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

Dish better NOT add BigTen Network

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by jeffwtux, Jul 27, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. koji68

    koji68 Icon

    627
    0
    Jun 21, 2004
    Well, my objection was on the grounds that you wanted intervention from the government because the actions of these companies where monopolistic.

    When the government acts against a monopoly is because its actions prevent others from entering/staying in the market. Even if the acts of the monopoly are beneficial to customers, is still illegal to use your monopolistic position to prevent market competition.

    FCC has authority on local market monopolies but I don't think that applies here.

    When the FCC recommended a la carte to Congress, after it had opposed it under M. Powell, it clearly said that they would not impose a new business model on the companies. Rather, it would put in effect more restrictive regulations on the basic packages. So the intervention was based on decency standards rather than economics for the customer or making more choices available. E* therefore created preventively a Family Pack that probably meets the requirements of any future FCC regulation.
     
  2. Mike D-CO5

    Mike D-CO5 Hall Of Fame

    3,099
    0
    Mar 11, 2003
    According to the What I have read on different websites there are over 14.86% of the U. S that still watch ONLY ota tv. So that is quite a lot of people . But I get the drift that you think it is fine to keep paying every year more money for something that you don't care about. It is kind of like taxes that we all have to pay . But someday if there is enough consumer backlash over this you might see a sports free option of the same basic packs we have today. IT was a consumer backlash from the Christian Right that gave us the "Family Packs" that all sat and cable providers provide today. THey provided them in response to the fear that the FCC would order Ala carte . So don't think that this is the last of ala carte talk by the FCC or the consumers out there who want more choice in what they buy and watch.
     
  3. koji68

    koji68 Icon

    627
    0
    Jun 21, 2004
    No I'm not saying that I like to pay more. I'm just saying that bundling is a marketing strategy and a business model and that the goverment is not going force companies to operate in a different way because individuals want it other way. The FCC mentioned a-la-carte as a alternative to control what objectionable content you don't want to watch or pay for.

    If a la carte was a viable business model where the company could make more money somebody would be offering it. Companies are only interested in your satisfaction if it brings them profit.

    I'd love to pay less for the 20~25 channels I watch. If I had a provider that offered that I would switch in a minute. However, I don't think is up to the goverment to tell the providers to adopt this business model.
     
  4. msmith198025

    msmith198025 Member of the Year

    1,260
    0
    Jun 28, 2007
    I dont doubt that there are alot of people that are ota only. I know quite a few of them myself.
    But i do think that getting the channels bundled makes the price lower rather than higher. Sure i get some stuff i wont ever watch, but i also get the ones i want. Getting them Ala carte would probably make the price per channel go up and little to no savings would be seen.
    And honestly what we pay for tv each month really isnt that high IMO.
    And taxes? Ill gladly pay them. Sure i want them lower, who doesnt, but keeping this country moving takes that kind of money, and if thats what it takes, thats what ill do.
     
  5. Mike D-CO5

    Mike D-CO5 Hall Of Fame

    3,099
    0
    Mar 11, 2003
    I think you keep missing the fact that most channel providers like ESPN , DISNEY , ABC are all related as they are all owned by the same company . They require you to take all of each channel to get the best price for their channels. So if you want only one Disney or east coast , instead of west , you can't do that. IF you want ABC oh well Disney and Espn channels all come along with the deal. So this inflates the price for all of these channels not to mention that they want special placement in the lowest programming pack for all companies or no deal. The only ones I see benefiting from this deal is the channel owners themselves.


    I heard Charlie Ergen just recently say ,that he wanted to sell everything Ala carte but the broadcasters won't let him. THis is the truth. The broadcasters want it this way so they can use them as leverage for more money paid by the video providers like DISH, DIrectv,Cable. So with this kind of leverage they can force companies like Dish to pay or lose the channels entirely. Remember CBS and VIAcom a few years ago. DISH lost all Cbs stations in CBS owned areas of the country till DISH caved and added the new channel :NICKTOONS, that VIACOM demanded they add. SO this is the bad side of things that cause all prices to go up for everyone. So don't think that this model is a customer firendly one that is benevolent in it's intentions. IT is about $$$$ and a lot of it. So when your bill goes up AGAIN next spring for the 8th year in a row , remember what I have written. IT will keep going up every year from now on. I remember the good old early days of satellite when there were no price increases at all for years at a time. ANyone remember what AEP was when it debuted in 2000? IT was 69.99 a month. Now it is $89.99 a month before you add locals. SO $20.00 increase in less than 7 years. Aint inflation great?

