Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by RAD, Sep 9, 2011.
I just posted on Facebook to put Disney in a tier by itself, like it was in the 90's.
without ESPN, I won't be able to watch many MLB baseball games
and college cheerleading competitions.
however, there's still TBS and FOX which carry some MLB games....
I'll press the panic button when ESPN, TBS and FOX are all gone
I think I'd miss Sports Center the most. The best way to get college football scores as they scroll across the bottom of the screen and NFL scores on Sunday. First Take during the week is a must.
Then maybe they should stop making megadeals and constantly increasing their fees.
By your arguement ESPN could go to $20 a head and we should all still shrug because of economies of scale.
Oh you would notice. If ESPN was missing so would a large percentage on the channels now available. What would happen if ESPN were charged as a stand alone channel? The number of subs would decrease slightly and the cost to those subs would increase slightly. But a substantial number of channels now bundled with ESPN would disappear. Because if they were no longer piggy backed with ESPN no network could afford to carry them. They would become dead weight. Beyond expendable.
What channels might you be referring too?
The only channels bundled with ESPN are other ESPN channels. ABC Family and Disney are separate issues.
Every package that includes ESPN I consider bundled with ESPN. If you prefer a word other than "bundled" fine. The point remains valid. If ESPN (including all ESPN channels) was not included in any package you would see subs shying away from the 200 and up packages. A premium charge (say $12) for ESPN in all packages would make the 120+ very popular.
You're definition is unconventional at best. What you're talking about is better described by the term "packaging".
Bundling in the classic sense happens at the acquisition level where the carrier can't get one channel without also getting other channels that aren't otherwise interesting enough to stand alone in the marketplace.
As I clearly stated, which you chose to omit when quoting my post, "bundled" may not be the best word to make my point. So you choose to attack my choice of words and ignore the point. Let me phrase the POINT differently. ESPN is the engine that drives every package offered by Dish, DirecTV, Cox, Comcast, and every other cable company. Remove ESPN from any package and you would see channels drop by the wayside.
Worded differently; ESPN is the culprit that bloats the price of every package offered by Dish, DirecTV, Cox, Comcast, and every other cable company.
In a way you are correct but in reality if ESPN was not part of a given package, some of the more obscure channels could not afford to exist. ESPN's presence actually subsidizes them.
ESPN's bundling benefits only ESPN's interests via the idea that they can be averaging nearly one channel of commercial advertising 24 hours a day. It doesn't require nor promote the carriage of CNN or History that inhabit most all packages as well.
ESPN's bundling benefits not only ESPN's interests but also Dish Networks interests. Any individual package losing CNN or History Channel would barely create a ripple of discord compared to the torrent of viewers discarding a package that loses ESPN. The high profits generated by ESPN's 24 hour a day advertising allows any provider, including Dish, to accept lower advertising profits from less watched channels like CNN and History Channel. If ESPN's profits were taken away from said package the lesser profitable channels would be dropped.
What advertising profits does Dish get from cable channels?
There are spots in all the channels where Dish can inject ads that they sell instead of running national ones. I'm sure you've seen them, even if you don't always notice them or know that they are inserted by Dish rather than the national channel feed.
Cable systems also insert commercials into programming from time to time.