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

ESPN prez confident that Dish-Disney deal will renew before Sept. 30 expiration

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by FTA Michael, Aug 22, 2013.

  1. FTA Michael

    FTA Michael Hall Of Fame

    3,474
    4
    Jul 21, 2002
    According to MultiChannel News, Disney's contract with Dish is up at the end of September. John Skipper, ESPN president and co-chair of Disney Media Networks, talked with reporters Wednesday at ESPN Media Day in Bristol. (That sounds like a fun event!) Skipper said he wasn't too concerned because Dish and Disney have had “very constructive discussions and it’s clear we’re on a path to get a deal done.”

    There are lots of other little notes and news nuggets about ESPN so feel free to go read it.
     
  2. JohnBoy

    JohnBoy New Member

    261
    14
    Sep 8, 2011
    As a Directv sub,I will be watching this Dish,Disney/ESPN deal real closely.

    I mainly just want to see if Dish will be finally getting WatchESPN App's access.So that will force Directv's hand when its time for negotiations.

    Good to see by reading that report that Jerome Bettis is going to be working with ESPN's NFL lineup as they recently canned Hugh Douglas for being drunk and using racial slurs on a fellow coworker of the same ethnicity at a ESPN/Disney funded party.
     
  3. pmjones

    pmjones AllStar

    77
    4
    Aug 3, 2012
    This is nice, but I think that a renewal while maintaining the status quo (no ESPNU in HD, Disney XD in HD, etc.) would be a disappointment.
     
  4. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I have to think Disney will pressure for carriage for all those HD feeds and the Watch ESPN app support in the new contract. IF they allowed Dish to renew without picking up those things it sets a weird precedent that most channels have not been willing to do (i.e. let the service provider pick which channels they want to carry vs taking the whole bundle).
     
  5. rtd2

    rtd2 Legend

    161
    2
    Oct 2, 2006
    Where is James at ? I should have took Stewart's hat trick offer..... :rotfl:

    http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/206777-raycom-stations-may-drop-from-dish-at-midnight-and-now-back-on-dish-again/page-6
     
  6. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    IF they are going to reach an agreement, I'm in the camp that wishes they would do it sooner rather than later... it would be nice to have the ESPNUHD and ESPNewsHD feeds back before college football starts next week...
     
  7. James Long

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

    45,952
    1,024
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    It has still been a long dispute ... so any statement that says it will take a long time to resolved is already true.

    Now if you say it will take forever for the stations to come in HD ... or a long time to come up with a renewal deal perhaps the hattrick could be in play to prove you wrong again.

    Nobody on this site is mad when you're wrong about saying a deal will take a long time. :D

    BTW: If this works we'll send you over to DirecTV to fix the PAC-12 issue. :lol:
     
  8. rtd2

    rtd2 Legend

    161
    2
    Oct 2, 2006
    Direct Tv and Pac12 ?, may have to pack a lunch but I'll do it!!! ... I'll take one for TeamDish. To warm up i may even tackle- Direct Tv and the Blaze :D
     
  9. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,053
    317
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    I don't suppose Charlie can keep me from having to pay within a couple of years an additional $5.00 a month for channels I don't want (ESPN/Disney/ABC Family) in my AT120 package. My guess is that by 2018 the cost for the ESPN/Disney/ABC Family group in the AT120 package will be about the same as subscribing to HBO except it will simply be a $200.00 a year tax in the bill for many of us who would never voluntarily subscribe to that channel combination.
     
  10. Paul Secic

    Paul Secic Hall Of Fame

    6,226
    23
    Dec 16, 2003
    Hopfeully the Live Well Network will be included in the deal. It's on all of the ABC digital stations. It's like DYI Network.
     
  11. James Long

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

    45,952
    1,024
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Networks delivered over the air would need to be blocked out in markets where there is an over the air station ... unless the local broadcasters agreed to allow a national feed instead of one with their commercials. Local broadcasters pay for the content ... and it is usually a market exclusive payment where no one else can air that content in that market.
     
  12. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    That may be true... but I know I'm paying well more than $10 for lots of channels that I never watch too... possibly some of the channels that you and others want to watch... so at the end of the day we are all paying for channels we don't watch and it benefits all of us because the channels are there for the day when we do decide to take a peek.
     
  13. James Long

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

    45,952
    1,024
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    $16 per month for ABC Family/ESPN/Disney by 2018? I suppose that is possible. But we'll probably see the $600 per year cost of AT120 go up more than the costs of the mouse channels over the next five years.

    Every channel wants a little more money each year ... and AT120 will not stay at $50 per month. Especially if Fox Sports 1 (and possibly 2) are moved in to AT120 to be with ESPN.
     
  14. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Yep... we dance around this circle multiple times per year... everybody goes into a panic when Dish loses a channel during a dispute... and they say "why not give them the extra money they are asking for"... but then the same people freak out over ESPN or whatever channel they don't watch wanting more money. We're doing the same dance over and over.

    IF there are 100 channels in AT120 (there are more but depending on how people want to count channels I figure the math is easier at 100)... and each channel just asked for a nickel more... that would mean at least $5 more per month. That nickel might be 50% raise to some channels but be a 1% raise to others... more popular channels are going to ask for more money. We are all getting the benefit of variety by being willing to chip into the "pot" so that we get those 100 channels.

