Social Feed

redelephants
Last reply · posted in DISH Network Support Forum
It appears I have fallen victim to a contract dispute with the abc affiliate in my DMA. Does anyone have any information regarding this dispute?
103 Replies · 13879 views
S
sam, go to your station and start bitching there, i hate to see people like you with those bull and shallow arguments, we are the ones that are paying your salary in that overpriced trashy station of yours!!! making excuses for a pricre increase, i will see you here when your station start the negotiations again, i bet you'll come with the same bull arguments!!!
Do you own the board? Do you have any power to say what any poster should do?

If you simply want someone to 'rah rah, Dish is right, poor subscribers', and don't want to actually DISCUSS other opinions, then put me on ignore. I thought this was a 'discussion board'. Yup... here it is on the front page... a link to 'Jump into our Friendly Discussion Board'. If this is what you consider 'friendly', I'd hate to see how you treat those you don't like.

Here are the arguments I've laid out... tell me where I'm wrong...
1) If cable/sat went away, people (not all, but MOST) could still get OTA. You can't say the same for the other networks (ESPN, Disney, etc).
2) MOST people don't NEED cable/sat to get their locals. Yes, some MUST. But I'm willing to wager the MAJORITY of viewers CAN pick up OTA. Having them on cable/sat is a convenience. Remember, OTA has been around a LOT longer than cable. It wouldn't have survived if cable/sat were NEEDED to reach viewers.
Tampa8
Here are the arguments I've laid out... tell me where I'm wrong...
1) If cable/sat went away, people (not all, but MOST) could still get OTA. You can't say the same for the other networks (ESPN, Disney, etc).
2) MOST people don't NEED cable/sat to get their locals. Yes, some MUST. But I'm willing to wager the MAJORITY of viewers CAN pick up OTA. Having them on cable/sat is a convenience. Remember, OTA has been around a LOT longer than cable. It wouldn't have survived if cable/sat were NEEDED to reach viewers.

Here's where I think your argument falls downs.
1. OTA has been around a lot longer as analog. Far fewer than you are thinking can get a reliable digital signal. In Eastern Ct. it's near impossible to get all four networks OTA reliably. When it was analog, I got them all, one barely. Proof? I qualified for one channel when it was analog for being in a white zone. I now qualify (and get with AAD) all four.
Even in Florida, it is hard to get one of the four networks since they moved their antenna. (CBS - WTSP) I had to get a rotor and pre-amp for my inlaws just to get it. Even at that, when a plane goes between them and the transmitter they lose the signal for a few seconds. During higher winds when the antenna moves a little, they lose the signal. This isn't the days of analog, when I could get most any channel. There is no way people in apartments with any distance from the transmitter is going to get a reliable digital signal. If you are willing to spend much more than in the past, have a huge antenna with a pre-amp and probably a rotor, yes many can get locals. Just throwing up an antenna, no. In many less populated is where signals did not reach, but those areas are not as sparse as years ago, almost anywhere. Things have changed, where once signals not reaching an area meant a relative few not getting it, now those areas have far more people. Add to that the digital signal not reaching where analog did, and there are far more than I think you are giving credit to that can not get the affiliate signals.

2.Lets ask the networks, if they are willing to take all four networks off cable and Satellite and go back to pre-cable/satellite days. Millions would not or could not put up an antenna, or even get the signals. I'm betting they do not feel as you do that networks don't need cable/satellite.

3. That does not mean I do not watch network programming, I do, but nowhere near as much as years ago. It's been replaced with programming I like better, on USA, or TNT, or History, EuroNews,etc..... If given an ultimatum, I could only have one or the other, I would keep satellite, drop networks. With the advent of internet news, don't need the affiliates as much as in the past for that either. I do prefer local network news, but could learn to live without it.
S
Here's where I think your argument falls downs.
1. OTA has been around a lot longer as analog. Far fewer than you are thinking can get a reliable digital signal. In Eastern Ct. it's near impossible to get all four networks OTA reliably. When it was analog, I got them all, one barely. Proof? I qualified for one channel when it was analog for being in a white zone. I now qualify (and get with AAD) all four.
Even in Florida, it is hard to get one of the four networks since they moved their antenna. (CBS - WTSP) I had to get a rotor and pre-amp for my inlaws just to get it. Even at that, when a plane goes between them and the transmitter they lose the signal for a few seconds. During higher winds when the antenna moves a little, they lose the signal. This isn't the days of analog, when I could get most any channel. There is no way people in apartments with any distance from the transmitter is going to get a reliable digital signal. If you are willing to spend much more than in the past, have a huge antenna with a pre-amp and probably a rotor, yes many can get locals. Just throwing up an antenna, no. In many less populated is where signals did not reach, but those areas are not as sparse as years ago, almost anywhere. Things have changed, where once signals not reaching an area meant a relative few not getting it, now those areas have far more people. Add to that the digital signal not reaching where analog did, and there are far more than I think you are giving credit to that can not get the affiliate signals.

