Gift-Wrapped Price Increase

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by BillRadio, Jan 18, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tampa8

    tampa8 Godfather/Supporter

    2,033
    37
    Mar 30, 2002
    Thanks for replying. There was no increase by DISH in November. Perhaps something you get was reduced in price and the reduction ended.
     
  2. crodrules

    crodrules Active Member

    431
    53
    Nov 21, 2016
    North...
    Read the box on page 2 of your Dish bill and you will see that is exactly what they do with the fee for the first receiver. There is a $9 per month lease fee for the first receiver included in the base package price. Hmm...Welcome Pack includes $10 for locals plus $9 for the first receiver. That means that the rest of the Welcome Pack channels only cost $0.99 per month! :)
     
  3. nmetro

    nmetro Godfather

    949
    54
    Jul 11, 2006
    Did your state enact a Sales Tax? That may explain the $4 increase.

    I dropped DISH, because they wanted to make me pay $10 what I get for free, via an an antenna and something called a Tablo that allows me to connect multiple TVs over my home network. And it has a DVR.

    I do not get one channel that DISH carried, because of the transmitter is in Fort Morgan. But, it was insulting to get a gift wrapped announcement indicating my fees were going up by $5, to support commercial television stations, which are licensed by me, the taxpayer, via the FCC. OTA plus streaming here and there take scare of my TV needs, for much cheaper. And no 2 year contract to be stuck with.

    I also dropped DISH, because more than 2/3 of the channels I didn't watch, I had no premiums, but had to pay $150/month plus tax.

    DirecTV or Comcast was not much of a better option, as they too were going to charge about the same or more.

    DISH, DriecTV and Comcst wonder why thousands of people each day cut the cord. They are still stuck in the 1980s cable company mentality.

     
    Michael P likes this.
  4. mwdxer

    mwdxer Well-Known Member

    2,064
    239
    Oct 30, 2013
    Seaside Oregon
    Cutting the cord does have advantages as streaming and OTA is less. But with many "cable" services, you need a cable or satellite subscription to view the streaming service. There are some alternatives in the Roku private channels often. But you have to look for them.
     
  5. AED55

    AED55 AllStar

    76
    1
    Oct 2, 2008
    I think at last some of the providers, like Dish, are finally starting to understand that offering more flexibility in channel choices and pricing are going to be a must if they want to stem the rising tide of so called "cord cutters". I myself am very close to joining this group of TV watchers.

    I believe ultimately they are going to have to move to a some kind of a "choose only the channels you want to watch" type of offering. I have never seen any statistics, but I've got to believe whether a person has cable or a satellite service they are paying for a huge number channels they never watch. I can't see why they couldn't offer something like the following. You start with some kind of a base price that one has to pay just to be a subscriber and then add a price for each channel the customer wants to add to their subscription, with the caveat that a minimum number of channels, say something like 10, have to be purchased. Nothing would need to change otherwise. They could continue to offer the various packages at some kind of discount and the premium movie channels and DVR service to both groups as extra cost options.

    Of course it's all about the numbers. If a large number of customers move to the cheaper, choose only the channels you watch option, their bottom line is going to suffer, but customer retention has to factored in to the equation as well. Seems like it only makes sense that a customer paying a little less has got to be better then no customer at all.

    It may be economically infeasible at this point in time, but if enough customers "cut the cord" as they say, I believe the providers will be forced to offer them an incentive like this or go out of business all together. IMO if just one provider starts offering some kind of option like this, the others will be forced to follow suite.
     
    crodrules likes this.
  6. mwdxer

    mwdxer Well-Known Member

    2,064
    239
    Oct 30, 2013
    Seaside Oregon
    I was told years ago if providers go to solid ale cart then the less popular channels will not survive and the price per channels will go way up. At that point, unless the providers keep the rel & shop channels that pay for a lot of the operating costs, then some providers may go away. I have heard Dish operates with a very slim margin. Sure they make money, but it all goes out to run Dish.
     
  7. James Long

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

    52,618
    2,795
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Most channels could not survive if only their regular viewers paid to watch them. Having a channel in AT120 with nearly 14 million people paying to watch is a good place to be. Charge a dime per customer, collect ~$16 per year and sell advertising based on being in x number of households. Or one can look at a channel's ratings and assume that only those who watch should pay. A channel that pulls half a million DISH viewers would need to charge $2.80 just to break even on the subscriber fees. They would need to charge subscribers more than that to make up for lost ad revenues (buys based on number of households the channel is in). And the higher the subscriber fee goes the more viewers will decide that it isn't worth $4 or $5 for a 10 cent channel. And the channel goes away.

    The channel's best chance is to get into as many homes as possible and still get their dime (or more, if possible) from each subscriber - whether they watch or not. Not only does that give them working income but it gets their foot in the door so they are available for when a subscriber finds their programming and watches their commercials.

    The channels that don't go away would likely need to find cheaper content. While TV is already being described as a vast wasteland don't expect it to get better with less channels. The winners would be the conglomerates ... channel groups who can spread their best programming out across 10 channels and force subscribers to buy all 10 channels to get the content they offer. The power remains with the content owners.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements