Fisher Communications Channels are BACK on Dish!

[whatchel1]

Part of Fishers reason

Not that I'm saying this is the right thing for Fisher to have done but here is part of their reason.
Locally the owners of TV Channels 13 and 22, Tribune, have filed chapter 11. Working there has got to be filled with apprehension. It just so happens that the stations owners, also are in the newspaper business…Not a good time.

"Fisher has announced what they call 'aggressive steps' to deal with the issue, including, a 10% reduction in work-force, wage freeze, suspended 401K match, no bonuses to upper management etc. In the mean time Fisher and the Dish Network are involved with a law suit. Whereas this is a sensitive local issue, I will let you read about this item elsewhere."

This came from a newsletter published by the chapter that I was a member of the Society of Broadcast Engineers So really they are trying to squeeze E* since their revenue is down.

 

[navychop]

Still, no sympathy for them trying to squeeze Dish. They lose Dish carriage, they lose eyeballs and ad revenue. If Dish caves, every little local station will try the same thing.

 

[NightRyder]

Wouldn't be surprised if Seattle-Portland subs jump ship to Directv.

KATU is hardly worth the hassle of changing providers, besides I'm getting my ABC from KGO San Francisco courtesy of AAD.

NightRyder

 

[smroycro]

"Fisher has announced what they call 'aggressive steps' to deal with the issue, including, a 10% reduction in work-force, wage freeze, suspended 401K match, no bonuses to upper management etc. In the mean time Fisher and the Dish Network are involved with a law suit. Whereas this is a sensitive local issue, I will let you read about this item elsewhere."

There is a simple fix to this. Fisher can have all of nothing (no money coming from Dish) or they can have part of something (a fair rate).

Let them eat cake.

 

[long_time_DNC]

I'm not worried about this...

An 82% increase demand is absurd. Even a 50% increase demand is absurd. No, Fisher needs to be reasonable about this and Dish needs to stand their ground.

 

[KayElle]

"Still, no sympathy for them trying to squeeze Dish. They lose Dish carriage, they lose eyeballs and ad revenue. If Dish caves, every little local station will try the same thing."

I agree and while I'd really rather watch LOST on my big screen T.V., I'll make do online for now rather than change providers - especially since I think this is going to be an ongoing issue with the broadcast network affiliates.

 

[wknd_warrior]

Ive already posted my complaint with Fisher on www.bbb.org and I recommend others do the same.

 

[ckgrick]

KATU is hardly worth the hassle of changing providers, besides I'm getting my ABC from KGO San Francisco courtesy of AAD.

NightRyder

I'm eligible for AAD also, but their web site doesn't say if it's in HD or not. I kind of assumed since it didn't say either way, it was SD. Correct assumption?

 

[Laddyboy]

I'm eligible for AAD also, but their web site doesn't say if it's in HD or not. I kind of assumed since it didn't say either way, it was SD. Correct assumption?

yes, no HD

 

[NightRyder]

I'm eligible for AAD also, but their web site doesn't say if it's in HD or not. I kind of assumed since it didn't say either way, it was SD. Correct assumption?

Yep. Only SD.

NightRyder

 

[Joe Capitano]

FISH vs DISH, Day 36(!):

... I'm getting my ABC from KGO San Francisco courtesy of AAD.

And for now I'm getting mine from Arkansas and Wyoming courtesy of FTA.

I can't believe this idiocy is still going on. I'd be selling off my stock in 'FSCI' today if I had any. Since I don't, I'll stand my ground. No KOMO for me - analog, digital or otherwise - until Brown & Company wise up.

 

[kstile]

I sent another note to Ms. Brown today (no response yet). She had earlier stated that the future carriage fee had actually been negotiated, but that the sticking point was all the fees that Dish supposedly never paid for carriage of other channels. My point to her: let the *courts* decide the contract dispute and get the stations back on the air. Fisher's heavy handedness on this and bringing it out into the public is, IMO, irresponsible. It's been a month now and still nothing.

