[FTA Michael]

In an exclusive interview with DBSTalk reporters Monday, Charlie Ergen spoke on a range of topics, including the convergence of the internet and the hidden advantages of losing the ability to sell distant networks to a third party using an Echostar satellite transponder.

"Now on Dish Network platform, anybody in the United States can buy distant signals, east and west (feeds), where we couldn't because we're doing local-in-local," Ergen said. "The customers got the best of both worlds, to get local-in-local from us in 96% of the homes in the United States (and) distant signals in the United States in 100% of the United States, where you qualify.

"(NPS is) on our platform just as Dominion is on our platform, so if you want religious programs, we've got a platform that's nice for religion, nice for international, and now it's nice for distant networks. And I think the broadcasters made a big mistake."

According to Ergen, NPS made the proposal to Dish to take over the sale of distant networks early last summer, but he "blew him off" so he could offer the $100 million settlement option to the broadcast stations.

"We were going to be able to sell local signals in 4% of the DMAs in the United States. And you get $100 million. That's Door Number One. I'm a broadcaster, and I can get $100 million, and you can sell in 4% of the United States. Or Door Number Two is, I don't get $100 million, and an entrepreneur who's a good entrepreneur can sell in all 210 DMAs in the United States, and I don't get $100 million. Now you tell me which door you would pick. I can lead a horse to water, but that's as much as I can do."

In the press conference, Ergen said he didn't expect to use live internet-based broadcasting, but in the private interview, he said he thought the internet made a good complement to broadcast TV. "I think it will be YouTube, and I think it will be the press conference after the football game. That it'll be Saddam Hussein actually getting hung as opposed to NBC just having the guy walking out there, because your curiosity is your curiosity.

"And I watch The Daily Show, because they show me stuff that they won't show me, you know, you want George Bush fumbling around at the press conference instead of the canned stuff that you see on TV, or you want something in-depth. ... Remember in the old days on C-band, you'd go through and say oh, there's Mack Robinson drinking his tomato juice before he goes on TV. So yeah, that's how you're going to do the internet, and everything else is canned."

And to no surprise, Ergen remains bullish on satellite TV broadcasting. "Broadcast TV isn't going to go away for a long time. Any time 10,000 people are watching a show, it's going to be cheaper to do it from satellite than any other way you can. ... So from a broadcast TV perspective, I have always said most homes, if they were omniscient, would own a satellite dish. It might be our competitor's, but they'd own a satellite dish."

 

[minnow]

I can predict that if Charlie keeps removing channels as his way to negotiate lower fees, continues to raise rates well above the annual inflation rate and doesn't come up with some way to bundle his sat. service with a phone and internet providers at a discount for the consumer, satellite service may still be around in 10 years, but it's going to be a much smaller service than it is now. With cable and now FIOS emerging, Mr. Ergen has got his homework cut out for him. In 10 years, Charlie may look back at 2006 as the beginning of the end of the golden era of satellite television.

 

[HarryD]

Still the gambler.. this time with customers.

 

[La Push Commercial Codman]

Still the gambler.. this time with customers.

Let 12 million people receive distant networks, and will see steaming mad locals. The locals are steaming upset with nationwide satrad 13 million. Will see a distruct David K. Rehr of National Association of Broadcasters. Everybody Dish would love distant networks and only Dish might mean a 5 or 6 million dump DirecTV, and Get Dish Network, for NPS DISTANT NETWORKS. That is a Charlie Ergen's dream... Phones will be ringing at the Rayburn building in Washington D.C. Hope There's another INUNCTION..

 

[kenglish]

100 million dollars would be enough to keep the "Big 3" affiliates of ONE CITY alive for one year.

It certainly does not even start to compensate the hundreds of stations that are harmed by the loss of viewers who get distant nets illegally.

 

[Richard King]

Ah, but now MANY more viewers will be able to receive distants LEGALLY.

 

[La Push Commercial Codman]

Ah, but now MANY more viewers will be able to receive distants LEGALLY.

I already qualified for distant networks with NPS. But Some type of change be a huge benafit to Dish Network customers. Charlie Ergen feels that way. People are turned about, WHY CAN'T I GET DISTANT NETWORKS? And it because of the DAMN A.C.L.U. lawyers And National Association of Broadcasters, being defiant, and holding Dish and NPS accountable. Many are happy with satellite radio. XM SATELLITE RADIO ACTIVATED 650'000 subs. The difference is there no accountable to satellite radio. There should be no accountability the satellite tv, but there is. Tax dollars are being wasted, only because broadcasters our being dumb founded.. The old saying, take it or leave it.

 

[James Long]

... A.C.L.U. lawyers And National Association of Broadcasters, being defiant, and holding Dish and NPS accountable.

I don't see any ACLU involvement ... and I've been following this.

Hmm, the NAB asking E* to follow the law. What a crime.

 

[Mikey]

...People are turned about, WHY CAN'T I GET DISTANT NETWORKS? And it because of the DAMN A.C.L.U. lawyers And National Association of Broadcasters, being defiant, and holding Dish and NPS accountable. ...

