too many shopping channels

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by KTMCDO, Jul 1, 2005.

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

    Sundance AllStar

    76
    0
    Mar 6, 2004
    So what, I don't see my bill going down, it's only more money in the pockets of the top at Dish.
     
  2. Sundance

    Sundance AllStar

    76
    0
    Mar 6, 2004
    Just setup your favorite's without the garbage.
     
  3. Mikey

    Mikey Hall Of Fame

    1,295
    0
    Oct 26, 2004
    Remember all those years when your bill DIDN'T go up? That's when E* was adding an occasional shopping channel.

    Now they haven't added any for awhile (because everyone was screaming about how irritating they are). What's the result? This year everyone's bill went up.

    Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.
     
  4. TNGTony

    TNGTony Hall Of Fame

    5,345
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    I've been hearing this every year since 1997 and for some reason, not only is Dish still in business, but it is turning a profit (2 and a half years) while DirecTV is on its second owner and had ONE profitable quarter in 11 years.

    I wish I could run a business and be "killed" like this every time!

    See ya
    Tony
     
  5. Darkman

    Darkman Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Gold Club

    6,901
    3
    Apr 16, 2002
    hehe.. Go Charlie! :D
     
  6. AllieVi

    AllieVi Hall Of Fame

    1,530
    0
    Apr 10, 2002
    Umm, no they aren't. The only reason they are in business is to make money (as you mentioned). It's not a byproduct, as you suggested, but the reason all companies are in business. If DISH could make more by doing something else, I expect they'd do it.
     
  7. Steve Mehs

    Steve Mehs Hall Of Fame

    11,498
    5
    Mar 21, 2002
    Your logic is fuzzy. I’m not arguing at how much Dish’s prices went up over the past 6 years, but to say the price went up because of the lack of shopping channels is ludicrous.

    When I subscribed to Dish Network in December of 1998 there were two shopping channels, and only 2. QVC and HSN. Within 18 months or so Shop At Home and Valuvision (ShopNBC) were added as part time channels that shared bandwidth with the BTV and eventually got their own channels. Spring of 2000 was the first increase I saw with Dish Network and there has been one that time of year ever since. 11 shopping channels were eventually added and packages increased $7-$9.

    Again, I’m not arguing the price, and I’m NOT taking into consideration channel additions or inflation, but just what you said in your post.

    (To compare apples to apples local channels are not included)

    AT40/50/60
    1999- $19.99
    2005- $26.99

    AT100/120
    1999- $28.99
    2005- $37.99

    AT150/180
    2000- $39.99
    2005- $47.99

    Shopping channels
    1999- 2
    2005-13
     
  8. TNGTony

    TNGTony Hall Of Fame

    5,345
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Looking at the Dish Channel Chart Archives:

    1/20/1997 2 Shopping Channels (HSN & QVC)
    12/6/1998 2 Shopping Channels (HSN & QVC)
    4/23/2000 4 Shopping Channels (HSN, QVC, SAH & Value Vision)
    April 2001 6 shopping channels (Gem Shopping Net, Product Information Net., SAH, QVC, Value Vision, iShop)
    6/15/2002 9 Shopping Channels (Men's, HSN, Vision Channel (infomercials), SAH, The Beauty & Fashion Channel, iShop/Gem Shopping channel (shared), QVC, ACN, ShopNBC)
    9/1/2003 9 Shopping Channels
    1/2005 13 Shopping Channels

    See ya
    Tony
     
  9. FTA Michael

    FTA Michael Hall Of Fame

    3,474
    5
    Jul 21, 2002
    You're both right. Echostar is in business to make money for its shareholders, but it does so in a particular way. E* began with a business plan, and I'm sure the plan has evolved over the years, but for years a primary core idea has stayed the same -- sell satellite-delivered TV programming.

    When E* thinks it can make more money on a related sideline, it adds that sideline. (See Bingo TV, printed program guides.) But in general, E*'s expertise has been built in satellite TV; there's no reason to think E* folks would be better than any other corporation's folks at running a department store or any other unrelated profitable enterprise.

    So it's accurate to say that E*'s primary goal is profit, but it's also accurate to say that E* is in the business of selling and delivering satellite TV.
     
  10. AllieVi

    AllieVi Hall Of Fame

    1,530
    0
    Apr 10, 2002
    That's why my original statement was: "Dish isn't in business to deliver satelllite programming."

    It's business is delivering satellite programming, of course. But that's not why it's in that business.
     
  11. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,512
    2,126
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    It doesn't matter what the subscribers would rather do. If it were up to subscriber preference everyone would get all 200+ channels for $30 per month. E* isn't a democracy of it's subscribers - it is a business where the company makes decisions intended to keep it in business. Selling bandwidth to a few shopping channels (some of them part time on BTV bandwidth) helps the bottom line. Something D* seems to have a bigger problem with.

    On a percentage basis, E* has far less of their bandwidth invested in shopping channels than D*.

    JL
     
  12. garypen

    garypen Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,410
    0
    Feb 1, 2004
    Perhaps they should start selling crack. That can make them lots of money. I also know that hit men do very well.

