100+ National HD Channels?
- Thread starter cjwct
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 65
- Views 7K
-
WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!
If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!
While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!
Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!
CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
Where do you get this "large loss" from? It didn't imply that at all.
He said he spends $120 a month and got screwed. In the Voom situation, the people spending the most got screwed the most. Why can't 98% of you see that point?
The HD Only customers spend the least. They have the same # of channels that they had before, they are just different. And if they didn't care for Voom, they are probably happy about the change. If they loved Voom, they might be unhappy, but they are still getting the same # of channels for the money.
The HD Essential customers spend a little more. They have the same channels, but more of them are in HD. Win/Win for them.
The HD Ultimate customers spend the most, but they have 12 fewer channels than they did before. Yes, I appreciate having more channels in HD, but they are channels I already had.
Nobody said anything about "paying more than a premium" except you. I would pay $5. In fact, I'm STILL paying $5, I'm just not getting anything for it.
Last edited:
But if they did that, they wouldn't be able to charge a $7 "HD Enabling Fee".
I'm pretty sure that's why they raised the enabling fee from $6.00 to $7.00 when they started the new HD packs. It's really easy to justify getting HD Essentials for just $3.00 more a month than the enabling fee (at least that's how I justify it
). Now if they just rolled HD Essentials in to the price of each SD pack, say raising the price about $2 for AT100, $1 for AT200, and another $1 for AT250 that should just about cover it. The cost would be spread out among ALL subs and would encourage everyone to upgrade so they could see what they were missing in HD. Dish could also claim to have the most "free" HD channels, since in reality everyone would be paying for it through slightly higher prices. Sure it's a gimmick, but it has worked before.
Hahahaha Im lucky that I scrolled over it and seen a website at the bottom left that said something about Tony Danza.
This thread was about 100+ National HD Channels, NOT a specific Voom thread (I know it can get confusing though with all the highjacking voom posts), and even if this was a "VOOM" thread, I still have the right to ask the question of why he is posting the same exact, word for word post in mulitiple threads. But thanks for playing there sparky!
Where do you get this "large loss" from? It didn't imply that at all.
He said he spends $120 a month and got screwed. In the Voom situation, the people spending the most got screwed the most. Why can't 98% of you see that point?
The HD Only customers spend the least. They have the same # of channels that they had before, they are just different. And if they didn't care for Voom, they are probably happy about the change. If they loved Voom, they might be unhappy, but they are still getting the same # of channels for the money.
The HD Essential customers spend a little more. They have the same channels, but more of them are in HD. Win/Win for them.
The HD Ultimate customers spend the most, but they have 12 fewer channels than they did before. Yes, I appreciate having more channels in HD, but they are channels I already had.
Nobody said anything about "paying more than a premium" except you. I would pay $5. In fact, I'm STILL paying $5, I'm just not getting anything for it.
I was one of those Ultimate subscribers and after V* (name ommitted to protect the innocent) were dropped, I dropped Ultimate. I agree that the Ultimate's got screwed the most and that's why bye-bye Ultimate for me: saves my $10 a month and I don't feel so cheated...
Charlie can get 100 + channels with these new additions:
WFN HD2
WFNews HD
WFN ocho HD
WFN Alternate HD
WFN International HD
WFN pescando HD
maybe this way he will get to 100 HD +? Why not more fishing channels and while they at it add:
Bingo HD
Bingo HD2
BingoNews HD
Bingo Alternate HD
Bingo bingo HD
WFN HD2
WFNews HD
WFN ocho HD
WFN Alternate HD
WFN International HD
WFN pescando HD
maybe this way he will get to 100 HD +? Why not more fishing channels and while they at it add:
Bingo HD
Bingo HD2
BingoNews HD
Bingo Alternate HD
Bingo bingo HD
I am not blaming Dish on this as it is a broadcaster issue, but what good is a HD station when they play the movie "Hoosier' with sidebars (not widescreen) as they did last night on 'VS'. Not sure what they transmitted audio-wise. As some have indicated, just being listed as a HD station does not always 'truly' count (at least in my opinion).
Or, you know, they could add any of the 50 or so HD channels (which, admittedly, have varying amounts of actual HD at this point) that are available or will be soon.
But then we wouldn't get to enjoy yet another "Ocho" joke. :sleeo
Similar threads
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)
Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)
Latest posts
-
Is burial-rated cable required if you’re burying the cable?- Latest: Stuart Sweet
-
-
-