2.Lets ask the networks, if they are willing to take all four networks off cable and Satellite and go back to pre-cable/satellite days. Millions would not or could not put up an antenna, or even get the signals. I'm betting they do not feel as you do that networks don't need cable/satellite.

3. That does not mean I do not watch network programming, I do, but nowhere near as much as years ago. It's been replaced with programming I like better, on USA, or TNT, or History, EuroNews,etc..... If given an ultimatum, I could only have one or the other, I would keep satellite, drop networks. With the advent of internet news, don't need the affiliates as much as in the past for that either. I do prefer local network news, but could learn to live without it.
1. You've given me TWO examples... out of how many viewers? I will readily agree when you get "far enough" away from the towers, picking up good reception is hit or miss. However, you're missing my point... the MAJORITY of viewers live within (or maybe a county or so) the city of license. I never said digital OTA was easy or perfect. And, as mentioned before, broadcasters were FORCED to transition. They HAD to put up millions of dollars for new equipment.
2. I never said stations didn't benefit from cable/sat. Of course they do. But who benefits more? The station or the cable/sat provider? I think the cable/sat providers do, but not by much. They should all work together IMO.
3. That's fine for you. Not everyone agrees with you. That's why many people waited until LiL happened before going to sat from cable.

Also, for those who keep pointing out "more eyes" and "more ratings" thanks to sat... maybe, maybe not. Let's say for example, 100,000 Dish subscribers in market 'Springfield' (not to be confused with any real Springfield market) watch station 'WWWW' thanks to Dish. Unless some of those subscribers have Neilson books, odds are that will do NOTHING for WWWW ratings. Only 56 out of the 210 markets are metered. (That's from Wiki, so if my numbers are wrong, please correct me). Without the meters in EVERY house, there's no true way to know how much a station benefits by being on cable/sat.
osu1991
Consider too that the main reason for these retransmission fees is the network programming. How many times should Dish/Directv have to pay for this programming. There are over 200 NBC affiliates alone. So Dish/Directv are paying at least 200 times for the same programming from NBC.
HanoverPretzel
Consider too that the main reason for these retransmission fees is the network programming. How many times should Dish/Directv have to pay for this programming. There are over 200 NBC affiliates alone. So Dish/Directv are paying at least 200 times for the same programming from NBC.

Television providers pay a fee per subscriber who has access to the channel, and only subscribers within a given DMA get their local NBC affiliate on Dish. So, if there were one national NBC Channel that cost the average of what the 200 affiliates charge, Dish would come out paying the extra same total in fees. There'd be no difference, really, other than that they'd have one entity to negotiate with instead of a bunch of different ones, and there'd be no local programming.

In fact, a national NBC channel rather than having affiliations might actually hurt Dish, because they'd probably do things in negotiations like demand that Dish also carry a bunch of other NBC channels in lower tiers- like NBC Sports Channel. Actually, come to think of it, let's have a national NBC channel. ;) Trying to get NBC Sports Channel moved to a lower tier is one of my big "things" with Dish.
Tampa8
1. You've given me TWO examples... out of how many viewers? I will readily agree when you get "far enough" away from the towers, picking up good reception is hit or miss.

Sam, this post is from a different thread. I think you are taking lightly the major change in being able to get digital channels from Analog.

I am in Lebanon NH. About 60 miles from Manchester. I used to receive The WMUR signal over the air before they went digital - now we are just out of their range.This is with a good roof mounted antenna, boosters and a rotor.

Exactly what I posted, right down to the rotor and booster. It just underscores how dependent the affiliates are on Satellite and Cable transmission. That's really my point.
S
Sam, this post is from a different thread. I think you are taking lightly the major change in being able to get digital channels from Analog.



Exactly what I posted, right down to the rotor and booster. It just underscores how dependent the affiliates are on Satellite and Cable transmission. That's really my point.
You are right. There have been people who got analog reliably and can't get digital. But there are also who had no (or poor) analog reception and got good reception for digital.

