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

**UPDATED RUMOR** Dish HDNet Launch Date

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by Scott Greczkowski, Jul 10, 2003.

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

    AllieVi Hall Of Fame

    1,530
    0
    Apr 10, 2002
    You asked about the bucks... Let me hypothesize a little.

    We’re told that it costs something in the neighborhood of $250-300 million to procure and launch a satellite. Additional uplink capabilities would also be required and probably more people, too. Let’s say the total cost of one satellite worth of additional HD channels is on the order of $500 million when all the costs are totaled. Using that number, if one million DISH customers subscribe to HD, the “share” of the cost for each would be $500. If Charlie could net $10/month per HD subscriber through fees, the investment would be recovered in about 4 years.

    I have no idea how many DISH customers subscribe to HD, but I doubt it’s anything like a million. If it’s 100,000 instead, the cost of the additional channels per HD subscriber would be $5,000 and the fees would have to be a bit higher. Whatever the number actually is, DISH will have to recoup the cost from someone.

    If DISH doesn’t have money in the bank to pay for the launch/upgrade directly, it would also have to collect enough in fees to pay the interest on any borrowed funds. Operation and maintenance costs would have to be covered, as would any subsidization of the cost of purchasing receivers and dishes. They may even want you to BUY the needed dishes... :eek2:

    This example discusses the implications of adding just HD channels, not other "keeping up with the Joneses" costs.

    No doubt Charlie hopes to increase the HD subscribership by offering more channels, but the price he has to charge may be higher than anyone suspects.
     
  2. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    1
    Apr 14, 2002
    I SERIOUSLY doubt that it would cost that much. If it did then they would NOT be doing HD for a while because it would not make business sense to them. It probably costs them just a fraction of that amount but still yet cost them enough to where it is still a pretty darn good investment in each customer.
     
  3. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    21,331
    1
    Mar 25, 2002
    Yea, but on television I don't have to wash my windows. :D
     
  4. Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,904
    208
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    ...but you do have to clean all those tiny little gecko footprints off your screen. :lol:
     
  5. AndyMon

    AndyMon Mentor

    40
    0
    Jun 12, 2003
    Actually, if they wish to remain competitive in the market place, they have little choice. There is a real battle brewing out there between sat and cable operators for a finite number of subs. Perception is quite important. The number of folks buying digital 16x9 tvs will be growing exponentially in the not so distant future and DISH needs to be positioned to take advantage of the growing demand. We early adopters will suffer as the field gets positioned but we will also be the early beneficiaries as the growing pains will not be without some benefits.
    So, while we will suffer and pay some, we will also benefit some but DISH will have to ante up in any event. I'm not so egotistical to believe they're doing it just for me <G>, nor am I planning on footing the bulk of the bill for their investment in their future.
     
  6. gpflepsen

    gpflepsen Guest

    This is my exact bitchin' point.
     
  7. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    21,331
    1
    Mar 25, 2002
    I keep telling him to wipe his feet when he gets out of his pool, but he never listens. :lol:
     
  8. nostar

    nostar AllStar

    85
    0
    Jun 22, 2003
    This is all so true, except for the suffering and the paying. I have already suffered and payed. I refuse to spend another dime until the HD programing and the equipment to receiver it is in place and if something else comes along in the interim, fine.

    This company(Dish Network) is jerking us around because we are enthusiasts. They will have to eventually switch to HD, not to please us but to be competitive in the future.

    I have one HD channel (HBO) and it's great, but I spent over a $1000.00 to get it.

    I can't get CBS and I don't want Pay Per View, as it is overpriced. Discovery is redundant and overpriced. Showtime looks like it's mostly up converted scuff. Sometimes I watch the Demo channel! They took the info channel. I used to watch it a lot.
     
  9. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    1
    Apr 14, 2002
    I am going to wait until HD matures before putting any money into it because it will improve, prices will go down, and there will be more common standards without having to upgrade so often.
     
  10. dmodemd

    dmodemd Godfather/Supporter

    286
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    Too bad for you...

    I was thinking the same way but then bit the bullet and got the TV and Dish 6000. Its been over a year, my TV is still on the market and about $200-300 less than what I paid for it. The Dish 6000 is still the ONLY HD receiver now available on Dish. I paid for Discovery HD but got the adapter for free. So by going last year instead of now it cost me about $300-400 extra but I got a years worth of Discovery with everything else. That comes to about $30 a month. Its been worth it to me no doubt. I may be a little lucky cuz I get the following HD capable channels:

    2 CBS, 2 ABC, 2 NBC, 1 FOX, 2 PBS, 1 WB, HBO HD, SHO HD, DiscHD

    It's been fun!
     
  11. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    1
    Apr 14, 2002
    There are no HD local channels here and even if there were I may not be able to pick up the signal anyways even if it was at full power due to hills, mountains, and trees.
     
  12. AllieVi

    AllieVi Hall Of Fame

    1,530
    0
    Apr 10, 2002
    The fact that DISH doesn’t have to launch a new satellite certainly means that it can initiate service sooner. But if space is leased from another company, I would expect the owner of that satellite to charge leasing fees that cover their actual cost and also earn money in the process (in proportion to the relative capacity leased, of course). If DISH could somehow lease an entire satellite's capability, the cost should be at least as high as launching one.
     
  13. Marcus S

    Marcus S Icon

    708
    0
    Apr 23, 2002
    I like C-band, I have every HD channel known to man and god while E* scrambles for sky wars & crazy 3/4 dish solutions. I wonder to believe that *D actually has the end card, they own Primestar's old sats and PamSat both capable of Ku band. Drop one into an existing satslot, and wallah another 100 SDTV channels / 20 HD's.
     
  14. Mike123abc

    Mike123abc Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,818
    0
    Jul 19, 2002

    Actually there is a glut of KU-FSS out there and Dish probably picked up the extra capacity on the cheap. Plus they are just using KU-FSS and these slots also have C and KA bands on them, so probably only part of the satellite cost.
     
  15. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    1
    Apr 14, 2002
    Its nice not having to move a big dish around having a multi-satellite solution, and having to wait for it to get from one location to another to watch a channel, and to have multiple receivers on one dish. That is a good advantage along with the pvr receivers and movability of the receivers and dishes for travel. The receivers are also cheaper. The good thing about C-Band/BUD is that the programming is cheaper, more availability, and FTA. Good for hobbiests as well.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page