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

DirecTV/Viacom Dispute?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by danpeters, Jul 9, 2012.

  1. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    I can imagine having raised one myself and fostering probably another 30 or so teenage girls.

    If you're real lucky she'll go in her room and pout!! :)

    Or write some drivelly poetry, or tweet until her thumbs go numb! :)
  2. Darth Malgus

    Darth Malgus Cool Member

    Jul 4, 2012

    I think your missing the point, you can't use "good feelings" as currency, at some point you have to make money.
  3. tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Another bad parallel. NF is nowhere near delivering the same content and never will be. They will not be delivering sports or news. They are only the On Demand part of the equation and in your price analysis remember that you have to pay for high(er) bandwidth to support them especially of you do multiple TVs.

    Bring realism into the equation.
  4. Darth Malgus

    Darth Malgus Cool Member

    Jul 4, 2012

    Two points on which we can agree :)
  5. Darth Malgus

    Darth Malgus Cool Member

    Jul 4, 2012

    I was not referring to the actual numbers going on in the real life negotiations, I was referring to the numbers thrown out as an extreme example. If you look at the posts, the example made states 1 bil a month for 20 mil subs = $5 per sub.
  6. APB101

    APB101 Icon

    Sep 1, 2010
    :blush: :lol: :goodjob: :glasses: :icon_da: ​
  7. darkpowrjd

    darkpowrjd Mentor

    Jul 10, 2012
    From what I gather, we have:

    - People who don't ever want to see a Viacom owned channel again, and will stop at nothing to drive that point home, going so far as to insult and troll those that dare to disagree with them.
    - People who just want DTV and Via to come to an agreement already so people will shut up about it.
    - People who are upset at Via for going as far as they are about this, but wouldn't mind having the channels back.
    - People who want DTV to at least consider the possible thing Via wants: their other channels on the service. They might think of DTV as a sort of channel nazi that is deciding what viewers value, as they did with G4, and they see the G4 issue as the stumbling block in DTV's way.

    In all of these, it seems the opinions are pretty much set in stone, and good luck trying to get any of them to have an open mind (or to even stop trolling the thread constantly).

    One common denominator seems to be present, though: Via and DTV seem to not believe in happy mediums, middle of the road agreements. It's all "my way or the highway" and childish games that makes us wonder how the people that own these companies passed high school!
  8. TheRatPatrol

    TheRatPatrol Hall Of Fame

    Oct 1, 2003
    Phoenix, AZ
    I say bring back a C Band type of distribution, cut out the middle man, and let the consumer pick the channels they want. ;)
  9. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    While much of your post is right on, you miss the really big picture.

    Both D* and E* know that at some dollar level, they will reach the tipping point when people will just say screw it to pay tv, or reduce their subscription level to some very low package. And they know that with the economy the way it is with prices of practically everything going up and getting less for it, and the paychecks/retirement checks of the consumer not even coming close to keeping up, that tipping point is coming too close.

    So that's where we're at. Both sides of the table think they are being totally reasonable in their positions. But both D* and E* know that if they give in to these outlandish rate hikes, then the next content producer will want hikes in that same general range. And that is certainly not what any of us want!
  10. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    LOL! C-Band has always been with middle men. You never bought the package/channel from the actual content provider.
  11. tulanejosh

    tulanejosh Godfather

    May 23, 2008
    It was also once probably said that there will never be satellites in space Beaming down tv for you to watch. Never is a strong word and you have no way to really truly prove never.
  12. georule

    georule Hall Of Fame

    Mar 31, 2010
    Well, it's probably not in HD, but D* adding Disney, Jr (noted to be a permanent addition in the PR, tho probably what they really mean is "not just until Viacom settles") is certainly a serious development. That's a long-term committment, unlike (probably) what Viacom had in mind in taking down online access.
  13. bobcamp1

    bobcamp1 Icon

    Nov 8, 2007
    Well, it's long term until the Disney/ESPN/ABC contract is up. Then it goes off the air while the contract is negotiated.

    When exactly is that? I have to plan on not having those channels for a couple of weeks.
  14. jasonblair

    jasonblair Icon

    Sep 5, 2006
    The real intellectual property and communications industry lawyers (like myself) remain silent on the issue... :)
  15. Davenlr

    Davenlr Geek til I die

    Sep 16, 2006
    Now that they added Disney Jr... all that is left is to switch FUSE to HD, Contract with John Stewart and Stephen Colbert to do their shows on the AUDIENCE network, and use the remaining recovered HD space and money to obtain BBCA, H2, NatGeoWild, and a few other requested channels. Then call it a day and watch Viacom stock drop :)
  16. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    Good. Why would we want to confuse an emotional argument with facts :lol:
  17. APB101

    APB101 Icon

    Sep 1, 2010
    At least 20 HDs in addition to what you had mentioned (including the HD for Disney Junior).
  18. susanandmark

    susanandmark Godfather

    Feb 15, 2007
    I apologize for the typo. It should have stated "year" not "month." I corrected it. Of course, typo or not, you are also taking it out of context, I was using it as an example of an unnecessarily inflammatory statement--a "cheat" of the facts--of the type that is being used by DirecTV and Viacom to rile up their bases, not as a statement of belief or accuracy or "statistic to make my point."

    My point was that both sides the "pennies a day" and "Viacom wants to increase your bill 30%" talking points are bogus. Viacom is not Oliver Twist ("please sir, can I have some more") and DirecTV is not Dudley Do Right.

    A good article about the level of discourse and debate and likely eventual outcome despite all this hype: http://money.cnn.com//2012/07/13/te...paign=Feed:+rss/money_technology+(Technology)

    So they are going to take away our channels for goodness knows how long and save a lousy, what 30 cents PER YEAR per customer? (Difference between the 30% increase Viacom reports that it requested and the 27% the quoted industry analysts think they'll eventually get.) I'm sure DirecTV is spending that, and then some, on the negative PR campaign, incentives to customers and other nonsense. Just frustrating! So they've "got my back" how again????
  19. David MacLeod

    David MacLeod New Member

    Jan 29, 2008
    I would have used a different description......
  20. Billzebub

    Billzebub Godfather

    Jan 1, 2007
    Pittsburgh, PA
    I wasn't a math major, but how does $10.96 per year translate to $15 per month?

Share This Page