Later this summer, IFC and Virgin America will offer guests the chance to win a walk-on role in season three of the hit series. Whether its parent company will have resolved its programming spat with Dish Network by then is still up in the air.
DISH Drops AMC Networks (AMC Back on DISH channel 131)
- Thread starter Sparkman
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 4K
- Views 579K
Just further proof that Charlie has no clue how to run a company... Except straight into the ground!
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SII using Tapatalk
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SII using Tapatalk
But he sure makes a lot of money. Don't we all wish we could have no clue but make a lot of money.
I guess Dish wants to keep as many channels as they can (total number of channels being a sacred cow for marketing?), while trying to save $$ by cutting one of the most popular ones. I can understand their not wanting to set a precedent with AMC, so maybe they don't get strong-armed by some other networks. But as time goes on, maybe more will not see Dish dropping them as big a threat as we have been led to believe.
I would have no problem downloading these shows online, but that is an inconvenience. Or more likely, wait for my favorite series to hit DVDs and rent them a year or so from now.
When I look at the list of available channels I am always taken back by how many I have no interest in at all. Maybe it's time for me to do my own cutting back.
I would have no problem downloading these shows online, but that is an inconvenience. Or more likely, wait for my favorite series to hit DVDs and rent them a year or so from now.
When I look at the list of available channels I am always taken back by how many I have no interest in at all. Maybe it's time for me to do my own cutting back.
hdaddikt said:
I think it's the exact opposite of your analysis. I think Dish wants to keep AMC and drop the other low rated family of channels.
just saw this on amc. "dish is dropping amc. switch to directv today". why say directv? directv is the only other option out there for me. but, not for others. others can get time warner,comcast,charter etc.
Hahahaha! I wish I could be as clueless. I'd love to be able to build a multi-billion dollar company without having a clue.
Hahahaha! I wish I could be as clueless. I'd love to be able to build a multi-billion dollar company without having a clue.
LMAOOO WE ALL DO
Hahahaha! I wish I could be as clueless. I'd love to be able to build a multi-billion dollar company without having a clue.
Well when theres an enormous population of suckers who will keep paying more for less and defend your unethical practices to the grave to take advantage of, anything's possible.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SII using Tapatalk
Its WAAAAAAAAAAAAY too late for that. Charlie has already set precident long ago that he will bend over and take whatever the content provider wants to stuff up his @$$. Its like throwing a hot dog down the Lincoln Tunnel at this point.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SII using Tapatalk
Which unethical practice would that be? Dish't for probably dropping AMC because they want too much money for that one channel and insist on Dish keeping some of the other Rainbow channels that are even lower down the list? Notice how no one is actually talking about the other channels at all?
Or would it be AMC's for thinking that a total of 65 hours of great to very good primetime dramas a year (5 dramas x 13 ep.), is worth a lot more than they are getting now?
Frankly I don't see either as 'unethical', I see two entities having a disagreement over the value of a product and using whatever negotiating/brinkmanship that they feel is necessary.
That is very funny! Thanks for the laugh.
Charlie has shown time and again that just the opposite is true.
Once again, bass-ackwards!!! Charlie is the bender, not the bendee.
Last edited:
1) This had nothing to do with the original comment you made and I responded to.
2) When people find little to no value in something that might be removed from a line-up, they do not see it as paying the same (or more if the price goes up) for less since they never saw value in the first place.
3) The comment I responded to and my comment say nothing about defending anyone for anything. The comment you made about the founder of a company that has grown into the 3rd largest TV provider in the United States with no "big money" behind him and the "big boys" gunning for him was completely inaccurate, if not misguided.
No, the price of Dish won't go down if/when they drop AMC, IFC and Sundance. But the price hike that is sure to come this Feb would have the slightest possibility of not going up as much as it otherwise would have had this CEO "running the company (he built from the ground up back) into the ground" not stood his ground against incessant price increases for channels that abandon their reason for existence.
Personally I have not watched more than 10 minutes of AMC since they started showing commercials. So I would never have noticed the channel missing had I not been a part of this community.
