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

Dish Retrans Dispute with Fox over 50% Hike (Closed Thread)

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by RasputinAXP, Sep 9, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Oct 4, 2010 #521 of 2032
    RasputinAXP

    RasputinAXP Kwisatz Haderach of Cordcuttery

    3,145
    12
    Jan 23, 2008
    :uglyhamme:uglyhamme:uglyhamme:uglyhamme

    that's about all I can say at this point. You want to be released from your contract.
     
  2. Oct 4, 2010 #522 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Funny you say that because everything has a price and if E* was willing to pay that price they could have the channels back. Now while I dont think they should based on your lame argument here it would be E*'s fault for not having the channels. You imply there is no offer for them. As I udnerstand it thats not true, just not an offer E* wants to accept. Might want to read more on here before posting.
     
  3. Oct 4, 2010 #523 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Glad you found a provider that would take care of your tv needs. Welcome aboard. I dont think you will be disappointed.
     
  4. Oct 4, 2010 #524 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    That might be correct but I am betting if alot of the channels you watch just got dumped you would be singing a different tune yourself.
     
  5. Oct 4, 2010 #525 of 2032
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,057
    318
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    Again, yes the loss of Fox broadcasts stations would hurt Dish. But keep in mind that all the deregulation notwithstanding, broadcast stations are a federal issue from the get-go. As I said in an earlier post:
    If the two Charles in charge hang tough and Rupert doesn't blink, we might very well see a post election review of this whole broadcast station retransmission fee issue with a number of lame duck and comfortably reelected members of Congress participating.
     
  6. Oct 4, 2010 #526 of 2032
    zimm7778

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    1,201
    5
    Nov 11, 2007
    You mean sites. They decided to register 7 of them for this issue.
     
  7. Oct 4, 2010 #527 of 2032
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    There may be other ways out of the contract; specifcally, there may be state laws on the books that make parts of the subscriber contract void.

    I seem to recall a material change in service offering may be invalid in some states; in many instances a material change in service must be provided to the customer in writing. If anyone wishes to take that tact, a call should be placed to the state's consumer protection department or to the state's Attorney General.
     
  8. Oct 4, 2010 #528 of 2032
    lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    4,306
    207
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    Maybe you should too. Yes, Fox has put a price out there, but not only doesn't Dish want to pay that huge increase, neither do I! And you know that whatever increase they get, it WILL be passed right along to us subscribers.

    And that is just as true for D* as it is for E*. So if you don't mind rates going up, encourage your provider to pay whatever is asked for. But don't talk to mine! :)
     
  9. Oct 4, 2010 #529 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    It needs to be regulated in some way. This is getting out of hand. I mean there has to be less of an affect on us the customers in my opinion. Like someone said earlier, its hard to have just signed for 2 years thinking that you were going to get what you wanted because E*'s page said so and then find out that the contract for those channels is up and they are not resigning for them. We as customers done know when the contracts are up and we have no say in any of that either. Like I said earlier we sign up for the advertised content. Its kind of not fair that these companies have power over changing that when its all based on perception. If we pay this we get this. I think that if customers lose channels there should be a window of opertunity to cancel without paying a fee. I mean lets face it that is a good reason to want to cancel.

    What if out of the 200 channels they replaced all of them with crap no one would watch? Should we all still feel obligated to pay the ETF? There should be some lines drawn here that protect the customer as well as protect the provider. Im not just out for my own concerns here.

    I think there should be laws on how much a retrans fee can be raised. It should be a standard and there are criteria that channels have to meet to consider themselves available for a full XXX amount of increase. If not then if falls in a lower level of possible increase. The stations have way to much power over their content. While I understand its their content, if they have no way of getting it out then its kind of useless. That being said rules on both sides of things could help us all.
     
  10. Oct 4, 2010 #530 of 2032
    GrumpyBear

    GrumpyBear Hall Of Fame

    3,235
    0
    Feb 1, 2006
    With the all the mergers on the verge as well, I for one wouldn't mind seeing this happen at ALL! Broadcasters wont like being under the microscope about this issue at all. Dish and Fox sports is just the latest issue this year alone. Bring in the Locals into the mix, and Fox and other Broadcaster wont like the extra attention.
     