One last thing to remember, the digital transition happened because the government FORCED it. I'm pretty sure the stations didn't want to spend millions to upgrade their facilities. THAT would have been interesting to see if stations would have upgraded to provide the better signal, or save money and keep the analog.
Tampa8
One last thing to remember, the digital transition happened because the government FORCED it. I'm pretty sure the stations didn't want to spend millions to upgrade their facilities. THAT would have been interesting to see if stations would have upgraded to provide the better signal, or save money and keep the analog.

We can agree! :)
Scott Greczkowski
Staff member HERE TO HELP YOU! Cutting Edge
Last reply · posted in The Chit Chat Club
Sometimes a thread gets so many posts in it that is can cause issues for the server so that why today we introduce The Song Name Game Part 3!

So let the game continue!

The last song was added by Bobby who posted...

One Meat Ball - Andrews Sisters

CONTINUE ON AND HAVE FUN! WELCOME HOME TO SATELLITEGUYS.US!

Here are the original rules for the game as posted by WebbyDude back in 2006. http://www.satelliteguys.us/threads/68645-Song-Name-Game

Just name a song title and the band who performed it. The next person does the same thing, but needs to list a song title or band name which includes a word from the previous entry. Pick songs from any genre.

Example:

Long Live Rock and Roll -- Rainbow

Rainbow in the Dark -- Dio

Another example:

Ride the Lightning -- Metallica

Lightning Strikes -- Ozzy Osbourne


Get it?


An additional note: we all know that song titles, sometimes, use profane words. Because this is a family friendly website it is advised that you clean up that title up a bit. This is accomplished by using something like sh!t instead of the real word. Thanks....
68675 Replies · 2681050 views
  • Like
Reactions: c-spand
long_time_Dish
I Can Hear Music - The Beach Boys
dishstaller
Boom Boom ( Out Go The Lights ) - Pat Travers
sdfntx
Palisades Park - Freddy "Boom Boom" Cannon
RaiderPower
Cherry Hill Park - Billy Joe Royal
long_time_Dish
Lakeside Park - Rush
Bruce
Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in Internet Television (IPTV) Discussion Forum
I was reading this article


That said this-
Last summer, for the first time, streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime claimed the largest share of the television viewing audience, surpassing both cable and broadcast TV. Streaming captured 34.8 percent of July viewers, according to Nielsen data, compared to 34.4 percent for cable and 21.6 percent for broadcast.

And then, sometime in the second half of 2022, cord-cutters became the majority. The share of cable and satellite television subscribers dipped to 48 percent, according to a report from Samba TV, a television technology company.


Now I do not consider those with YTTV and the likes, Cord Cutters, but they still do not have Traditional Cable/Satellite delivered Live TV, so I decided to do the math.

There are, now, 129 Million Households in the United States.

In 2015, there were 100 Million Cable/Sat Subscribers , no streaming Live TV Service.

Today, there are 66 Million Live TV subscribers, including Cable, Satellite and Streaming.

Roughly, Streaming Live TV has 14 Million subs including all of them.

So that means, Cable/Satellite now has, roughly, 51 Million Households

So in just 8 years, lost 49% of their subscribers and by the end of this year, expected sub count to be, roughly, 45 million households.

That means a total loss of 55% since 2015 at the end of 2023.

But out of 129 Million households, 45 million will mean only 35% will get Cable/Satellite Delivered Live TV by the end of 2023.

Imagine what 2024 will be like.
899 Replies · 72337 views
  • Wow
Reactions: MikeD-C05
Bruce
And again, 15 months in a row, streaming wins-

Cable and Broadcast added together-36.4%

Streaming with a massive 49.6%, 13.2% higher than Broadcast/Streaming.

IMG_2172.webp
Jimbo
And again, 15 months in a row, streaming wins-

Cable and Broadcast added together-36.4%

Streaming with a massive 49.6%, 13.2% higher than Broadcast/Streaming.

View attachment 194983
Your Still Thrilled about all this ?

These numbers will Never be accurate as many people use Both still ...

You have services like Hulu Live and You Tube TV that do, what you call Cable, but they ARE Streaming, so Which is is ?

Does it get counted 2x as both Streaming and Cable ?
  • Like
Reactions: MikeD-C05
S
Your Still Thrilled about all this ?

These numbers will Never be accurate as many people use Both still ...
Nobody is "happy" or "sad" about this. Simply posting data in an non-editorialized way has nothing to do with anyone's feelings.

The data on the streaming side is immensely accurate, I'm guessing to the millisecond. Plus most people likely have not turned off data sharing and thus they are grabbing a huge swath of data. Much more accurate than cable which relies on a smaller sample size and probably not to the second.

