Fox / Newscorp channels possibly suspended Nov. 1/Now resolved

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Pepe Sylvia, Oct 20, 2011.

  1. Nov 1, 2011 #1161 of 1258
    mailiang

    mailiang Legend

    219
    2
    Jul 30, 2006
    Springsteen...
    If there is one thing I have learned when I was a production assistant in the TV business, is that the financial wheels of television production is driven by advertising. I was never concerned about losing the Fox channels by the November first dead line. Direct TV sponsors many of the sports events televised by Fox. This was the same issue last spring with YES. When it comes to these type of negotiations, its not surprising at least to me, that DTV has a 99% success rate. As long a they continue to pay big bucks for advertising they will continue to be in the drivers seat.
     
  2. Nov 1, 2011 #1162 of 1258
    TBoneit

    TBoneit Hall Of Fame

    2,294
    7
    Jul 27, 2006
    I don't accept modest price increases as being a win. A price increase that matches the inflation rate, that would be a win.
     
  3. Nov 1, 2011 #1163 of 1258
    Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    37,060
    288
    Jun 18, 2006
    So long as it also took into account improvements in the product that are streamed to you for free, like updates to the UI functionality and other interactive features and apps.
     
  4. Nov 1, 2011 #1164 of 1258
    mkharsh33

    mkharsh33 Mentor

    32
    0
    Oct 6, 2008
    Well, now we get to await the next battle & 11th hour agreement/settlement. Until then...
     
  5. Nov 1, 2011 #1165 of 1258
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    :confused: Why?
     
  6. Nov 1, 2011 #1166 of 1258
    SPACEMAKER

    SPACEMAKER Freethinker

    3,183
    16
    Dec 11, 2007
    Mason, MI
    There are other factors to consider. The improved user experience (WHDVR, HD GUI, Additional HD Channels) have added a great deal of value. Also, there hasn't been a price increase for Premier subs since March 2010.

    But as with anything, the consumer has options. Perhaps the grass is greener elsewhere. For me and my family, DirecTV provides more value than Dish or Cable.
     
  7. Nov 1, 2011 #1167 of 1258
    njeske

    njeske Mentor

    41
    0
    Apr 25, 2007
    Rancho...
    I haven't seen any news on this yet, but any chance this new deal included adding Fox's programming to DirecTV's On-Demand lineup? That'd be worth a bit of a rate increase in my opinion.
     
  8. Nov 1, 2011 #1168 of 1258
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    All of those things are already added costs. Base package price increases should not take these things into account.
     
  9. Nov 1, 2011 #1169 of 1258
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,541
    617
    Dec 2, 2010
    Monterey...
    The advantage ain't a big one. Fox needs DIRECTV® and DIRECTV® needs Fox, though arguably to a lesser degree.

    Both sides lose, and we lose, if the two cannot come to terms.
     
  10. Nov 1, 2011 #1170 of 1258
    TBlazer07

    TBlazer07 Large Member

    4,867
    22
    Feb 5, 2009
    Florida
    They should only increase the wealthy (Premier) which should help the middle class (Choice Xtra). :lol:
     
  11. Nov 1, 2011 #1171 of 1258
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    It's not a lesser degree at all. DirecTV needs News Corp. DirecTV needs Viacom. DirecTV needs Disney. DirecTV needs Comcast/NBC Universal. If DirecTV decided to tell these four companies to take a hike, what would they have left?

    Let's just be reasonable here. DirecTV needs content, and content needs eyeballs.
     
  12. Nov 1, 2011 #1172 of 1258
    mhking

    mhking Legend

    584
    5
    Oct 27, 2002
    Atlanta
    Agreed; I love rugby, but I refuse to pay the extra $15 a month in any way, shape or form. :nono:
     
  13. Nov 1, 2011 #1173 of 1258
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,541
    617
    Dec 2, 2010
    Monterey...
    Uh, you've gone from a specific case in which our opinions differ, to extending it to something no one has suggested.

    Further no one has suggested DIRECTV® can live without content. I believe my statements, and those of others, are reasonable.
     
  14. Nov 1, 2011 #1174 of 1258
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    Of course you do. I disagree, and I will leave it at that.
     
  15. Nov 1, 2011 #1175 of 1258
    kude

    kude Cool Member

    29
    0
    Dec 28, 2007
    Doesn't News Corp own Directv anyway? What was the worry? (rhetorical)
     
  16. Nov 1, 2011 #1176 of 1258
    SPACEMAKER

    SPACEMAKER Freethinker

    3,183
    16
    Dec 11, 2007
    Mason, MI
    I disagree. Overall value/cost is all that matters. You can break it down in whichever manner you choose.

    But the fact remains, if one isn't willing to accept cost increases they are free to look at the alternatives.
     
  17. Nov 1, 2011 #1177 of 1258
    SPACEMAKER

    SPACEMAKER Freethinker

    3,183
    16
    Dec 11, 2007
    Mason, MI
    Not any more.
     
  18. Nov 1, 2011 #1178 of 1258
    Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    News Corp. sold their stake in DirecTV back in 2008.
     
  19. Nov 1, 2011 #1179 of 1258
    DawgLink

    DawgLink Woof Woof Woof

    1,543
    3
    Nov 5, 2006
    Washington, DC
    Socialist!
     
  20. Nov 1, 2011 #1180 of 1258
    Bewts1989

    Bewts1989 New Member

    7
    0
    Oct 28, 2011
    That was probably a good Idea for the customers in the long haul.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements