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

Now that the Dispute has Ended what have we Learned?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by PK6301, Jul 20, 2012.

  1. Jul 20, 2012 #1 of 168

    PK6301 Legend

    May 16, 2012
    Erie, PA
    Now that Directv and Viacom have come to terms and ended the dispute what have we learned from this?

    1) The sun came up every morning..(sometimes it was even too HOT !!! ) No dark clouds covered the earth.

    2) Most of our children were able to come up with other viewing choices, or even better they read a book, played outside, used their imagination.

    3) The adults realized how much we really did not miss most of the stations, or how little we actually watched them.

    4) In my opinion I believe we have gained a some and lost some..In the long run it probably came out equal.

    a. My son gained Disney Jr. (he does not care if it is in HD)
    b. I might upgrade to gain Sprout (he liked that also)
    c. Direct lost some subs due to this dispute (some are really never happy)

    5) In the long run time will tell how this all will play out. Now we can put the 115+ page thread to bed.
  2. Jul 20, 2012 #2 of 168

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    Apr 29, 2011
    For those of us in the industry, this was a real eye opener. Viacom got humiliated, that's the best way I can state it and the chatter among nearly everyone I speak to that does this for a living.

    Humiliated, publicly undressed, you name it. They thought they had the leverage and DTV got what they wanted from what I hear. The channels are back up, they aren't paying anything close to the 30% and if I am a betting man, Epix isn't coming. Meanwhile, Viacom got clobbered in the ratings, have to give make-goods to advertisers, likely lost some of their digital rights and they helped their competition like Disney, Sprout and others gain market share.


    There is no other way to put it. I've also not seen a major programmer act in such a low brow manner as they did. The sniping on both sides was not needed, but especially what Viacom had done. When they altered the video of DTV's CEO Mike White and called him a liar, that is not something you do. The 26 channels BS right from the start was garbage. The comment that DTV was only negotiating 10 minutes a day - knowing a few folks over at Viacom and DTV, that was a bald face lie and Denise Denson should apologize for that rhetoric. Unprofessional.

    The relationship will take some time to heal. Redstone must be fuming.

    DTV certainly lost some customers but they came out stronger from this. This was a strategic battle they picked and sends a message to the other majors out there. The message is simple, we can live for a long time without you and we are willing to lose customers. The days of grow grow grow subscribers at all costs are over, we can sustain what you throw at us so think real hard before you do it.

    That's my view from inside the television world in talking to friends and colleagues the last few days.
  3. Jul 20, 2012 #3 of 168

    mnassour Icon

    Apr 23, 2002
    That's a great sum-up of the situation.

    I really can't understand why Viacom took this route. All of our sniping at them here over the past couple of weeks aside, Viacom...like DirecTV...is a major public company and knows how to properly negotiate. The mess, yes, mess it created by aiming its characters at children(?), blowing the cover off of the negotiations in the beginning and publicly sniping at DirecTV was nonprofessional at best, reprehensible at worst.


    Were I a major Viacom stockholder I would be furious. Were I an advertiser I would be demanding major make-goods. Were I a viewer (oh, I am! :) ) I would have found something else to watch (oh, I did! ;))

    Other program suppliers will learn the lesson that Viacom has. Don't screw with DirecTV. DirecTV can now go before Congress (yes, expect hearings) in a strong position. And yes, our rates will probably go up.

    But the shows will be there for years to come.

    An excellent point....DBS is now a mature industry, and all the players need to act as such.
  4. Jul 20, 2012 #4 of 168

    DodgerKing Hall Of Fame

    Apr 28, 2008
    Viacom is one of the most dishonest companies around.

    Everything they posted on their website, FB, and Twitter was a lie. They went as far as saying that they were not negotiating anymore.
  5. Jul 20, 2012 #5 of 168

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    I think we have learned that the Sat/Cable providers are going to be more willing to play hardball a bit more, which should help in keeping subscription rates from climbing too fast and too high. And I think we have learned that for all the gnashing of teeth we did about the channels not seen, we didn't miss them anywhere near as much as we thought we would.

    I think that Direct learned that taking down a fairly big content provider's stations isn't as costly as it might have been thought.

    And I think that the other content providers learned, or should have learned, that going very negative and doing childish things is not in their best interest.
  6. Jul 20, 2012 #6 of 168

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    They picked their battle. Big player but nothing essential to the business on a day-to-day basis. They could not have pulled this with espn. Good choice. Maybe a landmark for the business.
  7. Jul 20, 2012 #7 of 168

    PK6301 Legend

    May 16, 2012
    Erie, PA
    I doubt that ABC/Disney would pull a stunt like Viacom did.
  8. Jul 20, 2012 #8 of 168

    mitchflorida Godfather

    May 18, 2009
    I learned you can get a $15 credit in exchange for losing Viacom channels for a week.

    That is the sweetest deal ever. I will call again in in 3 months and offer them the same deal.
  9. Jul 20, 2012 #9 of 168

    raott Hall Of Fame

    Nov 23, 2005
    What stunt?

    Disney has significant leverage with ESPN, far more than Viacom ever had. Since, Unlike the Viacom channels, the decision makers at the house who pay the sat bill will care about missing Monday night football, whereas those same decision makers wouldn't be nearly willing to switch providers because their teen cannot watch Jersey Shore.
  10. Jul 20, 2012 #10 of 168

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Not talking about the tactics but the choice to draw a line in the sand by directv.
  11. Jul 20, 2012 #11 of 168

    mitchflorida Godfather

    May 18, 2009
    Is it really such a great victory that we now have to pay 15% more for some lousy Viacom channels instead of 30% more? I would call that a defeat for us, the customers.
  12. Jul 20, 2012 #12 of 168

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    Dec 6, 2006
    Maybe, but don't forget Nick channel is the number 1 rated channel on D*. ESPN is not. Many people do not care about sports one iota. However, to your point, the difference is who is paying the bill...the kids or the parents. Typically you can find something else for the kids to do, parents not so much. :D
  13. Jul 20, 2012 #13 of 168

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    Dec 6, 2006
    Well, uhm, yes. In my opinion anyway. The reality is the content was going up but instead of going up to the level they wanted, it will not go up as high. All depends how you view things I suppose, but I'd rather pay $3.50 for gas than $4.00. Of course, I'd rather not pay anything for it, but that isn't reasonable.
  14. Jul 20, 2012 #14 of 168
    John Strk

    John Strk Legend

    Oct 16, 2009
    ...that I really did not miss any of these overrated channels and that our bills will probably see a significant increase next year! :nono2:
  15. Jul 20, 2012 #15 of 168

    PCampbell Icon

    Nov 18, 2006
    I learned thet I dont watch any of Viacoms channels.
  16. Jul 20, 2012 #16 of 168

    RunnerFL Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2006
    Yup, but that's not a surprise. They launched a full on smear campaign so I'm not surprised to find out they were lying the whole time.
  17. Jul 20, 2012 #17 of 168

    mreposter Hall Of Fame

    Jul 29, 2006
    If, during some future dispute with Disney, the ESPN channels were pulled I seriously doubt that it isn't the #1 channel would hold much water. The torches and pitchforks would come out very quickly and there'd be rioting in the streets. ;)
  18. Jul 20, 2012 #18 of 168

    Old_School Legend

    Nov 28, 2011
    That even after the dispute we seem to still be getting many Viacom threads!:lol:
  19. Jul 20, 2012 #19 of 168
    Ira Lacher

    Ira Lacher Icon

    Apr 24, 2002
    OK - who's going to be the first satco/cableco to let ESPN go dark?

    The only lesson I can think of would be what happened in New York last winter when Time Warner yanked MSG off its systems for seven weeks, denying Knicks and Rangers telecasts to 3 million subscribers. New York's governor had to intervene in that dispute, according to Bloomberg News. I don't think you will find the president of the United States doing the same thing if ESPN goes dark.

    Frankly, I believe this is shaping up to be the doomsday dispute that could do serious -- maybe even historic -- damage to both sides.
  20. Jul 20, 2012 #20 of 168

    wmj5 Godfather

    Aug 26, 2007
    I don't like sports one iota, I don't have anything to say about people that do, but I have always said half the stuff on D* is junk and that takes in all of viacom, that is your junk, I would like to see D* come out with a pakage without sports
    p.s. I don't know if this is the right place to send a reply or not, if its not would someone please tell me how, it looks like I would know by now.
    wmj5@aol.com jerry johnson

Share This Page