Why no AMC HD? (Now Live Sept 9th)

[cj_views]

You are proving my point for me, although you may not even realize it. There is only so much room for channels on Directv, since they don't sacrifice quality for quantity like Dish does. They have made a corporate decision as to what they think will give them the best return on their investment, just like any company does. I'd like to have many of the channels you have listed, but I also want the ones I have to look as good as reasonably possible.

However, there is also another possibility to why DTV hasn’t been actively pursuing HD program upgrades.

DTV may simply aim to become an attractive “takeover target” by beefing up its balance sheet (cutting down on programming expense) for past few quarters. Or, there is always that other possibility that a merger is in the works between Dish and DTV - DirecTV-Dish merger would create a pay-TV power - NYPOST.com

 

[FreddyvsJasonvsAsh]

so was this last sat that went up a bust? because they were advertising it as this huge event that they could add over 200 HD chanels blah blah blah

 

[DS0816]

Like scoop8 said, it's scheduled to go live this Friday. For some reason they aren't doing this one on Wednesday.

I think last year when DirecTV launched Sony Movie Channel (HD Only), it was not on a Wednesday but a Monday. We're obviously conditioned to certain days of the week, but the pattern can be broken up.

 

[lparsons21]

so was this last sat that went up a bust? because they were advertising it as this huge event that they could add over 200 HD chanels blah blah blah

No it wasn't a bust. They did add the 'capacity to offer up to 200 HD channels' - but they never actually said they would add that many or even any at all. You really need to learn to read/view DirecTV's advertising. It is a good study in what they say and more importantly, what they don't say. They are very good at it.

 

[charper1]

However, there is also another possibility to why DTV hasn’t been actively pursuing HD program upgrades.

DTV may simply aim to become an attractive “takeover target” by beefing up its balance sheet (cutting down on programming expense) for past few quarters. Or, there is always that other possibility that a merger is in the works between Dish and DTV - DirecTV-Dish merger would create a pay-TV power - NYPOST.com

It is more likely that every one of those D14 slots is reserved for the targeted 1000 PPVs and 3Ds, just like the once anticipated D12 was.

so was this last sat that went up a bust? because they were advertising it as this huge event that they could add over 200 HD chanels blah blah blah

LOL not this garbage again?

 

[harshness]

whats more shortsighted not adding channels, or randomly dropping channels?

Not giving viewers a shot at auditioning channels for themselves. If a channel stinks on ice or isn't attractive to enough customers, they need to get rid of it and not waste any more bandwidth on it. I can think of about four channels from the MTV family that would probably not make the grade.

 

[harshness]

These "dozens" you speak of are ULTRA NICHE.

Labeling them all as "ultra niche" is a pretty huge write-off. There's very little niche about some of them and some of them are pretty good sports channels. AMC brings access to a little over two hours of highly rated programming a week. How is that not of limited appeal?

Niche isn't all bad. There are lots of people who are paying about $15 a Sunday for the opportunity to watch a lot of NFL football on TV.

 

[charper1]

whats more shortsighted not adding channels, or randomly dropping channels?

adding anything and everything just for the sake of having it on the lineup.

Not giving viewers a shot at auditioning channels for themselves. If a channel stinks on ice or isn't attractive to enough customers, they need to get rid of it and not waste any more bandwidth on it.

why in heck would any sane company waste time negotiating and possibly over-paying to get channels that the majority of viewers already know they aren't worth the time, money or bandwidth just to fill a niche or claim we have it = foolish business mgmt

 

[raoul5788]

Labeling them all as "ultra niche" is a pretty huge write-off. There's very little niche about some of them and some of them are pretty good sports channels. AMC brings access to a little over two hours of highly rated programming a week. How is that not of limited appeal?

Niche isn't all bad. There are lots of people who are paying about $15 a Sunday for the opportunity to watch a lot of NFL football on TV.

You aren't seriously calling Sunday Ticket subscribers a niche are you?

 

[Jimbo]

LOL not this garbage again?

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[Optimist]

I believe it's scheduled to launch Fri 09/09 6am ET.

Like scoop8 said, it's scheduled to go live this Friday. For some reason they aren't doing this one on Wednesday.

Thanks for the clarification. I definitely misread the date.

 

[harshness]

You aren't seriously calling Sunday Ticket subscribers a niche are you?

Very seriously. As in around 12% of the subscriber base seriously.

 

[harshness]

adding anything and everything just for the sake of having it on the lineup.

Why not?

why in heck would any sane company waste time negotiating and possibly over-paying to get channels that the majority of viewers already know they aren't worth the time, money or bandwidth just to fill a niche or claim we have it = foolish business mgmt

Because if you don't wait until well after a channel goes hot to negotiate, you have a better chance of:

1. Having an exclusive
2. Getting a killer rate or a short-term contract just so the channel can land a carrier.

What is the downside of letting go of a channel that doesn't prove itself?

 

[JerryVolunteer]

Very seriously. As in around 12% of the subscriber base seriously.

Go troll somewhere else...

 

[cj_views]

why in heck would any sane company waste time negotiating and possibly over-paying to get channels that the majority of viewers already know they aren't worth the time, money or bandwidth

Ok genius, based on your logic majority of viewers wanted DTV to negotiate for the highly sought out religious channels (SBN,GEB,GTV,TCC,TBN,WORD), country harvest channels (RFDTV,WHT), inspirational channels (INSP,DSTR,EWTN,BYU,CTN,TCT), political agenda channels (LINK,HUB,NASA,MILT). Oops, don’t forget the hundredths of much craved shopping channels.

Give me a break! Who in their right mind would watch craps like those. You? Harsh is absolutely right ... Get rid of them!

 

[Jimbo]

Ok genius, based on your logic majority of viewers wanted DTV to negotiate for the highly sought out religious channels (SBN,GEB,GTV,TCC,TBN,WORD), country harvest channels (RFDTV,WHT), inspirational channels (INSP,DSTR,EWTN,BYU,CTN,TCT), political agenda channels (LINK,HUB,NASA,MILT). Oops, don’t forget the hundredths of much craved shopping channels.

Give me a break! Who in their right mind would watch craps like those. You? Harsh is absolutely right ... Get rid of them!

Most of these channels are linked with OTHER channels, you have to TAKE some of these in order to get the Popular ones that you all want.

 

[raoul5788]

Very seriously. As in around 12% of the subscriber base seriously.

 

[satjay]

Well tomorrow is the day we get new HD, enjoy eveyone!

 

[TDK1044]

All of the channels available to any tv provider are owned by 'the big six' companies. Channel acquisition negotiations can therefore be quite complex. Inevitably, a provider has to take some channels it doesn't want in order to get channels that it does. I wish it was as simple as 'let's ditch these 30 channels that few people watch and we don't want'....but it really isn't.

 

[raoul5788]

Very seriously. As in around 12% of the subscriber base seriously.

So a channel(s) that is on one day a week, for four months of the year that gets 12% of the subscriber base to pay a very high price for is considered niche? Go troll somewhere else Harshness.