3/5/2014 3:32pm - Uplink Activity Report - 107 changes

But are they viewable by a consumer. I dumped my 4DTV when the stream was shut down and you had to jump thru hoops in order to get any reception.

No, but what is your point??? Pretty much ANY (encrypted) HD channel on (C-band) is not going to be viewable by a consumer "end-user", & are used by cable & other TV providers... :confused:

The point of my response, was to counter where (allegedly) E* (NOT an end-consumer) HAS to get these channels via fiber...which is obviously NOT the case... ;)
 
Last edited:
I posted this in another thread and the same logic may be applicable here: The news of the contract signing was leaked. Dish is under no obligation to appease customers by quickly providing channels that they weren't even supposed to know that contract terms were agreed on. Presume the contract states April 1 as the start date. That gives Dish almost a month to get the technical stuff taken care of, marketing department to make promotional stuff related to new channels/services/etc, and so on. The smart thing that Dish and ABC/Disney/ESPN could have done was denied, denied, denied that anything was final. We wouldn't be having this debate if they'd have done that.

And then they would have had issues with the SEC for making material false statements to the public.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 
Just to clarify I am told again (unofficially) they are getting them via fiber not satellite.

Now might be a good time to buy stock in Metamucil,perhaps some bran cereal company.

On a serious note,what would be some of the advantages of fiber vs sat?
 
And then they would have had issues with the SEC for making material false statements to the public.

That's a stretch ! They can say "no contract is in effect yet" then (referring to the effective date).

Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk
 
That's a stretch ! They can say "no contract is in effect yet" then (referring to the effective date). Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk

That's different than denying the existence of a contract when one actually exists.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 
Okay then, what does the SEC say about acknowledging the existence of a contract between two publicly traded companies?

Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk
 
The 301 was already on the the list. When I upgraded from a 301 to a 221K, years ago, I was told to recycle the 301....

the 301's only get replaced if it craps out. dish is not forcing anyone to swap their 301's yet unlike the other receivers in the list
 
Okay then, what does the SEC say about acknowledging the existence of a contract between two publicly traded companies? Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk
I think the press released covered it. SEC network is launching in mid August and Dish is contracted to carry it at launch. I'm not really sure what else you meant by that.
 
Okay then, what does the SEC say about acknowledging the existence of a contract between two publicly traded companies?

Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk

Nothing ( unless it can have a "significant financial effect" and it would be the rare contract that meets this criteria.)
 
That's what I thought as well. Dish/Disney should have just denied or safer, said "no comment" when asked about a contract being finalized.

SEC=Securities and Exchange Committee. You brought it up, remember?

Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk
 
On a serious note,what would be some of the advantages of fiber vs sat?

No rain fade. Relatively unlimited bandwidth. Ah... I have no idea if a fiber lease is more or less expensive than a satellite transponder.
 
That's what I thought as well. Dish/Disney should have just denied or safer, said "no comment" when asked about a contract being finalized. SEC=Securities and Exchange Committee. You brought it up, remember? Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk

My apologies, I need more coffee. I definitely brought up SEC, but when you referenced it, I completely read that as the SEC conference and discussion about who will be carrying the network in the fall.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 
Nothing ( unless it can have a "significant financial effect" and it would be the rare contract that meets this criteria.)
A contract being in place removed the potential for a dispute and channels being pulled which has a huge potential impact on Dish and Disney in terms of revenue. Denying the existence of a contract when one is in place could induce people to sell the stock when they otherwise wouldn't. And that's why the SEC would get involved.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 
That's what I thought as well. Dish/Disney should have just denied or safer, said "no comment" when asked about a contract being finalized. SEC=Securities and Exchange Committee. You brought it up, remember? Sent from my d2lte using Tapatalk

Again, they wouldn't be able to deny. I'm not sure no comment would resolve the issues once it's been leaked. Once they release the statement they get the power to try and shape the discussion going forward. No comment let's speculation run rampant and is probably not in either parties' interests.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)