I still need my LOST fix, so it's just KOMO losing out b/c I won't be seeing any of their ads when watching.

 

[riffjim4069]

Just an observation...

First, here is a list of the Top 25 shows being recorded by Tivo users. Just like with the Neilson ratings, the most popular shows are on broadcast television (ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC).

1 Grey's Anatomy
2 Desperate Housewives
3 American Idol
4 House
5 Lost
6 CSI: Crime Scene Investigation
7 24
8 The Office
9 Heroes
10 Brothers & Sisters
11 Two and a Half Men
12 NCIS
13 Private Practice
14 Criminal Minds
15 CSI: Miami
16 ER
17 Bones
18 Law & Order: Special Victims Unit
19 The Closer
20 Without a Trace
21 Numb3rs
22 Medium
23 Law & Order
24 CSI: NY
25 Ugly Betty

Second, while folks are willingly fork-over $$$ for cable channels and programming that only a small percentage watch, they scream bloody murder when having to pay 5% of the bill towards the companies that provide more than 50% of their viewing.

Third, people willingly spend thousands of dollars on HDTVs, hundreds on PAY TV programming, and install satellite dishes on their homes...yet, they won't invest a couple hundred dollars in a quality OTA antenna setup when the good ole rabbit ears or bow-tie antenna doesn't do the trick. Nobody is preventing 85% of Americans from watching their free over-the-air locals. The agreement between the Government and Broadcasters is the broadcast networks provide a public service and, in turn, hope to make a few dollars. It was never intended to be a convenience for anyone subscribing to a PAY TV service. If someone cannot reliably receive their digital locals, they shoudl spend a few dollars on a quality OTA antenna, contact their local broadcaster and/or the FCC, move to another area or, better yet, start their own television station and grow wealthy sucking in all those advertising dollars.

Fourth, Dish Network and DirecTV are in the PAY TV business. The law states that the broadcasters are legally entitled to charge fees for the redistribution of their copyrighted materials if they so choose. I agree with this...to an extent.

Fifth, I would agree that the broadcasters should not charge distribution fees to be carried by Cable/Satellite, but only if this same standard applied to the Cable channels as well. Simply stated, if you accept advertising dollars you cannot charge licensing fees for Cable/Satellite redistribution of your signals. I don't know about you, but I would be much more outraged paying $$$ each month for dozens of channels that are filled with advertising and endless hours of informercials each night and early morning than I would paying another dollar for my digital locals (most popular programming available).

Sixth, a la carte would solve many of these evils: subsciptions are sold to the customers and not the MSO; there are no programming disputes since there are no agreements between the MSOs and programmers; MSOs keep a percentage of all programming subscriptions for operating expenses and profits; MSOs sell value added services and are judged by their efficiency, etc.

Seventh, a la carte lets consumers set the price of the programming along with the channels they receive. Customers can continue to subscribe to the megapacks, but this small, medium or large (pick-one) mentallity is for the birds.

Eighth, while I am not taking sides with Fisher on this issue...just as long as ESPN is charging each and every customer $2-3 per month (even those who don't watch sports programming), I don't see how anyone can complain about the broadcasters, who are asking for a small fraction of this amount, as being unreasonable.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out there is another side to this story...

 

[whatchel1]

Misunderstood

There is a simple fix to this. Fisher can have all of nothing (no money coming from Dish) or they can have part of something (a fair rate).

Let them eat cake.

Didn't say I agreed with Fisher just giving their side of it. I think that the increase is way over the top and want to see it at a fair rate. A small increase of say 5% could be understood but not what they are asking.

 

[WebTraveler]

Fi
Eighth, while I am not taking sides with Fisher on this issue...just as long as ESPN is charging each and every customer $2-3 per month (even those who don't watch sports programming), I don't see how anyone can complain about the broadcasters, who are asking for a small fraction of this amount, as being unreasonable.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out there is another side to this story...

You don't really understand all of this, do you?