    Why even bother with dbs sevices, if money is the only object?

    When making money is the only object, that is called GREED, not business. And, GREED is bad business.
     
  13. garypen

    garypen Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,410
    0
    Feb 1, 2004
    I didn't realize that E* had three times the bandwidth of D*.
     
  14. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,512
    2,126
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Just another factoid to add to your databank. :D

    E* has: 119 - 21, 110 - 29, 148 - 32, 61.5 - 11 plus 6 of SkyAngel's leased; That's 99 DBS transponders ... then add in 500MHz at 105 and 121 in FSS, equivilent to 64 more transponders. 163 TPs of space.

    D* has: 119 - 11, 110 - 3, 101 - 32; That's 46 TPs. If they are using 8 TPs at the Canadian 72.5 it would be an even 1/3rd of E*'s space.

    That's today - The balance continues to change.

    Pending FCC approval E* will have 11 more TPs at 61.5 (RainbowDBS) and they just got permission to use the Canadian 129 slot (32 TPs now and 16TPs later). They also have an entire slot pending at 157 (32 TPs waiting for use). That's 59-75 TPs waiting to be claimed. E* also has KuX and Ka bandwidth waiting for future use. D* is adding the Spaceway satellites (which have a lot of bandwidth but could have reception problems).

    BTW: If you want to open the "one dish" argument D* has 46 TPs on their "one dish" and E* has 50 DBS and 500MHz of FSS on either of their SuperDishes. Just about double the space. Dish1000 will have about the same capacity as a SuperDish with up to 82 TPs available.

    JL
     
  15. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    1
    Apr 14, 2002
    I will let Dish Network decide what and how many shopping channels to bring on the air and I will decide whether or not to watch them and include them in my favorite lists or not. I will also decide whether or not to lock those channels and hide the locked channels.

    I wonder how many shopping channels it would take to add one decent channel that many would like without increasing the monthly bill?
     
  16. Steve Mehs

    Steve Mehs Hall Of Fame

    11,498
    5
    Mar 21, 2002
    That's impressive on paper, but as a consumer, what does it mean to me? Nothing that's what. Living in a Top 50 market, with no plans to go HD anytime soon, no interest whatsoever in foreign programming and will never use satellite broadband, this means nothing to me.

    The DBS providers will not use the extra bandwidth to relieve current compression to bring picture quality back to what it used to be they will add more and more services that the majority of subs don't want nor care about. HD? Wasn’t 105 or 121 supposed to be used for HD? SuperDish was a failure and I don’t see DirecTV doing anything much different.

    More foreign channels, interactive content, and worthless spinoff channels (like DirecTVs 3 latest channel additions). They will keep focusing on quantity instead of quality, because numbers sell and the providers are in it to make money, but I’m in it to get the best value for my entertainment dollar, which if it wasn’t for the best DVR on the planet, it wouldn’t be. The DirecTiVo is the only thing I appreciate about DBS anymore. Time Warner can give me everything I get from DirecTV with no fluff, except for the DTiVo. TW here only has to focus on two DMAs and minimal foreign channels to be delivered to a few thousand square miles instead of focusing on the whole country, all 210 markets, SD, HD, reception issues in Alaska, Hawaii, and PR and worrying about adding channels that target every ethnic group under the sun and then some.
     
  17. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Hall Of Fame

    5,468
    0
    Jan 15, 2004
    I must disagree. Stupidish is not a failure. PITA to install and aim. Pricing and reimbursements are way outta whack, but it does the job it's supposed to do. Retasked from HD to LiL because market conditions changed. No problem.
     
  18. pmichael

    pmichael Legend

    111
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    I don't understand what the big deal is with the proliferation of shopping channels on Dish Network. I take a novel approach! I don't watch them. I know for most of you the shopping channels are just a waste of bandwidth. But I had a cousin over this past weekend who has cable TV, and she was impressed with the selection of shopping channels on Dish network. Just because you will never use your TV to shop doesn't mean there aren't people who actually like to buy products through their TV. And these people should have the same rights as those who crave the NFL Network or can't live without ESPN(and actually the shopping channels should be less offensive to most of us in that they help to maintain a low price, while sport networks like ESPN only contribute to escalating prices). So sit back and relax and enjoy the set of channels you like. Just don't arbitrarily reduce the choices of others.
     
  19. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    975
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    Where's the Satellite Junkie's Equipment Shopping Network?
     
  20. ck33

    ck33 AllStar

    51
    0
    Jan 5, 2004
    I thought that the BTV channels were simply mirrors of the shopping channels in the 200 range.

    Reason I say this, is that when the BTV channels show some sort of special programming where only "authorized customers" can recieve the content (examples: ReMax real estate programming (mostly), Radio Shack Franchise, McDonald's, and EDU-PROG. Prem Rawat / Maharaji is the only non-BTV content that seems unlocked / available for viewing during these special events), one of the shopping channels goes "Off Air" during the duration of the special program on the BTV.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

spam firewall