Dish Against the World: Why Dish Network Can't Stop Fighting

[dfergie]

By Tim Molloy
Say this for Dish Network: It isn't afraid of a fight.

If you're like most TV viewers, you don't think much about the constant, mundane negotiations that bring your favorite shows to the screen. But then those talks break down, a contract expires at midnight, and your favorite network goes suddenly goes dark.

http://www.thewrap.com/tv/column-post/why-dish-network-not-afraid-fight-heavyweights-53436

 

[Darrell S]

I love the part of the article where they say "only a small number of our negotiations end in blackouts. Are they freaking kidding?

 

[dangue]

Personally I was more troubled by the increase in network retrans costs and the projected costs by 2017. If that happens, everyone can expect their bills to go through the roof. $200/month here we come!

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Good article.

"They try to push around the weaker players and bluff big. It's a funny way to treat people who are ultimately your business partners."

I have always wondered about this one myself. I have always thought they should be working better TOGETHER.

 

[osu1991]

Personally I was more troubled by the increase in network retrans costs and the projected costs by 2017. If that happens, everyone can expect their bills to go through the roof. $200/month here we come!

I've been saying that for the last year. We are slowly creeping up to that being the norm, as each programming group adds more and more niche channels dedicated to just a couple of shows. In addition to locals wanting to get closer and closer to espn type money.

 

[riffjim4069]

I love the part of the article where they say "only a small number of our negotiations end in blackouts. Are they freaking kidding?

I like this line, "It has been involved in 22 of the 42 blackouts tracked since March 2010 by the American Television Alliance..." That's one provider involved with more than half the lockouts.

 

[Teehar]

Well at least Charlie has drawn a line in the sand and,dtv has started a line of their own.There has to be a limit to how high the prices can go especially when most folks income is flat or on the decrease.

 

[empiretc]

Personally I was more troubled by the increase in network retrans costs and the projected costs by 2017. If that happens, everyone can expect their bills to go through the roof. $200/month here we come!

it will be like gas prices. after a while, people will get used to it.

 

[Neutron]

Unlike gas though we don't NEED satellite TV. If the costs get that high our family will adjust accordingly. TV is a want, not a need.

 

[Teehar]

Unlike gas though we don't NEED satellite TV. If the costs get that high our family will adjust accordingly. TV is a want, not a need.

That's the way I see it as well.Eventually there will come a time when people say enough is enough.There are already several alternative tv viewing methods and one day soon these greedy broadcasters won't have any choice but to fold or lower prices.

 

[empiretc]

Unlike gas though we don't NEED satellite TV.

correct! a lot of people, though, don't feel this way. whenever the NFL gets their streaming completely into place, it will have a serious impact.

 

[dfergie]

correct! a lot of people, though, don't feel this way. whenever the NFL gets their streaming completely into place, it will have a serious impact.

Many who have satellite do so because it is their only option & broadband is not available either so streaming is not an option plus with more and more IP's putting caps on usage that is not viable...

 

[navychop]

Might send more business to libraries.

 

[Neutron]

Many who have satellite do so because it is their only option & broadband is not available either so streaming is not an option plus with more and more IP's putting caps on usage that is not viable...

BUT, people who only have satellite as their choice for TV can either erect an OTA antenna if feasible or go without TV if they choose, or get their favorite shows on DVD and do that for their entertainment.

 

[salyavin]

I saw Centurylink and Comcast which are the providers where I live have 250gb a month limits. If one has a high speed connection but only 250gb a month I suspect you could chew through that with HD video streaming if that is all you watched (getting rid of TV service one would likely stream a lot of video).

 

[dfergie]

BUT, people who only have satellite as their choice for TV can either erect an OTA antenna if feasible or go without TV if they choose, or get their favorite shows on DVD and do that for their entertainment.

Not around here Jason, if you do not live within 30 miles of an antenna OTA is not an option and thats not because of mountains but weak signals... as for DVD, umm HD is now DVD is past.

 

[harshness]

Unlike gas though we don't NEED satellite TV.

People don't need to pilot Urban Assault Vehicles to get groceries and run errands, but they do.

 

[Neutron]

Not around here Jason, if you do not live within 30 miles of an antenna OTA is not an option and thats not because of mountains but weak signals... as for DVD, umm HD is now DVD is past.

Very true Don. I guess those rural folks will have to make a tough choice if the price ever gets that bad.

 

[Mochuf]

"He conducts himself the way a professional poker player tries to bully people at the table," the person, speaking on condition of anonymity, told TheWrap. "They try to push around the weaker players and bluff big. It's a funny way to treat people who are ultimately your business partners." This attitude might also explain why Dish is considered one of the worst companies to work for.

 

[Tyralak]

Might send more business to libraries.

Yep. TV gets too expensive maybe people will start reading more. One can only hope.