:thats: I would have thought the ACLU would be on the side of the people being denied distants. Aren't they an opressed minority?

 

[Nick]

100 million dollars would be enough to keep the "Big 3" affiliates of ONE CITY alive for one year.

It certainly does not even start to compensate the hundreds of stations that are harmed by the loss
of viewers who get distant nets illegally.

Pity. :shrug:

Who will compensate my local newspapers that are harmed by the loss of readers because I choose to
watch broadcast and cable tv news and read on line papers from other parts of the country beyond the
boundries of my news DMA?

Who will compensate my local retailers who may be harmed by a loss of sales because I can buy more
for less if I shop on the Internet outside my shopping DMA?

Who will compensate my local movie theaters because I buy/rent movies on DVD and subscribe to more
than 65 premium movie channels on cable tv from outside my entertainment DMA?

Who will compensate me for having to waste my time reading through all the NAB controlled DMA crap
in order to glean a few nuggets of useful information?

Who says that a government-supported oligopoly should be able to prevent, with force of law, otherwise
free Americans from viewing what they want from where they want when they want?

Who?

 

[ebaltz]

Pity. :shrug:

Who will compensate my local newspapers that are harmed by the loss of readers because I choose to
watch broadcast and cable tv news and read on line papers from other parts of the country beyond the
boundries of my news DMA?

Who will compensate my local retailers who may be harmed by a loss of sales because I can buy more
for less if I shop on the Internet outside my shopping DMA?

Who will compensate my local movie theaters because I buy/rent movies on DVD and subscribe to more
than 65 premium movie channels on cable tv from outside my entertainment DMA?

Who will compensate me for having to waste my time reading through all the NAB controlled DMA crap
in order to glean a few nuggets of useful information?

Who says that a government-supported oligopoly should be able to prevent, with force of law, otherwise
free Americans from viewing what they want from where they want when they want?

Who?

Beautifully stated! Exactly. It just shows the hypocrisy and stupidity of those arguments from the local stations. They should all just GO AWAY anyway.

 

[kenglish]

Fine.

Destroy an industry. Put hundreds of thousands of local people out of work.

Eliminate more sources of local news.

Add Pay TV to your monthly household budget.

Let local advertisers cram your mailbox with even more ads every week.

Have someone e-mail you when there's a tornado coming toward your trailer park.

That's all better than broadcasters defending their contracts with programming providers and honoring their obligations to the viewing public.

And, certainly better than making a bunch of grumpy old men get their TV programming from the rightful owner/supplier, instead of the exact same programming for a fee that you pay some billionaire.

No wonder those D* and E* guys are rich. They can manipulate anybody!

 

[kappy44]

Fine.

Destroy an industry. Put hundreds of thousands of local people out of work.

Eliminate more sources of local news.

Add Pay TV to your monthly household budget.

Let local advertisers cram your mailbox with even more ads every week.

Have someone e-mail you when there's a tornado coming toward your trailer park.

That's all better than broadcasters defending their contracts with programming providers and honoring their obligations to the viewing public.

And, certainly better than making a bunch of grumpy old men get their TV programming from the rightful owner/supplier, instead of the exact same programming for a fee that you pay some billionaire.

No wonder those D* and E* guys are rich. They can manipulate anybody!

Watch locals with low signal output, inferior HD transmission, poor delivery of signal via Cable....did I see you cry when local newspapers began to lose circulation because of the internet? I'm lining up to see the Farm News report superceding a network broadcast. As for the tornado reference ("the sky is falling...right wing hysterics")...as it is between the weather channel, CNN, Fox, interactive satellite services, etc....I ain't hurting.....Bah, Humbug to you, too!

 

[James Long]

:backtotop

 

[Dubber2]

I don't see how Chrlie Ergen can say that anybody in the U.S. can buy distant signals. The customer DID NOT get the best of both worlds - distant and local-in-local. Many of us live in areas where we get locals, but w/o ABC. All American Direct does not offer all networks in all areas. In our case all they offer is Fox. Big deal. (All we need is ABC). You have to go thru the waiver process, but foget that. ABC affiliates are not budging. So here we are w/o the programming we had enjoyed with no way around anything. Some of us are between a rock-and-a-hardspot. Antenna's aren't always effective. In our area DirecTV is worse and cable isn't an option. So, Charlie, quit patting yourself on the back over the All American deal. And while you're at it, stop those rediculous commercials about your excellent customer service. Those are a waste of your (our) money. We deal with what we can, but we sure aren't enjoying it. Why should television be so complicated?

 

[ebaltz]

Fine.

Destroy an industry. Put hundreds of thousands of local people out of work.

Eliminate more sources of local news.

Add Pay TV to your monthly household budget.

Let local advertisers cram your mailbox with even more ads every week.

Have someone e-mail you when there's a tornado coming toward your trailer park.

That's all better than broadcasters defending their contracts with programming providers and honoring their obligations to the viewing public.

