FORCING you to get NFL ST before typing your posts?

    :beatdeadhorse:

    Oher providers could have outbid D* for NFL ST, but they did not.
     
  6. Jan 6, 2010 #506 of 849
    Beerstalker

    Beerstalker Hall Of Fame

    3,556
    70
    Feb 9, 2009
    Peoria, IL
    I heard rumors that was the case but hadn't heard anything solid yet.
     
  7. Jan 6, 2010 #507 of 849
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    It's always going to be just rumors until Steve unveils the product. There was a solid rumor a month or two ago that the next iPhone would have a dual GSM/CDMA chipset, and there's really only one reason for that...
     
  8. Jan 6, 2010 #508 of 849
    wingrider01

    wingrider01 Hall Of Fame

    1,764
    2
    Sep 9, 2005
    haven't seen that publicly stated by apple yet, but have seen public statements that the other other companies offering the Iphone are hainvg network utilization issues also.
     
  9. Jan 6, 2010 #509 of 849
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    Like I said, you're not going to. Apple isn't that type of company. The very first indication you're going to have that AT&T's exclusivity is over is when Steve announces that the iPhone will be available on both AT&T and Verizon. Until that moment, it'll all be rumor.
     
  10. Jan 6, 2010 #510 of 849
    JLucPicard

    JLucPicard Hall Of Fame

    3,985
    0
    Apr 27, 2004
    I love people that feel if they state their case with more emphasis or louder and louder that they feel that makes it true.

    DirecTV: We'll pay you four billion over the next seven years to carry Sunday Ticket.
    NFL: OK, Dish Network, cable, do any of you want to match that to carry it, too?
    Dish Network, cable, etc.: Hell No. (or dead silence, whichever the case may be),
    NFL: Very well. DirecTV, you have the exclusive rights for the next seven years.


    I don't see anything at all monopolistic about that. PERIOD! ;)

    I don't really see this as any different than Stern being exclusive to Sirius/XM. Or maybe even more representative, Stern being exclusively on Sirius while XM was still a separate company.
     
  11. Jan 6, 2010 #511 of 849
    hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    Agreed.

    It's called Free Enterprise, Capitalism, or Survival of the Competitive Fittest.

    Those naysayers just need to deal with it.
     
  12. Jan 6, 2010 #512 of 849
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    It is kind of crazy. I mean some seem to almost be saying that if this were the food industry we are talking about that we should have the right to walk into McDonalds and order a Wendy's burger. Resutrants dont all have the same menu items, cell carries dont all have the same models of phones, cable co's dont all offer the same channels, nor do Satellite companys. I view this completely different then sports channels that Comcast hold hostage. Everyone had the chance to get Sunday Ticket. Besides isnt it the NFL that decides if they want the package to be exclusive? I mean come on if they decide they want all providers to have it then really what choice does DirecTV have? Either agree to the NFL's terms and carry Sunday Ticket or dont. Thats what happened to the other providers. Sounds like some are a little unfair in their thinking in my opinion.
     
  13. Jan 6, 2010 #513 of 849
    Skyboss

    Skyboss Icon

    606
    4
    Jan 22, 2004
    No one else was dumb enough to bid that much.

    Yes, and the only reason this is allowed is because they have anti-trust immunity which flies in the face of all that is capitalist.

    Not the same.
     
  14. Jan 6, 2010 #514 of 849
    Justin23

    Justin23 Hall Of Fame

    1,218
    1
    Jan 10, 2008

    Well...then go complain to the other providers that chose not to bid enough for NFL ST...:nono2:
     
  15. Jan 6, 2010 #515 of 849
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Why arnt you complaining about the March Madness package or the Nascar Hotpass package or the MLB Extra Innings package? Are you not on the MLB because some providers offer it but not all? Is that far to offer it to some but not all in your opinion since you dont like that ST is exclusive. Kind of sounds like you want to make up your own rules to me. As for my examples some are pretty good. Like it was said earlier AT&T dont own Apple but the iPhone is exclusive to only AT&T. DirecTV dont own the NFL or Sunday Ticket but its exclusive to them. If you really feel it then you need to be saying the NFL is a monopoly not D*.
     
  16. Jan 6, 2010 #516 of 849
    Skyboss

    Skyboss Icon

    606
    4
    Jan 22, 2004

    Try to sort out your apples from the oranges.
     
  17. Jan 6, 2010 #517 of 849
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    What ever. All I know is that I will be enjoying the games next year. When you come to a Sunday you miss a game you really want to see remember you are not watching it cause you were to cheap to pay $2.06 more a week for 17 weeks of Sunday Ticket. Enjoy your money I know I will enjoy the way mine is spent.
     
  18. Jan 7, 2010 #518 of 849
    Piratefan98

    Piratefan98 Icon

    685
    0
    Mar 11, 2008

    Let me guess ..... you weren't a math major in college. :lol: :lol:

    Jeff
     
  19. Jan 7, 2010 #519 of 849
    wingrider01

    wingrider01 Hall Of Fame

    1,764
    2
    Sep 9, 2005
    I agree there - but the simple fact that has ben shown is that the networks that can offer the IPhone have over-utilization issues - there is no proven fact that if T-Mobile, Verizion, Sprint get what ever future IPhone that is released their networks will not have issue with getting slammed with the bandwith the IPhone utilizes, even when it is idle.
     
  20. Jan 7, 2010 #520 of 849
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    $35 price increase divided by 17 weeks. You do the math.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page