Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by richzilla, Oct 18, 2008.
Is that why Cheap Charlie over at Dish Network was able to get WGN HD added?
We really don't know the negotiations that went on. Perhaps WGN wanted something from Charlie, like local HD coverage. Or perhaps they traded out the carriage fees. We don't know!
We do know that certain carriers like ESPN/Disney, Viacom, WGN, Lin Broadcasting and others want more to carry their channels, or special line-up and/or tier positions.
We really don't know what WGN wants or demands, nor what Directv is willing to accommodate. All we know is WGN-HD, AMC-HD and others do not appear on our lineups. We can bellyache all we want and guess how much things will change? Nada!
Your first post says that WGN would bend over to get the channel on D* but then you say its about money. So which is it? Doesn't sound like a money issue to me. Sounds like WGN wants it on D* and D* doesn't want it at this time.
Don't know how you come to this conclusion. First post says WGN will bend over backwards, second says money is the hold-up. You know the old adage, follow the money. If money is the holdup it means either one side wants too much or the other side is offering too little. The truth lies somewhere between the two extremes and only WGN and Directv negotiators know the real truth. Not fair to point fingers at either at this point.
Its both, Tribune has a price they want but would allow WGN america to be moved to any tier including the HD extra pack to get that price. I was told that price is "similar" to what others pay for WGN.
If WGN gets its price, why should it care what tier it's on? How is that a sign of flexibility, or bending over? It does seem perverse to me that DirecTV, which constantly touts itself as THE provider for sports fans, has this gaping hole in its coverage. Unless WGN is stiffing DirecTV, which doesn't seem to be the case, I just don't get it.
They care what tier it is on for the same reason ESPN fights for tier location...
Say DirecTV has 18 million subscribers... if it is in the basic tier, all subscribers get it so thats 18 million times whatever they get PER subscriber. If it moves to a higher tier, then it is however many people subcribe to that tier times the per subscriber rate. Substantially less money.
This an arguement that is getting enormous attention from Congress and the FCC: Should sports programming be kept in sports packages? You could argue special packages for any genre, but the unique thing about sports is the cost. ESPN alone charges over $3.50/subscriber/month and is looking for more. This is an enormous percentage of the cost of a basic programming tier, way more than any other channel.
So the question that is being asked is should the consumer be forced to pay for these sports channels at extremely high % of subscription cost if they don't want it, and if not, then should Sports programming become a special package for all carriers?
There are excellent arguements on both sides of this issue.
Just out of curiousity ..... how is this thread 6 pages long and still going?
Seems like all other discussions on new HD get closed down and re-directed to the "official" thread. Something different/special about WGN-HD discussion and speculation?
P.S. I'd like to have this one too.
Why is the provider outpricing DirecTV only? -- being facetious here. But it seems plenty of others have come to terms.
It just kills me that I already have one friend in a nearby city getting WGN in HD on Comcast, and NOW ... a family member on COX is now getting it!!
DirecTV has totally lost the edge in HD. Dish has recently lunged way ahead in count. It just seems lately that they simply do not care anymore about serious national HD. At least, that is the increasing impression "out here." Only a surprise "festivus" relatively soon will forestall this momentum.
Chicago Sports Fans have to have a place of their own to vent:lol:... no one else cares about WGN, but I get the sports fans. I stopped watching WGN when they stopped broadcasting the WB.
I have DISH Absolute and get WGNHD !!!
Speaking for the many Cubs fans that I know reside here on DirecTV, may I say ..... damn you. Damn you to hell. And a curse be placed on you, your heirs, and on that DISH Absolute of yours.
(Those Cubs fans take this stuff seriously)
I guess if they are going to lose either way, it's best to watch them lose with a crystal clear picture.....
Its a sign of flexibility in that they know if they are moved to a higher tier they are helping directv add more subs to that tier. They will get less money because they get paid on a per sub basis also. Its a face saving measure for Trib, they can get the same amount per sub from directv as they do from other MSOs.
No offense, WGN not in HD does not qualify as a gaping hole to sports fans anymore than ESPNU not in HD does IMO.
How so? The games are produced in HD, and DirecTV subscribers can't watch them in HD. Therefore, there is a gaping hole.
IMHO it does since the Cubs, Sox, Bulls have a number of their games originated by WGN. When those games are on WGN if you subscribe to the out of market sports packages you're stuck with the SD version of the game while it's being originated in HD. IMHO they should at least come to some type of agreement where the sports packages are allowed to carry the WGN America feed in HD since we're paying a bunch of money to be able to watch those games.
If a significant portion of Directv's subscribers were clamoring for WGNHD then I'd agree it was a gaping hole, and one DirecTv would be trying to fill. I don't believe that to be the case.
Many of us are not even sports fans so we could care less. Add to that, we could care even less about Chicago sports (no insult intended). If people like us are the populace that DirecTv is seeing then it could be a while before they are motivated to come to WGN's terms.
And can we please stop the comparisons to other carriers. Each one has different carriage agreements and policies. There is no direct correlation to what DirecTv does or does not carry. Each carrier, including DirecTv, balances customers' wants against their costs and profit margins.
Some of the complaints on this board make getting WGNHD sound like a life-or-death situation. In reality, it is a sports game; the outcome will not affect the rotation of the earth, the stock market, or anything of that magnitude.
We've pretty much reached the point now where a significant portion of DirecTV's subscribers will never be clamoring for any one channel. Does that mean DirecTV should just stop adding channels?
Was at my parents over the holiday. They had WGN in HD.
Wow it sure did look nice. Granted a lot of content was not in HD, but just having the feed in HD made the issues with a SD feed go away.
Great picture even if some of the content was SD upconverted.
Sure wish directv would add it.