And, certainly better than making a bunch of grumpy old men get their TV programming from the rightful owner/supplier, instead of the exact same programming for a fee that you pay some billionaire.

No wonder those D* and E* guys are rich. They can manipulate anybody!

All the providers lives would be better without locals, including Dish. They should look to squash them all like the inconsequential outdated bugs they are. As to the above:

1. An industry of some yes, but they will find other jobs like everything else, time moves on. Should we still have jobs for people to pick cotton?

2. Local "news"? Its mostly pointless, and all available on the internet when it happens not only at 6 and 10. I never watch it anyway.

3. I already spend $100 a month for TV via Dish.

4. Local advertisers can advertise on the web, Duh. I throw away any and all junk mail without reading.

5. Exactly...someone like the NWS, you can set up your browser or e-mail notification of severe weather a lot faster than the local yocals can get a guy in a studio to read it over a TV which you would have to have on and paying attention to get. Where do you think the locals get the warnings and watches from? From a National Weather Service, who has that info online instantly already. I get ALL my weather from weather sites not local TV stations.

 

[FTA Michael]

I don't see how Chrlie Ergen can say that anybody in the U.S. can buy distant signals.

He always added at the end "if you qualify". His point was that under his settlement, he would have been restricted to selling distant networks only in those DMAs where Dish is not selling that market's locals. If I understand it correctly, NPS can sell to anyone who lives in a white area, even if they can buy that market's locals on Dish. These are the people who are getting "the best of both worlds" as a result of NPS taking over the distant network business on the Dish platform.

 

[cable_killer]

what i am still trying to figure out, is how DIrect Tv can break the same laws and not get punished for it. Their own employees tell costomers to change the physical address to get different locals. Could it be that Direct Tv was and is trying to make it a monopoly for Distant Networks? Makes you think. I too use to subcribe to locals and had for some time. I did not ***** and complain because after 6 months, we started getting locals in our area. I enjoyed the distance especially during football season because i was able to get upto 4 other games that I would not have been able to see.

What people don't realize is that cable and satellite have guidelines that need to be followed. I get sick and tired of idiots that call in and ask, why can't I get the game? Because it is not broadcast you idiot. Well you should have it. you're satellite. Yeah well you should have a brain because you're human.!!!Why don't I have locals in my area? Cable does...... Because contrats need to be granted to provide that service to you. Why do you charge for locals if cable doesn't? Idiots, if you have a service to receive cable or satellite, you are paying for locals!!!!!! Ask your cable provider to give you the price for just locals............Guess what, they're not free!!!!! What's that? they are more expensive then the $5.00 E* charges? OMG!!! The only way to get free locals is the old fashion way. Remember the thing that has 2 antennas? what was that called? A TV antenna? Rabbit ears?

But the picture is not that clear.......... That's why you pay to get a better signal!!!!! Get your heads out of your AS**S!!! Stop being lazy and stop *****ing because you have not paid yopur bill and now the BABYSITTER is turned OFF!!!! Spend quality time with your children!!! That is why society is so F**KED up!!!

I have spoken for the MILLIONS and MILLIONS of satisfied satellite subscribers in the world DEATH TO CABLE AND IT'S HIGH RATES FOR LESS SUPERIOR SERVICE!!!


DISHNETWORK SUBSCRIBER SINCE 2001 4 ROOM SERVICE W/DVR
$50.00


CABLE INTERNET SUBCRIBER FOR ROADRUNNER LITE NEVER WILL GET TIME WARNER EVEN IF THEY PAID ME!!!! $19.95

SBC/AT&T PHONE SERVICE. $24.00

IF IPAID CABLE FOR THEIR 3 PLAY SERVICE, I WOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR LESS SERVICE!!!!

 

[An-Echo-Star]

100 million dollars would be enough to keep the "Big 3" affiliates of ONE CITY alive for one year.

It certainly does not even start to compensate the hundreds of stations that are harmed by the loss of viewers who get distant nets illegally.

Waaaaaahh customer aren't watching my crappy local programming and it's hurting my Ad revenue waaaaaaahhh! Get over it! People should be able to choose what they watch and when they want to watch it. :goodjob: Cheers to Charlie Ergen for standing up for customers!

 

[Tower Guy]

Who says that a government-supported oligopoly should be able to prevent, with force of law, otherwise
free Americans from viewing what they want from where they want when they want?

Who?

You, that's who.

"The reason why men enter into society is the preservation of their property." (John Locke)

We all have property rights in the US. Property rights are what prevents someone else from living on your land or taking your car.

TV signals are also property. If you believe that TV signals should be copied without limits, be prepared to have squatters on your land and robbers driving your car.

We all need property rights, it's just that it seems different with TV. It's not really any different, it's the same. Just like a squatter on your land deprives a nearby rental unit of the income it might receive, the deprivation of income to a local station is only a side effect of the illegal viewing. The true theft is easier to comprehend when you realize that the value of the original property is diminished because the sale price of the program to the local station has been eroded by illegal retransmission.