I think it is obvious from the lack of new content on Voom before it's demise that they weren't spending much on Voom programming.
DISH -VS- VOOM - A Settlement has been reached!
- Thread starter orlmac
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 2K
- Views 308K
Of course it looks like Voom has a strong case, because Voom's lawyers wrote the complaint. I'm sure when Echostar responds, it'll look like they have a strong case, too.
As for the spending issue, I'm sure what will come under scrutiny will be not the total dollars Voom spent (which Voom harped on in the complaint), but rather how much was spent on programming vs. what was spent on overhead and other non-programming items. It seems that when Echostar did the audit, they found that the spending shortfall was on programming (which is actually apparent from the endless reruns). I'm sure they will nitpick about every dollar.
Obviously I'm biased as a fan of Voom, but this is not a "throw everything at the court" situation. E* has taken actions that violate the affiliate agreement, and it looks likely that Voom has not violated it. (can we avoid the "repetitiveness of Voom programming" argument, as if they spent what they needed to spend, then they spent it).
E* doesnt want to pay Voom the $3.25 for every HD subscriber. They, at most, only wanted to pay the $3.25 per Ultimate HD subscriber. There is no basis for re-tiering, and only the temporary injunction was not granted. Voom has a very strong case, and this may not drag on forever.
Wrong. voom didn't spend enough money on new programming. they provoked this situation and now they're suing E for money not for the right to be back on E. i know that's your opinion and you have the right to express it but i just don't see this being E's fault. In 2006 they spent $56 mil on programming, where is the rest of the$$? and i don't want the poor excuse of bull s*** costs of $46 mil because it's just bull.
Fitz, you are stating your opinion. Apparently, so far, the courts do not agree, as the injunction earlier was denied.
To some, it looks like VOOM did in fact violate it. The courts will make a final determination, but by denying the injunction, the court said it appeared that VOOM's case was not strong enough to merit action.
And yes, I've seen enough of these to recognize that VOOM is throwing everything they can, perhaps in the hopes that volume will overcome a weak position. It's a common approach.
To some, it looks like VOOM did in fact violate it. The courts will make a final determination, but by denying the injunction, the court said it appeared that VOOM's case was not strong enough to merit action.
And yes, I've seen enough of these to recognize that VOOM is throwing everything they can, perhaps in the hopes that volume will overcome a weak position. It's a common approach.
anyone read article 73-75 when in November 2007 Echostar asked Voom to cut in their programming and remember how we were all complaining about how the programming has become worthless. If this was not orchestrated by Echostar, someone has to be blind by it. Read it for yourself. (of course, everything according to the voom doc. We are yet to hear what E* has to say).
Remember that the $100m was for 21 channels; E* never carried 21 channels so therefore the 15 channels only committed to $82m according to the document. It seems like Voom think that at various points E* wanted to to drop Voom because they did not want to pay the money per sub especially since that number was going to increase based on the new numbers of HD sub very soon.
Remember that the $100m was for 21 channels; E* never carried 21 channels so therefore the 15 channels only committed to $82m according to the document. It seems like Voom think that at various points E* wanted to to drop Voom because they did not want to pay the money per sub especially since that number was going to increase based on the new numbers of HD sub very soon.
By the way, the document also stated that E* never approached V* to just keep five channels. They were all drop by E*. There was never an intention from E* to keep or come to an agreement. They did not want to pay the money as the HD subs base increased with time. That is the bottom line.
I've read all of the available court documents on this (both Dish and Voom's sides). My interpretation is also that Dish is trying to save a ton by trying to dump this 15 year agreement. Voom is shooting for the moon by refusing to alter any portion of the agreement. I personally see Voom ultimately winning, but I don't know if that means we will ever see any of their channels back on Dish. It does seem obvious that they are unwilling to bring back the channels on a different tier, but they may be willing to consolidate channels (leaving Dish more space for other national HD channels).
They didn't spend the money.... and when they did.... they included alot of -Shared- cost with their affilliates. They will try and make out like this is okay, but I think this will be given a more detailed look.
FWIW - I can see why Charlie would want to find a reason to break the agreement. VOOM should not have given ANY reason at all for that to be done. That was an outrageous deal they had. All they had to do was just keep maintaining the programming by spending the required amount of money. It seems like they were getting greedy and trying to prevent the first few years from being such a loss, until they could start making the profit in the later years.
BTW - If it was up to VOOM, they would have kept the repeats going and going and going much much longer according to this document.
I wish rainbow would just kill the voom channels so we can go back to arguing about the lack of hd instead..
If you read #72, it says that E* raised claims regarding the amount of non-repeat programming that VOOM was required to broadcast on VOOM's non-movie channels.
To me- that sounds as if E* thought they were not providing enough non-repeat shows.... not the other way around.
BINGO!!! if this true, E* is responsible for the schedule that y'all have been complaining about from November thru April.
Anyone doubt that if VOOM would have produced quality material in quantity that Dish would gladly have kept them? And other systems would have signed them?
The point of the spending requirements was to produce material. When the money was spent on other things to excess, it clearly did not meet the intent of the contract. I suspect that is how the courts will continue to see it.
The point of the spending requirements was to produce material. When the money was spent on other things to excess, it clearly did not meet the intent of the contract. I suspect that is how the courts will continue to see it.
I definately think this is their "spin" on it. We'll have to wait to hear the other side. If you read it, you can see how they worded it a certain way. Yes, E* publicly announced they would soon remove the other 5 channels, but was that only after VOOM told them all or nothing?
VOOM stated that they sent a letter to E* to restore VOOM to it's proper carriage. Meaning all of the VOOM channels.
Seems to me that VOOM was doomed in April 2005 when Cablevision was going to shut them down, but E* made a large and, IMHO, risky commitment to VOOM and they lived for many more years. E*'s 'all in' approach with VOOM didn't pay-off and VOOM didn't maintain programming in good-faith. Both seem to have made mistakes and both are trying to get what they can out of it. I think VOOM should of gladly accepted being put in the 'Ultimate' tier, improved their programming thereby attracting more people to the tier and building a stronger/larger brand loyalty. Forcing E* to give VOOM to a majority of HD customers without improving content was bad idea. Kinda like 'New' Coke...
What really gets me angry is that we were told to believe that Voom was the one cutting it and it was E*. But at the same time, I was paying the bill to E* and E* was trying to make an effort to make the programming of 15 HD channels worthless.
You have no idea what you're talking about. You've obviously not watched Voom much. Neither you nor I know what the shows that were produced by Voom cost. There have been many, many new episodes of shows on Voom the 18 months I've been watching - maybe not as many as some want, but new ones nonetheless. Charlie just doesnt like the deal he struck.
