5/18/2011 1:46pm - Uplink Activity Report - 44 changes

Ghpr13

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 1, 2009
3,212
0
Louisville, KY
Scott,
I'm confused. Why would Dish pull a HD feed and leave a SD feed up? If low viewership is the reason, why not just pull both feeds and be done with it? I mean I understand when there's a dispute, like Disney, but I would think Dish would want to get rid of any SD feeds that they can and keep the HD feeds going...What am I not seeing?

Ghpr13:confused:
 

Santinelli

SatelliteGuys Family
Jul 14, 2004
101
21
Milford, NH
Scott Greczkowski said:
So your the one that watches it! :D

Actually now that its in HD I may tune in more myself. :D

Hahaha yeah, I'm the one person watching. :). It really isn't bad, but the sd was just the worst....

The funniest show is the Jewish doctor and the... Um regular doctor? :). They argue over treatment. :)
 

cmcgrail

SatelliteGuys Family
Aug 30, 2006
44
15
Phoenix, AZ
What kind of testing is required before a new HD channel goes available? I've seen mention that Bloomberg HD is being tested now, I kinda figured it's one of those things that either works or it does not.
 

Ghpr13

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 1, 2009
3,212
0
Louisville, KY
Because all 16 million customers can see the SD feed... only a few million could see the HD feed.

But it's in the Platinum package, so most people that have that are HD customers. Unless they moved WFN to a core package, then viewership would be pretty much the same.

Hugh? Over80% of american households have hd tv. I think your numbers are backwards.

OK, now I back to being confused. Was the total viewership of both SD/HD of WFN down, or was just the viewership of WFN in HD down?
Because if only the HD viewership was down, and that's the reason Dish pulled the HD feed, then doesn't that give validation to Disney's argument that SD and HD feeds are separate feeds and should be paid for separately?

Or is it because WFNHD was part of the Platinum package, and as part of the Platinum package, Dish felt that WFN didn't have the viewership needed to be part of that package?

To me the argument that "Because all 16 million customers can see the SD feed... only a few million could see the HD feed." means that Dish will always cater to the SD feeds and HD feeds will take a back seat. We will never get out from under the thumb of SD.

Again, if I'm off base here, please straighten me out...just remember, type slow.

BTW: I know Disney has nothing to do with WFN, I'm just saying that an action like this tends to give more weight to Disney asking for payment on both the SD & HD feed.

Ghpr13:(&:confused:
 

Scott Greczkowski

Welcome HOME to SatelliteGuys!
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Sep 7, 2003
100,213
18,828
Newington, CT
Hugh? Over80% of american households have hd tv. I think your numbers are backwards.
But do they have DISH HD equipment setup and subscribe to DISH HD service on all those TV's? The answer is no.

Look how many people just here at SatelliteGuys still have DISH 1000 receivers!
 

MikeD-C05

Pub Member / Supporter
Pub Member / Supporter
Nov 25, 2003
26,250
16,241
Nederland , Texas
But do they have DISH HD equipment setup and subscribe to DISH HD service on all those TV's? The answer is no.

Look how many people just here at SatelliteGuys still have DISH 1000 receivers!

Which shows that DISH needs to start upgrading their subs to hd receivers so they can take advantage of the Hd channels. Besides if they would obsolete the older receivers and replace them for newer mpeg 4 receivers , they would also have more bandwith to use . They could end duplication of sd channels and give everyone hd channels ,even if they are only down converted to sd, for those who don't want to pay the extra $10.00 a month.
 

TheKrell

A mighty and noble race originating on Altair IV.
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 4, 2007
31,898
26,711
Fairfax, VA
I think what Scott means is that an HD channel costs them in bandwidth, while an SD channel less so. So... If not that many people are watching the HD channel compared to another HD channel that's not up yet, then Dish will drop the HD channel and replace it with some other HD that potentially has greater interest. The SD channel has less cost at least to broadcast, and potentially could draw more viewers, so the calculation might still be favorable for this network in SD, as opposed to some other channel in SD.
 

JFaber99

SatelliteGuys Guru
Apr 9, 2009
129
13
Huntsville, AL
9464 - TMP36 - Ciel-2 129W TP 26 ConUS beam renamed to VERIA(218) (Veria TV) (A) (H)
9464 - TMP36 - EchoStar15 61.5W TP 26 ConUS beam renamed to VERIA(218) (Veria TV) (A) (H)

Channel 218.
 

Ghpr13

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 1, 2009
3,212
0
Louisville, KY
I think what Scott means is that an HD channel costs them in bandwidth, while an SD channel less so. So... If not that many people are watching the HD channel compared to another HD channel that's not up yet, then Dish will drop the HD channel and replace it with some other HD that potentially has greater interest. The SD channel has less cost at least to broadcast, and potentially could draw more viewers, so the calculation might still be favorable for this network in SD, as opposed to some other channel in SD.

OK, put like that it makes sense to me. :)

Ghpr13:)
 

Similar threads

D
Replies
0
Views
992
DigiDish Uplink Report
D
D
Replies
0
Views
990
DigiDish Uplink Report
D

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

Latest posts

Top