D* retailler chat

[RealityCheck]

I'm getting to the point of thinking its getting pretty anal in regards to whether or not the 100 channel number is the final judge of whether or not DirecTV reaches its target this year. If so, does ONLY having 90 give them an A? Is 80 a B, and so on? Would 105 mean A plus with honors?

From my point of view, what they did in 2004 was make a formal and public committment to purchase the sats and infrastructure to be able to provide a huge increase in bandwidth by end of 2007. They put ALL of the content providers on notice that they expect them to be ready for it in that timeframe. They say that have engagd at least 70 of them - I would guess more by now.

If the sats go up, if they quiickly add 50 or more channels and reach at or above the 100 mark by March or April you will never convince me that they didn't work hard to achieve their stated goals.

 

[bonscott87]

Agreed. If they *only* added 70....oh the horror! They didn't get 100. Get the pitchforks, down with D*!!

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Here is the problem as I see it.

They have advertised 150 HD channels, now they are advertising 100.

Yet we all know there are not going to be 100 national HD channels on the air by the end of the year.

Joe Consumer hears DirecTV saying 100 HD channels, and now many are starting to believe that 100 HD channels number as gospel.

I am saying 100 HD channels will not happen by the end of the year. I am not saying this to be mean to DirecTV or put them down, I am just being realistic. I can already see this forum in December when there is no where near 100 HD channels and all the complaints from folks saying that DirecTV lied to them.

I do think that DirecTV's ads were misleading so they do deserve the complaints. However I dont want to see our DirecTV area just turn into a bash DirecTV forum. DirecTV has some big plans and from where I sit the future looks exciting, but if your waiting for 100 HD channels by December 31st your going to be disapointed.

 

[harshness]

I thought it was interesting to hear them say they did not have contracts for 100 HD channels, the way they are advertising it sounded like 100 HD channels by the end of the year was a sure thing.

I believe the phrase went something like "agreements or agreements in principle". What remains to be seen is how many were done deals and how many were "in principle".

At least one channel that DirecTV claimed indicated that their "agreement" was news to them.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Yeah I know, don't forget I met with a lot of these channels a few weeks ago.

While many of them plan on going HD, they will NOT be on the air in HD by the end of the year.

 

[RealityCheck]

Scott G - they said CAPACITY for 150 - they said carriage of 100.

Again if it takes them until March to hit 100 I will consider them within acceptable range of a very ambitious plan revealed 3 years ago.

 

[harshness]

They have advertised 150 HD channels, now they are advertising 100.

Correction: They advertised (and continue to advertise) capacity for 150 channels. Obviously, it won't happen this year.

I think the real question is this: If they will have the capacity for 150 HD nationals after both satellites go up, how do they expect to have 100 HD nationals with only one satellite?

What it will come down to is a spin on what the word "channel" means. They've already let on that it won't be 100 simultaneous channels. Will they claim out-of-season premium sports channels in their count?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Again if it takes them until March to hit 100 I will consider them within acceptable range

You might, however most others will not, they think by the end of the year, is by the end of the year.

 

[RealityCheck]

You might, however most others will not, they think by the end of the year, is by the end of the year.

Frankly I think that only applies to the DISH fans here. The same ones that seem to also 'overlook' the delays and broken timeframes from Charlie.

Look anyone is free to their opinion. Most of the smackdown comes from the opposite fanbase in BOTH cases.

 

[FlyingJ]

You can't get blood from stone. Who cares what the freaking number is. As long as the capacity to carry what most people would like to see is there and they indeed do carry these actual channels the only people doing any type of "bashing" will be those from the other side. Who, by the way, I have stopped listening to a long long time ago. The D* subs will not be complaining, they will though be very happy to see what is a minimum of a tenfold in HD programming. If anyone that is a D* sub, complains about that than they are merely complaining to complain. Unless of course the supposed lack of PQ comes into question.

 

[trafter]

Hey, while not necessarily a "Dish fan" I am a Dish subscriber. That being said, I sincerely hope that Directv hits its goals. Competitive pressure is good and so is choice. Satellite TV is a utility. I've never really understood the whole partisanship thing. If I decide I can't live without a certain service that only one or the other provide, then I'll switch. They almost always catchup with each other and then it just becomes a matter of personal preference, price or just plain old inertia. So go Directv!

 

[Lucky]

I would like to see D* carry every national channel that is available and on the air in HD by the end of the year, except maybe VOOM. If they carry all the available national channels and they do not add up to 100 channels than it is not their fault. All they can do is carry the HD channels available. With the exception of the partially owned Echostar VOOM, they should carry all the nationals. Whatever number the add up to is fine with me as long as they have all the HD channels.

 

[RealityCheck]

You can't get blood from stone. Who cares what the freaking number is. As long as the capacity to carry what most people would like to see is there and they indeed do carry these actual channels the only people doing any type of "bashing" will be those from the other side. Who, by the way, I have stopped listening to a long long time ago. The D* subs will not be complaining, they will though be very happy to see what is a minimum of a tenfold in HD programming. If anyone that is a D* sub, complains about that than they are merely complaining to complain. Unless of course the supposed lack of PQ comes into question.

Your 100 percent right I think. I also think the slammers from the 'dark side' will be quiet - a lot of them will be busy switching over to DirecTV.

 

[mdonnelly]

... a lot of them will be busy switching over to DirecTV.

Not likely, because Charlie's leak of the two satellite launches does the same thing that the D* "capacity" announcement does: it keeps you from immediately jumping over to the provider that has the most HD channels, because you're convinced that more are coming soon.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Frankly I think that only applies to the DISH fans here. The same ones that seem to also 'overlook' the delays and broken timeframes from Charlie.

No actually I wouldnt say that, you should see my PM box from DirecTV folks saying things like...

I am a directv customer and I want more HD , I see they are advertising 100 HD channels by the end of the year, can you give me a list of what those channels will be?

And another.

I have Directv and want more HD channels, I see Dish has Cinemax HD and a few other hd channels I want, is Directv really going to have 150 channels by the end of the year or do you think I should switch to Dish?

Trust me I get a lot of both of these.

 

[roachxp]

Well why is D* new commerical " In responds to cable (it's Comcast they are talking about) lying about their capacity, and D* would soon have up to 150 HD channels". It has the 30 second timer, of course the fine print is barley reable and says subject to change.

Another lawsuit on the way i see.

 

[trellaine]

Channels to the consumer?

This all sounds fine and dandy but what I was wondering is: approximately how many of these "new" channels do you foresee being available on a "full" time basis for a person with HDplus packages?

Because I realize part of these 100 or so HD channels are including Sports packages.

So how many available to the average Joe without sports packages.

Thanks

 

[RealityCheck]

Not likely, because Charlie's leak of the two satellite launches does the same thing that the D* "capacity" announcement does: it keeps you from immediately jumping over to the provider that has the most HD channels, because you're convinced that more are coming soon.

Its only an opinion (for both of us) but I predict a huge increase towards DirecTV - the BIGGEST TV buying season is for Xmas thru Super Bowl. Wait till the advertising REALLY starts for HD on DirecTV!

.

 

[Hemi 6.1]

Directv never said it was going to have 150 HD channels by the end of the year. They said their goal is to provide up to 100 national HD channels by the end of 2007. With a maximum capacity of 150 National HD by 2008 and 1500 Local HD channels. Here's a link for Directv's HD plans and other providers HD plans.http://tinyurl.com/8etdp

 

[RealityCheck]

I would love to keep up with you all - but time to go out, pop some brewskis and watch the live music at the favorite watering hole!