Social Feed

pulltab said:

So, correct me if I am wrong.....but didn't Charlie say that they own 20% of Voom???

So if that is the case, are they not suing themselves????

Inquiring minds want to know.....

Click to expand...

Geronimo said:

No they are suing a company that they own a piece of. VOOm has not been profitable and therefore Echostar has never had any return on its investment. It is easy to see how froma dollar and cents perspective Echostar is better off eliminating the VOOM payment even if it means that VOOM dies.

Click to expand...

FitzAusTex said:

Voom as a suite of 15 channels carried on other providers like E* was not expected to make a profit till 2009, at the earliest. Although true, it is nonetheless a little disingenuous to state that 'they've not been profitable', as they are a three year old up-start. How many companies become profitable out of the gate? I don't know the answer to this myself, but my observations in paying attention to such things tells me not very many.

Click to expand...

pulltab said:

So, correct me if I am wrong.....but didn't Charlie say that they own 20% of Voom???

So if that is the case, are they not suing themselves????

Inquiring minds want to know.....

Click to expand...

Geronimo said:

It is not disingenous at all. VOOM has failed to find a single domestic customer outside of their two owners. It is highly unlikely that t hey would have achieved profitability anytime soon much less last year.

My post was made in response to the question about why would Echostar be involved in a dispute with a company that they own a piece of it? the answer is that froma purely financial perspective they are better off getting rid of the payments to VOOM even if it forces VOOM into failure.

I fail to see how t is disingenous to answer the question asked and point out that the original business relationship with VOOM has not turned out as hoped.

Click to expand...

FitzAusTex said:

I feel like you were stating that Voom was not profitable because it had not secured other distributors. Voom was not yet profitable as it didnt expect to be turing a profit by mid-2008, and I surmise that Echostar knew this upfront. "VOOm has not been profitable and therefore Echostar has never had any return on its investment.", to me sounds like a 50 year old airline that losses money most of those 50 years.

Click to expand...

hockeynut5150 said:

if Voom provides proof they fulfilled the contract, then E* no longer has that 20% ownership, or at least that's my understanding of that ownership issue

Click to expand...

Fitzie said:

If Rainbow sits on its butt and does nothing about Voom except sue Dish, who will get the Voom programming that was of excellent quality (though largely dated)? They have a large number of concerts in the files with some outstanding music--if I had realized the service would terminate so abruptly, I would have DVR'd a bunch of them for my own replay. I guess i just snoozed and lost...

Fitzie

Click to expand...