DISH -VS- VOOM - A Settlement has been reached!

Absolutely. I have no doubt that most of the voom channels were mostly unwatched. Monsters, World Sport, and Equator may have been exceptions, but I'm sure hardly anyone watched most of the channels. I have no doubt the Dish receivers we had could report back out viewing habits. I seem to recall someone at Dish even showing Scott the data, with one channel having viewership as low as two dozen people over an hour.

No doubt some of the Voom channels were not very popular. And yes, Dish receivers were cable of generating activity reports. However, I did not believe the data they forwarded to Scott. As I recall, Dish compiled a spreadsheet and forwarded a PDF copy of it to Scott. There was no independent verification and validation of the data so it was of "questionable" accuracy. Based on recent events, I feel reasonably confident the numbers were complete fiction. Who know? What we do know is these Voom activity reports are not a trusted source.

At the very least the spirit of the agreement. I believe Voom stated to devalue the service by inflating its overhead, funneling AMC overhead to Voom, and overpaying for programming. Anyone who watched Voom has to admit in 2007, the programming got progressively worse (except for perhaps Monsters) even as Voom continued to spend the same amount. Wasting money is the only logical explanation.
There is no doubt that AMC/Rainbow/Cablevision (call 'em what you wish) is partly culpable in this failed business relationship. However, I always suspected they improperly terminated the affiliation agreement (i.e., everything Voom proported in their Amended Complain in May 2008 made perfect logical sense) and they backed up their motion with evidence with nary a sensible argument/defense nor evidence from Dish. Not they're going to get whacked with the full Arm & Hammer of the law for a plethora of monkeyshines and shenanigans.

I think they chose a poor way of arguing the case. Yes, Dish realized typical overhead was included. But the overhead Voom charged, well conforming to accounting standards, was not part of the Dish understanding. Charlie is a bit of a handshake deal kind of guy. He just let Voom's lawyers write a bad deal that didn't reflect Charlie's understanding of the overhead to be included.

Now you're spinning. Dish's ONLY point of contention is that the 100M spend requirement (although it may be only 82M according to Voom) was for programming only. Period. Dish said this was their understanding of the agreement. As the evidence has demonstrated---and later reconfirmed by the deleted emails---Dish knew that all of Voom's customary business expenses and overhead counted toward meeting the 100M spend requirement. After all, this wasn't a carriage agreement, the collective agreements were part of a business partnership in which all the details, to include Dish being given a 20% equity share, were covered in the April 2005 LLC Agreeement. Besides, Annex A detailed the 11 authorized expense catetories (don't quote me on that number) and Dish's own audit (November 2007) concluded that Voom spent 102.94M (rounded up to 103M) on the 'service'. Besides, if Charlie was a handshake kind of guy, as you suggest, that would imply he was negligent in his responsibilities to fully understand the terms and conditions of the agreement he signed. Moreover, the recovered emails paint a very different picture...an ugly one in which Ergen know full well (in 2005 and again in 2007) that Voom spending included overhead.

What the heck does double delete mean, anyway? That they moved it to the deleted items box, then emptied it? Big deal. And they were perfectly allowed to delete emails in 2005. That was long before there needed to be any litigation hold.

It is a big deal...it shows that Dish was aware of the terms and conditions and, made a choice, to purposefully delete (not merely accidentally nor through email policy) evidence that was supposed to have been legally retained. I may be wrong, but I believe these 2005 and 2007 emails were deleted in 2008 after the legal hold was in place. I will assume they attempted wipe/overwrite the file using a 3rd party tool, but I have no information on how it was deleted nor how this information was recovered.

It goes a long way toward proving damages and penalties. For example, if somebody were to be kissing Charlie's boots while he was standing in the street and I accidentally struck the man and killed him which driving...well, I could potentially be going to jail for manslaughter. However, if I were to later make utterances that I aimed my vehicle at one of Charlie's boot lickers, well...I could be going to prison for murder (that or fined for littering :D). The double deleted emails demonstrate knowledge and intent

Huh? This is the first I've heard an allegation that they altered the report. There may have been changes to a draft version, but Voom needs some strong evidence to convince me they changed the report.

CV/AMC claims to have forensic data that the final 2007 Audit report (Excel Spreadsheet) was altered shortly before being submitted to the court via discovery, and that major portions of the document were removed. Voom believes the missing sections denote that Dish's auditor was using Annex A of the LLC (authorized spend catagories) to verify and validate expenses. In other words, even Dish's auditor used the aforemetioned document (the one Dish claims no knowledge of regardless of how many times they agreed to it) as the basis for conducting his audting and reporting his or her findings.

Innocent until proven guilty is what I prefer to go with.
I would agree, except this case is based on preponderance of the evidence, there is no guilt or innocence to establish. I believe everything Voom has stated been supported by the evidence...and then some. I've seen enough to assume Dish is lying unless they prove their honesty.
 
