Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by lparsons21, May 4, 2012.
Maybe in the last couple of months! :sure:
My buddies who still work at Dish are now complaining on there FB status's about how many AMC related calls there taking xD
I'm sure AMC could go the USA route and have cheaper generic original programming on 3 or 4 nights a week, but they choose quality over quantity.
If you care about quantity, USA, TNT etc have you covered, if you care about quaility, then AMC, HBO, Showtime etc are your destination. If you like wrestling...well there's Syfy.
Only the broadcast networks can afford to do both (on occasion), but mostly they just focus on quantity as well. But they are in a completely different situation. They cater to a bigger, more mainstream audience, and have to fill up 12 (Fox) to 18 hours (the big 3) of primetime a week with original programming, they don't have the luxury of buying someone elses syndicated programming to fill their schedule with.
Cable on the other had does have the luxury of targeting one or two nights a week with quality original programming, or quantity and syndication if they choose.
Either way, given the choice of a la carte, USA, Syfy TNT and TBS would be the first channels I dumped, they are the ghetto of the cableverse.
Not exactly. As has been noted... AMC didn't choose quality when they ran the showrunner of Walking Dead away and cut that budget... they also didn't choose quality when they delayed Mad Men over a budget dispute for an entire season.
Also... quantity vs quality is a valid argument BUT not when you're trying to ask for a raise.
Go tell your boss that you don't want to work Monday through Thursday but you will work really hard on Friday and that you want to be paid for the other 4 days you don't work.
We all want quality... but even AMC's own Web site doesn't brag about having very much quality. I noted earlier about how they only had 6 things on their own "keep AMC" Web page... so even AMC knows they don't have much to brag about.
When you use the term “quality content”, you must realize how subjective the term is. Clearly, those people who are fans of the already mention shows are upset about the prospect of the loss of their shows, but you cannot just offer the blanket statement that other channels only supply quantity.
I can honestly say I do not watch a single program on AMC or any other of the channels in dispute, they simply are not my cup of tea. I like a great many original programs on FX, TNT and TBS and that is where I spend my viewing time.
The owners of AMC felt that they had the advantage with their weak lineup because of the popularity of a smaller list of hits than FOX had their first year on the air. Mad Men routinely is not in the top 25 cable channels ratings for the night and is regularly beaten by The Mythbusters in the same time slot. You are not going to win a battle rate increase with viewership based on those kinds of numbers and only Rainbow’s hubris allowed them to think they were in a position they could.
Ultimately, AMC will be dropped and possibly never to return; a few of Dish’s customers will flee to higher ground to view their precious shows that were taken from them. However, eventually if Rainbow were to win this fight every single other provider would be held hostage, why stop at a dollar, why not two or three? You can damn sure bet that if they win here each and every other carrier will have a target painted on them.
Nope, I have nothing to lose or gain in this battle but I do believe it is one that needs to be fought and I stand behind Dish’s decision to fight it, just as they did against FOX a couple of years ago. We lost FX for about a month, but it was back with a rate increase apparently everyone could live with.
Nevertheless, in the end we are only talking about television shows and how shallow have we become when we need to feel our lives are richer because of something we watch on television.
Personally, now that Mad Men is over for the year, I'm pretty much done watching AMC for the year anyway save for putting on the occasional film until I tire of how thoroughly they've added commercials to it.
<with a very big grin>, then you might be interested in this:
Today on ENGADGET they are talking about the Neilson ratings being recalculated to show the significance of DVR's in today's viewing habits. According to them over 40% of households have and use DVR's and that many shows are being recorded and watched within 6 days of the recording. Many of these shows are from the lower tier channels. I think they said that Modern Family (not a lower tier show) jumped 70+% for that 6 day watching window. Because of a lack of viewing time allowed I record the entire seasons of "Walking Dead" and end up watching it on a marathon weekend of my choosing. I do this with several shows like "Merlin", Dr. Who", "Warehouse 13", "Suits", "Fairly Legal", "Lost Girl", "House", "CSI:Miami". In the past I did this with "Lost" and "24". Just because some of these shows don't get great weekly ratings doesn't mean they are not being watched. This DVR thing is making the networks think twice about what to cancel and what not to.
I wish the broadcast networks each had "5 Pretty good Shows". As a consumer, I applaud AMC for their perceived commitment to quality (although their poor negotiations with Frank Darabont contradict that perception). I'd much rather get the high quality programming of Mad Men, The Walking Dead, The Killing, and Breaking Bad, than a full week's prime time lineup of S##T My Dad S##T, CSI: Scranton, Rollerblading with the "Stars", America's got Singin', etc.
However, If I was a corporate sponsor, I'd want the network I invested my advertising dollars in to crank out as much filler around their few hit shows as possible, to keep my ads in front of the masses for multiple hours every night of the week.
As a Dish customer, who entered into a contract in good faith that they would provide me with the content I was seeking, I'm pissed off that AMC, a network whose programming I get two to three quality hours from every week, will not be available to me. (Hell, I'd rather lose any of the broadcast networks).
Still, when looking at the big picture, I understand there are millions more people out there who would be outraged if they couldn't see America pick their next favorite singer/dancer/Kardashian husband, than if they couldn't see if Don Draper actually survives the sixties. And these are the same people who will raise Holy Hell if Dish raises their monthly bill a couple of bucks, despite the fact they spent nine bucks last night voting with their cell phone for Clay Aiken...
I am talking about the amount of money they put into their programing, and how much original programing they provide, not the quality of shows. There is no way on earth you could ever get a consensus on the true quality of all shows n any one network.
I forsee a day when networks sell commercials in three types of groups for shows. One for shows watched live, one for shows watched within a week, and one for shows watched within six months. There are plenty of commercials that can fall into any of those, if not a combination up to all of those three slots. And I see shows selling commercials in different slots based on when they are usually watched.
The interesting thing with commercials is that as far as I know there is not an easy way to skip streamed commercials over the internet unless they give you a skip button. Going to a website to watch a show often involves watching whatever commercials they have inserted. Also pretty much eliminates the DVR. Not sure I would want 100% streamed TV. I'll pay Dish or whoever to give me a good supply of channels I want for a reasonable price. For the case in point, I would like them to come to a reasonable compromise to keep AMC and do it before Hell on Wheels starts season 2 on Aug 12.
How much does AMC stand to lose over this really? According to a recent wall street article, AMC Reported 20% higher profits than the prior year mainly due to ad revenue increases.
There are 14 million dish subs roughly...is AMC on the lowest tier? There are an estimated 313,000 million Americans...how many viewers out of that number? How many viewers that subscribe to some type of television service? Is losing Dish really going to hurt all that much?
If there are 14 mil Dish subscribers and AMC is in the lowest tier then it sounds like it would be about 3.5 Million/month at the current rate of $0.25/Dish Subscriber.
That sounds high, though I have no way of getting figures on this. What's the source of the quarter per sub at Dish? Please!
AMC is in the 2nd tier, not 1st.
Emphasis added. The current rates being moderate, what AMC wants to continue being not so moderate.
DoyleS has to be really close in that estimate as someone had posted a link to an article which stated AMC stands to lose $20M in the first six months once Dish flips off the switch.