  11. Oct 4, 2010 #531 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Your statement said that E* wants to provide the channels but FOX is mucking it up. That is actually incorrect. FOX has made an offer to keep the stations on. Like I said, I dont think that E* should pay the money but I also dont think FOX deserves all the blame either. That was my argument.
     
  12. Oct 4, 2010 #532 of 2032
    chum76

    chum76 Mentor

    41
    1
    Jun 4, 2010
    My only advice is if you do cancel with them and they have your credit card on file cancel that card BEFORE or they will bill it right away. Also send back all the equipment and put tracking on it. If they send boxes put tracking on it anyway. You can always dispute the early termination fees with the collection agency and most likely pay much less the longer you fight it.
     
  13. Oct 4, 2010 #533 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    For once I agree with you. If the affiliates and the provider can not play nice then lets have it all regulated alot more.
     
  14. Oct 4, 2010 #534 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    While that may be one of his options that is a horrible thing to have to do. Everyone goes with a provider due to content provided. This is no different. I understand that E* did an install and needs to recover money. That being said its not okay in my book to make drastic changes after you have someone on the hook and just say like it or pay us and leave. If FOX is removed as well I can see some people taking E* to court over this.
     
  15. Oct 4, 2010 #535 of 2032
    lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    4,306
    207
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    I think you've got it backwards. E* offered to keep the channels on at the current rates/subscription levels but Fox said no to that idea. The only way Fox wants them on is at a newer and higher rate and in a lower tier.

    In this case, I think Fox is the bad actor. In the previous one (ABC/Disney), I think Dish was the bad actor.

    But in both cases, I'm actually less worried about the channel loss than I am not seeing a new programming charge that reflects the losses of those high priced channels.
     
  16. Oct 4, 2010 #536 of 2032
    joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,808
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    I think both are at fault in this case as well. Its not unreasonable for the FOX sports channels to want a increase. Its also not unreasonable for E* to want that increase to be within reason. Both are at fault. E* could have then on today if they wanted to & FOX could lower their expectations and have the stations back on today as well if they wanted to. Its hard to say which one is being more greedy. In this case its not really a matter of who is more greedy. They are both trying to say you need me more and we are the ones left in the middle. I hope it gets sorted out. All I was trying to say to that individual was that FOX is not the only one to blame here. E* should of been talking to them months in advance to assure that there was not an interrtuption of this kind. Maybe they were but it wasnt enough.
     
  17. Oct 4, 2010 #537 of 2032
    GrumpyBear

    GrumpyBear Hall Of Fame

    3,235
    0
    Feb 1, 2006
    I know its cool an rainy here in San Diego, but it must be snowing somewere today, as Joshjr and I are in complete agreement.
     
  18. Oct 4, 2010 #538 of 2032
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,057
    318
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    I'm not really sure how significant Dish's "greed" is in this picture. Dish will increase rates in February and would likely recover whatever out-of-pocket costs they would incur from that point on.

    My guess is that if Charlie said to Rupert "whatever you want, just so its effective February 1," Rupert would go along. I really do believe Charlie is irked at the demands on his customers sports channel and broadcast station owners are making.
     
  19. Oct 4, 2010 #539 of 2032
    James Long

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

    45,954
    1,026
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    DISH absolutely CANNOT have the channels back on today without an agreement from Fox. No one party is in complete control of the negotiation unless the other party simply chooses to cave in to the demands on the table. Neither party will do that so ... negotiations continue.


    "Maybe they were?" Just because they didn't make announcements that they were in negotiations does not mean they have not been in negotiations for months.
     
  20. Oct 4, 2010 #540 of 2032
    tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,374
    57
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...
    It seems that i'm one of the few people that this has worked out for the better so far. Since I basically almost never watch FX and i'm prone to actually watch the channel they've substituted it for, HDNet Movies and since I wasn't currently subscribing to the Platinum package to get it, it's like a little bonus for me! :) As far as i'm concerned HD Theater for Nat Geo is a wash, no biggie either way there and I never watch the Fox Sports until basketball season and considering how bad the Pacers have been the last few years the wife and I might not even care about that unless they start having a good season by some miracle! In any case personally I think it's bad form for them to be asking for a rate increase at all considering the economy and all. They should be happy with what they're getting and hope that more people just don't cancel their service all together because it becomes one more optional service they choose to get rid of because finances are tight.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page