    To me, the way I look at it... Am I enjoying the TV I watch every month? Do I feel like I am getting good value for my payment? I think yes, so I don't bother myself trying to decipher how much I may be paying to channels I never or seldom watch... its just something that would frustrate me for no actual reason. IF I feel like paying $80 or whatever a month is worth it for the channels I do watch... that's all that matters at the end of the day. Do I like the service, do I feel I'm getting good value, and can I afford to pay the bill. As long as the answer is yes, even if the bill goes up next year, then things are fine. Once I answer "no" to one of those questions, that's when I need to make decisions on cutting service.

    We have a gas tax that pays for road maintenance... that includes maintenance to roads I have never driven upon and likely will never drive upon... but I don't wish for the option (think toll roads) to only pay for the roads I actually use. I'm fine paying the tax and getting the freedom to drive on any roads (except those damn PPV toll roads!).
     
  15. Gloria_Chavez

    Gloria_Chavez Godfather

    530
    23
    Aug 11, 2008
    Let's do a back-of-the envelope exercise.

    CBS wants 2 dollars a month. Let's say that TimeWarner caves, and by Year 4 (2016), CBS is getting 2 dollars a month. That would mean that NBC (Sunday Night Football), ABC and Fox will certainly also get 2 dollars a month. Then you have Univision, whose demographics should result in 2.50 a month, but which will settle for 2 dollars. Telemundo will be happy with 1.50 a month.

    So, in 2016, you have 6 broadcast networks taking in 11.50 a month in retransmission fees. Over 12 months, * today's 100M PayTv subs, you get 13.8B a year, from PayTv subscribers to broadcast networks.

    Today (2012 numbers), PayTv subs pay "just" 2B (of 43B in total in content fees) to broadcast networks.

    That 2B will, within 4 years, increase to 13.8B.

    From paying broadcast networks 1.67 a month in 2012, to 11.50 a month by 2016.

    Do you think this is viable?
     
  16. James Long

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

    45,952
    1,024
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The networks are NOT going to get what they want. They will need to compromise.
     
  17. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I tend to agree... the networks will not be able to strongarm in that manner because they are available OTA and companies like Dish even support OTA through their receivers, so Dish happily will say "hook up an antenna and enjoy"...

    But, it is refreshing to see someone other than ESPN being blamed for potentially higher future prices :)
     
  18. inazsully

    inazsully Icon

    862
    13
    Oct 3, 2006
    Many different items in this pot. You read that many subs are cutting the cord and getting what they want via streaming. But what number constitutes "many"? How much of a concern is this to the various providers? Are they quaking in their boots? Then there's the al-a-cart scenario which most here feel is financially unfeasoble. Then there are those like me that think the broadcasters like Disney, CBS, ABC, NBC etc should be paying the providers instead of the other way around. Let the broadcasters make their profits from the advertisers, which is basically what they did before the advent of cable. Somebody is making a whole lot of $$$ regardless of how they choose to report it. The only cetainy is that we are funding a lot of folks in the entertainment industry. Supply and demand. We demand it and obviously were content to pay for it. Me too.
     
  19. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Exactly.

    I haven't been to a movie theater in years... I think movie tickets are $10 sometimes now... but I honestly don't know since I never have a desire to go... but when I was a kid we used to go every weekend. If I went alone every weekend we are talking $40 per month just to see those 4 movies... whereas I can put that towards TV and see that many + loads more.

    I also don't attend live sporting events or concerts... I have attended both in the past, but I'm not a big crowd person and again the expense comes into play. You'd be hard-pressed to find a concert or sporting event ticket for less than $20 these days... and I can watch most of the sports I care to see on TV and lots of music channels and videos + I still have my radio as well.

    So I feel like I'm getting a LOT of value for what I spend on TV every month.
     
  20. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,053
    317
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    Ok, I'll bite.

    Yes, we're all paying for channels we don't watch. And I accept Stewart's analogy to a gas tax. That's my point. At first ,regulated-by-government-broadcast-TV was free after you had the equipment to receive it, albeit the selection was limited. The government "provided" the roads (airwaves). The government owned the airwaves, the"roads", and licensed their use, much like a vehicle license.

    And now we get into a grey area. The cable companies use public right-of-ways (roads) to create an entertainment delivery system of their own. The satellite companies use the public airwaves (sort-of-roads) to create a delivery system of their own. I'm not uncomfortable with the idea of paying them for the service they provide - signal delivery.

    I don't like them being a reseller for multinational media conglomerates "trinkets."

    The manufacturing of the trinkets we call entertainment generally should not be of interest to government or the delivery companies. The problem is that the combination of a large multimedia corporation with its package of channels and the service provider with its tier packages come together to create a "creeping tax" nightmare using the public right-of-ways and the public airwaves. I don't remember authorizing Disney to tax the American people. They are a private corporation selling products.

    We should let Disney/ESPN/ABC, and Comcast/NBCU and CBS/Showtime/Viacom and News Corp/Fox/whatever and etc. each have to sell their products not in cable/satellite company packages but in their own packages which we could choose to buy separately and have delivered through our ISP-like cable and satellite services. Let the conglomerates compete in the free market and let us viewers pay the cable/satellite companies like we pay for an ISP. Then if Disney won't sell ESPN without ABC and the Disney Channel for less than $20 a month, so be it. But I'd guess that as direct retailers really competing for our dollars they would take a different approach.

    The media conglomerates would get paid by me and you, the carriers would get paid by me and you. Let the best in each field win. And, if nothing else, this would end the retransmission fee fights between the carrier companies and the multinational media conglomerates.
     

Share This Page