First, you are asking to change the historical pricing model. Maybe that model is wrong or whatever. But the historical pricing model is that cable/satellite get charged by the channels by viewers and OTA gets advertising dollars. The historical retransmission model has OTA getting pennies.

Whether that model is right or wrong is another issue. One station group is attempting to change that pricing model. If the industry gives into this demand, don't you think every other station will want the same deal (or more). We'll be paying $25.99 a month for locals under your theory.

Second, what am I supposed to do? Install 2 dishes and a OTA antenna? That's ridiculous. Why not have an antenna for each station while I am at it. No one wants a host of contraptions on their roof. I don't, my neighbors don't, and so on. Under your theory we should have multiple items sticking out of our house.

If the historical pricing model is to be changed it should be the OTA stations and the providers discussing that model at a much higher level than Dish.

Fisher is renegade, plain and simple. If they succeed everyone else will want more.

I think we are getting closer to ala carte being reality every day. Everyone wants outrageous sums, but there are just a few channels that would still be around if ala carte was here..

 

[WebTraveler]

I sent another note to Ms. Brown today (no response yet). She had earlier stated that the future carriage fee had actually been negotiated, but that the sticking point was all the fees that Dish supposedly never paid for carriage of other channels. My point to her: let the *courts* decide the contract dispute and get the stations back on the air. Fisher's heavy handedness on this and bringing it out into the public is, IMO, irresponsible. It's been a month now and still nothing.

I still need my LOST fix, so it's just KOMO losing out b/c I won't be seeing any of their ads when watching.

I've said the same thing.

The local nielssen rating periods are pushed back until March this year because of the digital transition, too bad. They start traditionally in Feb. I think this will be resolved before then or the locals will take it in the shorts on the viewership measurement dates.

Local news for Fisher stations won't be as great and it will affect ad dollars for quite some time.....I think they've already shot themselves on this whole event. I am NEVER going to watch KATU news again unless Fisher unloads the stations. This will affect their ad rates for years to come.

 

[whatchel1]

Push Back

I've said the same thing.

The local nielssen rating periods are pushed back until March this year because of the digital transition, too bad. They start traditionally in Feb. I think this will be resolved before then or the locals will take it in the shorts on the viewership measurement dates.

Local news for Fisher stations won't be as great and it will affect ad dollars for quite some time.....I think they've already shot themselves on this whole event. I am NEVER going to watch KATU news again unless Fisher unloads the stations. This will affect their ad rates for years to come.

Obama is trying to get the change over delayed to June. So it may mean if that happens then sweeps could go back to Feb. This is the one thing I hope the new prez isn't able to do.

 

[navychop]

I have two sat dishes and a large OTA antenna on my roof. No one complains.

 

[david_jr]

I have two sat dishes and two large OTA antennas on my roof and I still have difficulty with reception of some digital channels. I am only 48 miles from the transmitters. I think the 85% figure for households served by OTA is a bit high. They may be served, but they are not well served.

As far as the OTAs getting fees for redistribution of the OTA signals, I think it is ironic that the cable/sats have to pay a fee to the OTA to redistribute their signal to THEIR CUSTOMERS! Not only are they their customers, but they are a captive audience. Can't go to the shop across the street to buy the competitors signal because no competition is allowed. Have trouble with OTA, sorry, you're out of luck. Waiver? Fugettaboudit. Prove you can't get our signal.

 

[WebTraveler]

I have two sat dishes and a large OTA antenna on my roof. No one complains.

Well I complain. I also complain about my neighbor's dishes when Direct or Dish do a hack job on installation. One neighbor next to me have wires running all over the place on the side of the house. It's a hack job in a nice neighborhood.

I am not putting up with all of this because of pure GREED.

The point is that it's ridiculous that we have to have this and that just to watch channels because all of the providers that take the transmission to the last mile (i.e. the home) can't get along with the producers of programming.

I have a finite dollar I will spend on programming. I think an 82% increase is just ridiculous any way you look at it.