In either case, nobody is getting "double counted" because it's usage based. If I watch 100 minutes of content and 30 minutes is on Youtube and 20 minutes on Disney and 50 minutes on YTTV, it's going to show up as 30%, 20%, 50% slices of my personal pie respectively.
Q.
Who does the Counting for Streaming ?

Neilson does the Broadcast/Cable ...
Nielsen does. If you go into the settings of any of your streaming accounts, you can turn off the option to share to usage data with their third party measuring service - Nielsen.
Jimbo
Nobody is "happy" or "sad" about this. Simply posting data in an non-editorialized way has nothing to do with anyone's feelings.

The data on the streaming side is immensely accurate, I'm guessing to the millisecond. Plus most people likely have not turned off data sharing and thus they are grabbing a huge swath of data. Much more accurate than cable which relies on a smaller sample size and probably not to the second.

In either case, nobody is getting "double counted" because it's usage based. If I watch 100 minutes of content and 30 minutes is on Youtube and 20 minutes on Disney and 50 minutes on YTTV, it's going to show up as 30%, 20%, 50% slices of my personal pie respectively.

Nielsen does. If you go into the settings of any of your streaming accounts, you can turn off the option to share to usage data with their third party measuring service - Nielsen.
I have turned some off, not others ...
dishstaller

Funny thing is that as the screen size and pic quality increase, the quality of the programming has DEcreased.
  • Sad
Reactions: Jimbo
dishdude
skipped the OLED Tv entirely?

AI slop
dishstaller
Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in DISH Network Support Forum
I figured some of the guys would be looking here for an answer. You'll need to use this link

I'll mention what happened over there. I don't want to cause Scott any issues or put him in a bad spot.
3 Replies · 84 views
dishstaller
If any of you know some of the guys from the board and you have their contact info, please reach out to them....many failed to update their contact info and some even had starband email addresses.
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Scott Greczkowski
I figured some of the guys would be looking here for an answer. You'll need to use this link

I'll mention what happened over there. I don't want to cause Scott any issues or put him in a bad spot.
Now I have to go check out what happened now. Lol!
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Scott Greczkowski
Went and looked, not too bad...

Just let people know the address is satelliteretailer.com as DishRetailer.COM is not working. :)
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
osu1991
Pub Member / Supporter
Last reply · posted in The Chit Chat Club
:mad::mad::mad::mad:

Pissed off at the crappy healthcare costs

My health Insurance renewal for 2027 just came in. Going from $827 a month to $1,187 a month. Deductible going up a $1k to $9,350. Max out of pocket also going up $1k to $11,000. Doctor co-pay of $40. Urgent Care co-pay $50. ER 50% coinsurance after deductible. That's all in network. Out of network is double, should it be needed.

Have to think about this. I'm really tempted to just go without now. I only go to the doctor once or twice a year. I pay out of pocket for Tirzepitide and can do without the Rosuvastatin (crestor) now. Really tired of spending over $10k a year and getting nothing out of it.

After years with Blue Cross I switched last year to Ambetter as my Blue Cross premium was going from $1200 to $1800 for a Silver plan and the Bronze plan was still going to be $1300 at BCBS. Ambetter was $827 for the same coverage with a Bronze plan. Didn't think it would jump this much so soon.

I'm guessing a Silver plan is probably over $2,000 a month for 2027.
11 Replies · 117 views
  • Sad
Reactions: AZ.
b4pjoe
Pissed off at the crappy healthcare costs
Are you employed with no work insurance or that is what you are paying for your workplace insurance? Or is that through Healthcare.gov? Retired? Eligible for medicare?
vazhog
that cut is only for illegals to get off the rolls and I was being sarcastic before -
osu1991
Are you employed with no work insurance or that is what you are paying for your workplace insurance? Or is that through Healthcare.gov? Retired? Eligible for medicare?
Started my own business in 2006, been self employed for 20 years this year.
meStevo
that cut is only for illegals to get off the rolls and I was being sarcastic before -

Even sarcastically it's wrong. Undocumented immigrants already weren't eligible for federal Medicaid, so there's no one to "get off the rolls." The immigrant-related pieces are a small part of the ~$1 trillion. They cut the federal match for emergency care from 90% to the state's regular rate and end eligibility for some lawful immigrants like refugees. Most of the "savings" come from work requirements, more frequent eligibility checks, and provider tax limits, which hit citizens.