    I used to think that when my bill went over $ 100.00 a month I would stop paying for it and do something else. But now that hd is what we all crave for our hd tvs, I see my bill over $130.00 a month on average. I really hope that the hd channel providers do not decide to start hiking the price for them . I can definately do without them in hd if I can save more money. I can control that at least.
     
  6. msmith198025

    msmith198025 Member of the Year

    1,260
    0
    Jun 28, 2007
    Yes I understand that ESPN, Disney and ABC are all owned by the same company, and if it were me in charge id want all three bundled also.
    yes the price will rise. thats the nature of the buisiness. Heck, its the nature of EVERY buisiness. Whether things or sold seperately or not.
    I really do understand you point if things would work like you seem to think they would. I happen to think that it wouldnt, and buying this particular product in a bundle is the best deal that we can get.
     
  7. TBoneit

    TBoneit Hall Of Fame

    2,294
    7
    Jul 27, 2006
    Nobody has even mentioned that Dishnetwork used to have some channels available ala carte back when I first subscribed.

    I suspect that the demand was low for them and that could be why they went away.
     
  8. Mike D-CO5

    Mike D-CO5 Hall Of Fame

    3,099
    0
    Mar 11, 2003
    Actually it was qutie nice . YOu could pick up to 10 channels for a set price, and I believe it was called DISH PICKS . I believe it could be any 10 channels in the basic programming. But as I pointed out above the channel broadcasters decided they want the video providers to take them in Bundels just like we consumers have to do. So this eliminated the whole idea of DISH PICKS . Charlie Ergen would love to sell everything ala carte as he could actually charge more per item than with bundels but as I pointed out above he said the broadcasters won't let him. So we will remain with the stauts quo for now.
     
  9. Jim5506

    Jim5506 Hall Of Fame

    3,686
    37
    Jun 7, 2004
    The bonus that programming providers (Disney, CBS, NBC, etc.) get for bundling their channels is broader coverage. The bonus that distributors get is lower prices overall. If each of the Disney/ABC channels were sold seperately the price would probably double. Look at Setanta - $15 per month for one channel.
     
  10. msmith198025

    msmith198025 Member of the Year

    1,260
    0
    Jun 28, 2007
    so you mean if i wanted 12 channels there would be 8 that i wouldnt want that i had to buy?????????
     
  11. msmith198025

    msmith198025 Member of the Year

    1,260
    0
    Jun 28, 2007
    sorry, meant to follow that with a :) !
    Its all good fun!
     
  12. angiecopus

    angiecopus Legend

    231
    0
    May 18, 2004
    i sure cant afford to buy me a ticket for the First game of the season. i was told to listen to the ohio state- youngstown game on the radio, but its not the same as watching it. i really would like to see btn added but not as ala Carte.
     
  13. caseymeeps

    caseymeeps New Member

    8
    0
    Jul 7, 2007
    I gave up waiting to see if Dish gets BTN. Ordered Directv for one of my tvs yesterday.
     
  14. Mikey

    Mikey Hall Of Fame

    1,295
    0
    Oct 26, 2004
    I think you made the right move. I doubt that Dish will ever put this in their basic nationwide package. At some point, it may show up as an RSN, and you might get it with the MultiSport package, but even that's a stretch.
     
  15. pbrown

    pbrown Legend

    179
    0
    May 23, 2002
    Has anyone pointed out the fact that B-10 and DirecTV aren't going to be owned by the same company by the end of the year? Rememeber Liberty is getting D* and three FSN's, but not Big 10. At that point, DirecTV is just another carrier negotiating with another channel.
     
  16. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,176
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Today is what matters ... and E*'s complaint against BTN has more to it than just D*'s ownership involvement.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page