While they are at it, they need to update the Multi-Sport Pack ad in the Gamefinder app. (Press the number 0 on the remote to bring up the banner in this picture.)I also think that Dish should change it's webpage about "taking the term sports fanatic to a whole new level" and that the multisport pack offers a "ton" of Regional Sports Networks.
Well, that is precisely it: with Directv, there was urgency to get a deal done, due to the broadcast locals contract expiring. I have posted before about this, but based on activity in the uplink reports last year (removal of OTA guide map-down links from the satellite-delivered versions of Sinclair stations, uplinking separate OTA guide data streams for the OTA version of those channels, and then later reversing those changes) it looks like Dish and Sinclair already reached a long-term deal for the local channels at that point. So, it may be quite a long while before Dish feels any real urgency to negotiate with Sinclair again.
I have said it before, that as soon as I say that they are never coming back, then Dish will go ahead and bring them back. So... They are never coming back!
The "new price" is irrelevant when there's a flex pack negotiation to deal with.
That is a good point. Part of Dish's whole argument in this dispute is that "...The fact is, the costs for TV regional sports rights in America are currently a poor economic deal, only favoring the sports broadcasters..."
Probable because Charlie is smart enough to not spread the company that thin when they have bigger things to deal with like the 5G build out and the pending Sprint/T-Mobile deal...
Yes but they can a compromise on that. If someone wants sports pack on a flex pack, that means they want the RSNs. So I'm sure they're fine paying $1 more a month to see the sports. ( Not sure what sports flex price pricing is currently just add +$1 more)
If someone wants a sports pack on the Flex Pack, that means that they want the flexibility to add and remove those sports channels at will. (For example, only subscribing during their favorite team's season, or even only when there is a specific game that they want to watch, and then drop the channels the rest of the time to save money.) Unfortunately, the negotiations are not about what the customers want, but rather what the RSN's want. They want the guaranteed revenue from those subscribers who want the RSN's (and ideally even from subscribers who do not want the RSN's at all) year-round, without the flexibility to remove them from the basic packages.
They are technically receiving everything they are paying for... per the agreement... technically.
Meanwhile, those who did not ask for credits are still paying the full $5 the entire time. I absolutely agree that the prices of the basic packages need to be adjusted, and if this is what Dish is doing as far as credits, then perhaps that tips their hand for what to expect in the January price changes. In other words, without the RSN's, the scheduled annual increase would only be $2 instead of $5 like usual. So, at the time when Dish normally adjusts the package prices, they will go down by $3 per month for everyone. This would reflect the $5 decrease due to the loss of the RSN, offset by the scheduled increase for all of the other channels in the package. This would match what Dish did to the prices of some of the Latino packages this year, while Univision was still missing. Those who are getting the $3 credits now are technically paying next year's rate, which means that they got hit by that $2 price increase earlier than they should have, but it still reduced the overall bill by $3 per month. Of course, those who requested the credits are the ones who actually watched, and still miss, those channels. So, the $3 reduction (or even a full $5 reduction) in their bills would still not feel like enough, when they would rather have the channels back.
