DirecTV 2013 Price Increases
- Thread starter johnny58259
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 135
- Views 44K
- Status
I believe the providers are seeing the potential for drastic changes in the way we receive our audio/video entertainment. And those changes are not advantageous to those providers.
Based on that belief, I think we will see larger and more frequent price increases over the next few years.
Put simply, they are getting what they can get right now before the party is over for them.
You may be right.The way I see it though,the more and larger price increases they keep shoving down our throats the faster they will fail.
The more subscribers they lose the faster they fail...We all should call and drop to there cheapest package and if they ask why say your prcing is getting to high 
Not sure about "gnap", but "nas" is Network Attached Storage.
As for the rate increases, I intend to review my options and see where I can save.
I don't have a lot of options, since I don't subscribe to any movie packages.
I'll probably move to Xtra since that is $1 less than the Choice Xtra Classic I have now and the programming isn't really any different.
I could also remove the grandfathered DNS, but I really like having the ability to record from the west coast.
I'll also ask to get the $10 HD Extra Pack fee waived again. IMO, this should be removed all together. DirecTV just added that as a new revenue source.
If they just increased a package price by $1 on everybody that should make up any loss. Of course, the SD subs wouldn't like it.
Last edited:
DirecTV, Dish, Comcast, Time Warner, and the like are simply middle men in this transaction.
No matter what the delivery mechanism in the middle happens to be, the pricing will still be determined by the content producers.
If there is collusion among the providers, you'd be correct. I believe the marketplace will eventually determine rates.
As more providers get into the business, prices will fall.
Let's look at internet services.
As wifi becomes faster and easier to encrypt, customers are no longer limited to local incumbent wire line providers.
As tv programming becomes more widely available via the internet, current providers will have to make adjustments.
It is my hope that pay tv becomes totally internet based. I hope.
That wasn't real clear. My AR is now $20.00 with a DVR. Are they charging $3.00 more + another $2.00 for DVR?
I'll tolerate this until the end of my contract (maybe) and then it's adios no matter what they offer. I've live with just my antenna and HTPC recorders before and will have no problem doing it again. Comcast is offering internet and basic cable for $39 for 12 mos. May just pay the termination and go there as much as I detest ComCrap. I only have this for college football and the season's over.
The more subscribers they lose the faster they fail...We all should call and drop to there cheapest package and if they ask why say your prcing is getting to high
I was thinking the same thing, but it would take at least 80% of Directv, Dish, and the cable subscribers combined to make it work. Don't get me wrong, I would be all for it, but a lot of people would rather sit and whine about the price or the channels that they could not watch in order to make this work.
That only works if you're willing to abandon all of shows produced by the current content providers. You can do that today -- stop watching network TV, and sustain your desire for entertainment only on Youtube or similar sites.
Do you really think Disney, Viacom, and the like would sell programming to you directly for cheaper than they are selling to cable and satellite providers?
This is simply never going to happen, for a variety of both technical and political reasons.
The best hope for reigning in pricing in the foreseeable future would be more granular channel packages like the "theme" packs offered by Canadian providers.
all of this begins to change when 1 (or more) of the "middle men" stand up to ABC/Disney/ESPN and reject the idea that all those channels will be forced to the lowest (paid for by all customers) tier (actually that begins to un-balance the entire pro sports empire, which is built upon the crazy fees ESPN promises for broadcast, which is predicated upon the idea that they can extract their pound of flesh from every single cable subscriber). But it will take some provider willing to do this. Right now they all just sing, dance, but roll over at the end of the day.
I for one would very much support such a carrier, and endure a gap in programming. but most folks can't get past the idea of missing a single week of walking zombies
Dropped to Choice from Ultimate. It's not worth it for me. And the only reason I didn't drop down to their "Entertainment" package is so I could keep NESN. BUt if things keep getting tight, then the Sox and Bruins (If they play again) will not be able to save that from happening.
Pessimism helps no one.
What the hell do you think is going on with radio? It's all available over the internet. I can listen to any radio station I wish right on my computer. Cars are being equipped with internet radio systems.
What makes you think the lid will be placed on video transmissions?
Look, the only difference between internet based and traditional tv reception is live content is not yet readily available. This WILL change. It's inevitable.
Hell why do you think Dish wants all that spectrum? For cell phone service? Data? Please.
all of this begins to change when 1 (or more) of the "middle men" stand up to ABC/Disney/ESPN and reject the idea that all those channels will be forced to the lowest (paid for by all customers) tier (actually that begins to un-balance the entire pro sports empire, which is built upon the crazy fees ESPN promises for broadcast, which is predicated upon the idea that they can extract their pound of flesh from every single cable subscriber). But it will take some provider willing to do this. Right now they all just sing, dance, but roll over at the end of the day.
I for one would very much support such a carrier, and endure a gap in programming. but most folks can't get past the idea of missing a single week of walking zombies
Yep..I believe the next showdown between producer and provider will be, to steal a NASCAR cliche, THE BIG ONE.
I believe the next major deal is between Dish and Disney. Disney is going to ask for a substantial per sub increase from all providers. And if my perception of Charlie Ergen is correct, he will be the one who will stand their ground vs the Giant.
I think just maybe Ergen is willing to make a calculated risk and then lower the boom. I believe he is willing to accept the collateral damage to his subscriber base in a standoff vs Disney.
In other words, Dish tells Disney to go pound sand. ESPN leaves Dish and dish loses 1/3 rd of it's subscriber base. With Dish's obvious aversion to sports programming, read "they don't care about sports", I think this is a real possibility.
Think about it.
While I don't disagree that Charlie might consider a battle of that proportion, if it would cause a 1/3 drop in subscriber base it could be seen as not carrying out his fiduciary responsibility to the stockholders.
ie; he might want to, but probably won't.
ie; he might want to, but probably won't.
I just noticed that if Illinois passes the TV tax, and it sure looks like they will, that my bill will increase more because of that tax (5%) than it will because of D*'s upcoming rate increases.
In the composite with all fees counted, the only reason the state tax might be more is because almost half are already paying over $100/month for DIRECTV service.I just noticed that if Illinois passes the TV tax, and it sure looks like they will, that my bill will increase more because of that tax (5%) than it will because of D*'s upcoming rate increases.
These state legislators that tax things that they don't regulate need to be removed from office. It isn't like they're going to have to put pay TV subscribers on state-run medical care because they watched TV.
Completely different scale. Streaming radio stations top out at, what, 48kbps? High end streaming services like MOG or Spotify top out at 320kbps. That's a far cry for the 6mbps required for Netflix to deliver a single HD stream.
Dish wants to improve their position for providing lucrative "on demand" content -- this is merely an extension of the reasons they acquired Blockbuster.
The internet has a play in the future of how we get video, but it's not a replacement for existing broadcast distribution methods. I wrote about this in another forum: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,25003030
Mark Cuban (yes, that Mark Cuban) also addressed the scale problem in a blog post a few years back: http://blogmaverick.com/2009/01/27/the-great-internet-video-lie/
The Internet doesn't magically make everything better and cheaper, there are many more factors in play.
- Status