Of course you don't want to talk about TiVo. But as long as we are discussing a CEO's responsibility to his shareholders, it is good to point out, the Dish investors got a better deal than the TiVo shareholders at the end of the TiVo case. As an investor, which would you rather have, the belief that your CEO "won" the case, even though less money in your pocket, or your CEO "lost" the case, but you get to take more money to the bank?
Let's avoid the Tivo discussion because we've been down that road...it's never pretty, and I don't like seeing anyone shaking a finger in my face while crying. ;)
 
No doubt some of the Voom channels were not very popular. And yes, Dish receivers were cable of generating activity reports. However, I did not believe the data they forwarded to Scott. As I recall, Dish compiled a spreadsheet and forwarded a PDF copy of it to Scott. There was no independent verification and validation of the data so it was of "questionable" accuracy. Based on recent events, I feel reasonably confident the numbers were complete fiction. Who know? What we do know is these Voom activity reports are not a trusted source.

I was not given anything, only was shown some stats.

The channel that had 12 people watching at most times of the day if I remember correctly was HDNews.
 
Settlement Discussions?

Don't get too excited, but I see the court updated their docket to reflect the following comment. Is this one of those pie-in-the-sky general statements (i.e., the court encourages all parties to engage in settlement dissussions prior to and during a trial), have the parties agreed to meet to engage in serious settlement discussions, or have they negotiated a possible settlement that they wish to inform the court. I don't know...just haven't seen this tidbit reflected on the docket prior to it being updated late this morning.

Comments: 9:30 AM POSS. SETTLEMENT
 
Last edited:
riffjim4069 said:
Let's avoid the Tivo discussion because we've been down that road...it's never pretty, and I don't like seeing anyone shaking a finger in my face while crying. ;)

You cannot raise the issue of a CEO's fiduciary duty to his shareholders, then insist we cannot discuss it because the evidence does not support your claim.

Not as if you often shy away from cases that are "never pretty". You don't want to discuss the TiVo case not because it was history, you have been more than happy to point out history when it was convenient.

Unfortunately after the TiVo case ended, all of your dire warnings fell flat. But you were not allowed to shake a finger and cry, so you'd rather not talk about it.
 
Last edited:
Don't get too excited, but I see the court updated their docket to reflect the following comment. Is this one of those pie-in-the-sky general statements (i.e., the court encourages all parties to engage in settlement dissussions prior to and during a trial), have the parties agreed to meet to engage in serious settlement discussions, or have they negotiated a possible settlement that they wish to inform the court. I don't know...just haven't seen this tidbit reflected on the docket prior to it being updated late this morning.

Comments: 9:30 AM POSS. SETTLEMENT

News of a possible settlement is being reported... http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118060932
 
You cannot raise the issue of a CEO's fiduciary duty to his shareholders, then insist we cannot discuss it because the evidence does not support your claim.

Not as if you often shy away from cases that are "never pretty."

I'm going to focus on the news that a settlement is in the works and that Cablevision/AMC will be compensated for Dish illegally terminating the agreement, Dish customers will be able to watch new episodes of The Walking Dead on AMC this Sunday, some Dish customers will enjoy a free Roku player and other perks, and that AMC Networks can use some of the settlement money to bring additional content to viewers and finally unleash the vault of purchased/licenced films they've had gathering dust pending this matter being adjudicated.
 
And our bills will be adjusted accordingly for the new carriage agreement and other perks paid out.

Do you think all the Rainbow channels will be back, or will Dish get any part of their wish and not have to carry them all? Though I bet the contention that being forced to carry all the channels was a smokescreen for the real reason they dropped them in the first place.
 
i hope this settlement thing is true, maybe we can see the AMC Networks owned channels and maybe the MSG owned networks return to Dish's lineup. Walking Dead, Breaking Bad and Mad Men fans maybe be happy with Dish Again if this settlement is true and Dish signs a new long term deal to bring the AMC Networks back.
 
riffjim4069 said:
Oh, I'm sure the court is going to oversee the settlement agreement to ensure there is NO AMBIGUITY. :D

I think you need to slow down a bit. Right before this news you were still saying no way Cablevision/AMC would settle, when they could get all the damages they asked for, plus full extent of sanctions.
 
And our bills will be adjusted accordingly for the new carriage agreement and other perks paid out.

As Scott pointed-out, Dish bankrolled money for this eventually years ago...just wanted to pay as little as possible, which backfired on them.

Do you think all the Rainbow channels will be back, or will Dish get any part of their wish and not have to carry them all? Though I bet the contention that being forced to carry all the channels was a smokescreen for the real reason they dropped them in the first place.
The Rainbow channels are dead and buried. While it is remotely possible (albeit very slim) you may see a MonstersHD or KungFuHD like channel (anything is possible), however the the real benefit is that AMC can now unleash it's library of thousands of hours of films and orignial material. We shall see.
 
Tyralak said:
I just want Monsters HD. I couldn't care less about the others.

I won't be surprised if Charlie gets some arrangement in a settlement to give Dish a competitive edge. Although is there still such package exists anywhere on this planet?
 
The Rainbow channels are dead and buried. While it is remotely possible (albeit very slim) you may see a MonstersHD or KungFuHD like channel (anything is possible), however the the real benefit is that AMC can now unleash it's library of thousands of hours of films and orignial material. We shall see.
Maybe I used the wrong terminology...I meant the other channels that were dropped this year: WE, IFC and Sundance.
 

Hopper and USB Hub???

Upgrade to 2nd Hopper questions

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts