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

DIRECTV HD Channel Anticipation (Official Q2 2011 Thread)

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Scott Kocourek, Mar 17, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. May 2, 2011 #1601 of 4112
    cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,470
    67
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    Yeah I wouldn't call 1 HD addition a festivus (yet alone a mini festivus). I would call a festivus a group of new additions, say 6 new channels or more, and a mini festivus 2 - 5 additions.

    1 new channel, I would just call a bonus or a what it is - HD Channel addition.

    But really it's just a play on words from a classic Seinfeld episode (best show ever btw).
     
  2. May 2, 2011 #1602 of 4112
    FLWingNut

    FLWingNut Godfather

    471
    12
    Nov 19, 2005
    It seems there is a certain segment of posters here who want to blame D exclusively for holding things up with getting certain channels in HD. Some posts even put out the vibe that D should just do whatever it takes to get them on. Sorry, if "whatever it takes," involves my bill going up, forget it. If we can get the channels without an increase, great. But if the providers are after a huge increase, well, keep tangoing until you get it right--without an increase.
     
  3. May 2, 2011 #1603 of 4112
    Coca Cola Kid

    Coca Cola Kid Hall Of Fame

    3,768
    20
    Jul 19, 2009
    Mt. Morris, MI
    Um that didn't answer my question at all and it was directed at SR anyway.
     
  4. May 2, 2011 #1604 of 4112
    digitalfreak

    digitalfreak Legend

    182
    0
    Nov 29, 2006
    I knew we'd get bin Laden before DirecTV got AMC HD or BBCA HD!
     
  5. May 2, 2011 #1605 of 4112
    raoul5788

    raoul5788 Guest

    1,481
    0
    May 13, 2006
    VERY few think it's all Directv's fault. There are even fewer that think channels should be added regardless of the cost. There is a certain segment that thinks Directv can do no wrong, however. Regardless, since so many carriers besides Directv have added numerous hd channels that Directv doesn't have, it can't be entirely the supplier's fault now can it. This is all JMHO, of course!
     
  6. May 2, 2011 #1606 of 4112
    espnjason

    espnjason Armchair Referee

    529
    2
    Sep 30, 2008
    Or Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia :rolleyes:...
     
  7. May 2, 2011 #1607 of 4112
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    ...and all of those providers have their own unique circumstances. Package deals, rates, package placement, guide placement, TV Anywhere/Everywhere, VOD, marketing and ad sales, term length...and probably a whole list of other things that are considered and we are not aware of. Comparing the negotiations of other providers, especially regional providers, is pointless. I agree that very few actually believe it is all DirecTV's fault. A few simply choose to ignore, for their own benefit, that the content providers can often be the ones at fault. It's easier to complain about DirecTV just for the sake of doing so.
     
  8. May 2, 2011 #1608 of 4112
    mhking

    mhking Legend

    567
    0
    Oct 27, 2002
    Atlanta
    !rolling
     
  9. May 2, 2011 #1609 of 4112
    Laker44

    Laker44 Godfather

    285
    0
    Jun 18, 2008
    When it is a channel(s) that they control or have a well established unique financial relationship with, and those channels are on other providers, it is their fault for them not being added. If they where dealing with and outside company yes I understand the tangoing part and what them to get the best deal they can. But there is no excuse when they more or less are dealing with themselves.
     
  10. May 2, 2011 #1610 of 4112
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    "All" you want is 15 more channels? So glad that you are so reasonable and that you do not need much.

    :nono2:
     
  11. May 2, 2011 #1611 of 4112
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    OR they could cut fatcat Michael White's insane salary just enough to bring us AMC and BBCA HD. Why must we always masochistically assume that WE have to bear the brunt of rising carriage costs? They keep us in fear of our rates going up, then deliver us substandard quality.

    Perhaps they should revisit their own bloated overhead and start cutting salaries. Lots of guys could do just as awful a job as Michael White for a few million less a year.
     
  12. May 2, 2011 #1612 of 4112
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Fun with math.

    If a basic channel costs 50 cents a month per subscriber, then, with 19 million subs, that channel costs $114 million per year to DirecTV.

    50 cents x 12 months = $6 per year.

    19 million x $6 = $114,000,000.00

    What does Mr. White make?
     
  13. May 2, 2011 #1613 of 4112
    cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,470
    67
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    Sure, those are my top 15. I didn't even mention IFC , Sundance in HD, or OWN, Sportsman, SWRV, TV One, Centric, LMN, G4, WFN, HLN, Bloomberg, Shopping networks, etc...

    I could of been needy and listed every single channel with a red mark in the DirecTV column on this list:
    http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1058081

    There's a lot more than 15 HD's missing, but the original 15 I posted would make me happy.
     
  14. May 2, 2011 #1614 of 4112
    rkr0923

    rkr0923 Guest

    499
    0
    Sep 14, 2006
    funny how providers that are barely surviving (according to people here) can afford what D* can't. You can say they want to rip D* off with there pricing all you want but I for one don't believe it. Sure they ask more from D* they have more subscribers, but that much out of line they refuse to pay it....don't believe it.
     
  15. May 2, 2011 #1615 of 4112
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,603
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    You don't believe simple math as tonyd explained?
     
  16. May 2, 2011 #1616 of 4112
    raoul5788

    raoul5788 Guest

    1,481
    0
    May 13, 2006
    Yes all of the circumstances are different, and there is A LOT that none of us is privy to. However, there are too many available channels and too many other carriers that have them in hd, to keep me from thinking that much of the speed of molasses additions are the fault of Directv.
     
  17. May 2, 2011 #1617 of 4112
    Hutchinshouse

    Hutchinshouse Hall Of Fame

    4,632
    0
    Sep 27, 2006
    Sure DIRECTV needs to keep $ low as possible. However, just because we don’t have it in HD, don’t automatically assume the channel owners are asking too much. Don’t automatically assume DIRECTV is waiting for the channel owners to lower their $. Before a single channel can be added in HD, the first step is the desire to do so. Sure, we could be missing HD due to negotiation roadblocks. However, we could also be missing HD due to DIRECTV. Hence, GSNHD. Simply put, channel owners are far from innocent. DIRECTV is far from innocent.
     
  18. May 2, 2011 #1618 of 4112
    Hutchinshouse

    Hutchinshouse Hall Of Fame

    4,632
    0
    Sep 27, 2006
    :lol:
    That is a chunk of change. What the H does DIRECTV pay ESPN every year? Its got to be pushing a billion bucks a year.
     
  19. May 2, 2011 #1619 of 4112
    Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
    I knew we'd get bin Laden before Dish got YES, kept SNY, got NFL Sunday Ticket, etc, etc,

    LOL. This could be a fun drinking game
     
  20. May 2, 2011 #1620 of 4112
    Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
    I'm curious why that same logic is not used for channels D* has and other providers do not....does that mean they are moving at the speed of molasses or does that argument only apply one way? ;) Just curious.

    I've never quite understood why one set of rules is used for one provider and a completely different set of rules and expectations are used for another. I'm not trying to get cute here, asking a fair question I believe.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page