Either way, the cost doesn't disappear. It shifts to states, hospitals, and everyone else's premiums and will only serve to make issues like those raised in this thread worse.
dishstaller
Undocumented immigrants already weren't eligible for federal Medicaid, so there's no one to "get off the rolls."
That's only part correct. Actually I had to look it up to make sure. There is NO Federal money going to Medicaid for illegals but there ARE some states that use State money to pay for Medicaid for illegals. Here's the list

    • California: Covers all income-eligible undocumented adults. [1, 2]
    • Colorado: Covers specific adult demographics (with upcoming budget caps in 2027). [1]
    • Illinois: Covers specific adult age brackets. [1]
    • New York: Covers specific adult demographics. [1]
    • Oregon: Covers all income-eligible undocumented adults. [1, 2]
    • Washington: Covers specific adult demographics. [1, 2]
    • Washington, D.C.: Provides adult coverage through the D.C. Health Care Alliance. [1, 2]
meStevo
That's only part correct. Actually I had to look it up to make sure. There is NO Federal money going to Medicaid for illegals but there ARE some states that use State money to pay for Medicaid for illegals. Here's the list

    • California: Covers all income-eligible undocumented adults. [1, 2]
    • Colorado: Covers specific adult demographics (with upcoming budget caps in 2027). [1]
    • Illinois: Covers specific adult age brackets. [1]
    • New York: Covers specific adult demographics. [1]
    • Oregon: Covers all income-eligible undocumented adults. [1, 2]
    • Washington: Covers specific adult demographics. [1, 2]
    • Washington, D.C.: Provides adult coverage through the D.C. Health Care Alliance. [1, 2]

Fair point, but it's consistent with what I said: no federal Medicaid money goes to undocumented immigrants. Those programs are state-funded, so the federal ~$1T cut can't touch them. Whatever states decide to do with their own programs is a separate budget decision.
  • Like
Reactions: osu1991 and Bobby
vazhog
The feds give money to the states for them to use - Cutting the fed funding only means the taxpayer savings will passed onto the states that need to make up the Fed dollars cut -See the list above for those states affected
dfergie
Staff member HERE TO HELP YOU!
Last reply · posted in What's Cooking?
We have a Breakfast and Dinner thread so... :)
Continuing from the Breakfast thread, found Cornbread mix so ...
Yellow Cornbread Mix
2 Hatch Green Chiles -diced
1 Egg
2/3 cup of milk
add to greased pan
Bake for 400f 20-25 minutes(From instructions)
now to put together and try... this to go with pinto beans...
5450 Replies · 336220 views
dfergie
Chili dog bowl, water… (homemade chili)
TRG
TRG
Leftover wanton soup and pork fried rice. Water.
dfergie
IMG_5955.webp

Sweet tea…
  • Like
Reactions: Bobby and TRG
TRG
TRG
Tuna salad sandwich on toasted honey whole wheat bread with a handful of kettle chips. Water.
  • Like
Reactions: Bobby
TRG
TRG
Breakfast for lunch. Crispy corned beef hash, home fries, two over easy eggs and sourdough toast.

1653.webp
dfergie
Staff member HERE TO HELP YOU!
Last reply · posted in The Sports Section
160 Replies · 3671 views
  • Like
Reactions: Foxbat and meStevo
Foxbat
Weird F1 weekend is already over with a Saturday race.
dfergie
Tried to watch the truck race but the stage c**p is why I don't watch NASCAR anymore…
  • Like
Reactions: Yespage
Y
Today is the anniversary of Dan Wheldon's passing at Las Vegas in a dreadful crash that luckily didn't take more drivers' lives. I vaguely remember the crash, but I more strongly remember Paul Tracy trying to keep it together as he left the Medical Center knowing that Dan most likely wasn't going to.

The safety in these vehicles is beyond incomprehensible, especially relative to what it was 60 years ago, when dying wasn't unexpected. But it is still very dangerous. I always scoff at the prayer invocations, but never scoff at the risks these drivers take and the emergency workers out there who might need to pull short of a miracle to save a driver's life.
Tried to watch the truck race but the stage c**p is why I don't watch NASCAR anymore…
HBO Max has the live in car streaming without commercials, which provides an interesting take, but you are driving blind, knowing only what the team is telling the driver about what is happening on the track. The stages definitely ruin the NASCAR set up.
  • Like
Reactions: dfergie
Y
NASCAR is an abject mess, but at least it has Kyle Larson. Guy had the lead on the green/white checker, fell back to 12th or the like, kept his cool, and charged back to win with room to spare at the line. And win very cleanly!

NASCAR needs to stop racing at Talladega. Especially if they are going for elderly Sunday drives at the track! Stage racing is real stupid, but NASCAR should consider one half point a second per group gap as a bonus.