Another Programming Dispute

[Scott Greczkowski]

Looks like another programming dispute is coming for Dish...

Check it out..

http://www.ktsm.com/news/local/29683384.html

 

[navychop]

Clickable link.

 

[CubsWin]

The article makes it sound like "2 pennies a day" is a steal of a price, but figure that is 60 cents a month and multiply by 6 networks (CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox, PBS, CW) and we're up to $3.60 in expenses out of a $5.00 charge, not to mention any other expenses that E* would incur to broadcast these channels. It's definitely not as clear-cut as the article makes it out to be.

 

[skyviewmark]

How about instead of complaining to Dish, Everyone in that market contact KTSM and complain to them.. Why do stations think we as consumers should take their crap. We are already paying for Local stations. We don't need to pay more.

 

[Laddyboy]

It's funny they will give anyone the programming for free OTA but want everyone to pay for cable or sat broadcasting of the same thing. Are stations just looking to recover some of their HD conversion costs? If E* would get a 2 or 3 OTA tuner DVR to market, they'd make a mint. I get all my HD locals just fine OTA but having only one HD OTA tuner in my 722 is a bit limiting. I love my 722 and wouldn't trade it for anything.

 

[navychop]

That's why I have an HD OTA DVR, and why I'll be buying at least 1 TR-50. Actually, now that I have 2 ViP722s, I may not have as great a need for HD OTA DVRs. So I might buy just 1 instead of 2 or 3.

 

[MikeD-C05]

Dish should of made their dvrs with both dual tuner ota capability and dual tuner sat capability as well. This would make the need to uplink these stations and pay for them less important. The new 722 K will have just that capability. I have never understood why the ota option wasn't included in all sat tuners from the start and the need to Pay for all these ota stations to be carried would be greatly reduced. Now this would mean that the sat companies would have to also be in the ota antenna business as well , but it would be better for both the consumers and the sat companies as well. As long as guide data was included with all ota channels regardless if those ota stations were carried by the sat company or not.

 

[Gorbash]

Seems this is happening to more than just Dish. Comcast is refusing to pick up NBC in Austin, and ABC in San Antonio. I agree it's not the cable/sat providers screwing the people, it's the local stations screwing the customers. It's just like Dish dropping the channel package we aren't supposed to talk about. We pay for it, we should get it, or a refund.

 

[JEFFinINDY]

Bright House in Indianapolis (2nd largest cable franchise in Indy) is about to drop the local CBS station here (WISH TV - a LIN station). The channel is offering deals to sign up with Dish Network if you're a Bright House subscriber.

 

[johnwadams]

This happened in Memphis, TN some years ago with Time-Warner. The ABC station wanted to be paid, the others invoked the must carry. Since those in Memphis with a good antenna could get a perfect picture on the Jonesboro ABC station 60 miles away, I begged TimeWarner to tell Memphis ABC to stuff it and go for Jonesboro. At that time Jonesboro was broadcasting MTS like all the Memphis stations except for Memphis ABC.
Apparently the Memphis station was so desperate for funds since they couldn't even pay for MTS equip. but I think they finally caved in and invoked "must carry". Since their ad revenue is based on viewers, would it not hurt them to loose Dish customers? Or have we reached the point where there are so few left that they don't care?

 

[Racer47]

I think a very viable business plan would have been no locals on Dish at all. Only "cable" channels and every receiver has 1 or 2 OTA tuners. I think that would save Dish a ton of money and allow a lower cost sat tv alternative. There are 200+ markets at an average of about 5 to 6 channels a market. So thats well over a 1000 channels that need to be uplinked and spot beamed back down. Eliminate that cost and the cost of launching new sats to support all that and give me a lower monthly bill and let me watch networks ota.

 

[stck4evr]

I think a very viable business plan would have been no locals on Dish at all. Only "cable" channels and every receiver has 1 or 2 OTA tuners. I think that would save Dish a ton of money and allow a lower cost sat tv alternative. There are 200+ markets at an average of about 5 to 6 channels a market. So thats well over a 1000 channels that need to be uplinked and spot beamed back down. Eliminate that cost and the cost of launching new sats to support all that and give me a lower monthly bill and let me watch networks ota.

The problem is some people can't get OTA channels, or only getting a few of them, which would force me to go to Cable and Dish would never get my $$$

 

[Racer47]

I realize that would be the case for some people, but not most people. Directv would cover some of those as well. I guess it doesn't really matter now anyway and since I'm not in Forbes 400 list, I won't be launching the Racer47 Sat Tv service any time soon.

 

[Jim S.]

I think a very viable business plan would have been no locals on Dish at all.

And what are the people with no OTA reception supposed to do? It's more common than you think. It's very easy to be theoretically in range of the transmitters and still not have a usable signal due to terrain. In fact, it's become a whole lot worse with digital. I could, if I wanted, receive ABC, NBC, CBS, and PBS analog in poor but intelligible quality with an modest-sized antenna. (But half of them would be from a DMA that's 90 degrees away from the one I'm supposed to be receiving.) I've got nothing on Fox, CW, or MyNet. But digital? I've got nothing, and the field-strength calculations I've seen indicate that I could get nothing with any reasonable antenna at any reasonable height.

 

[reddice]

I realize that would be the case for some people, but not most people. Directv would cover some of those as well. I guess it doesn't really matter now anyway and since I'm not in Forbes 400 list, I won't be launching the Racer47 Sat Tv service any time soon.

I live in Brooklyn NY and I can't get most of the OTA digital stations that are only broadcasting 5 miles away so there you are wrong. So I greatly rely on the HD local channels on Dish Network.

 

[ESPNSTI]

I think a very viable business plan would have been no locals on Dish at all.

The rural population is not insignificant:
w ww.demographia.com/db-usa-staterural.htm

In my opinion, one of the main strengths of satellite over cable or internet is that it works in rural areas.
Not catering to rural customers would be rather silly I would think.

Personally I'm probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 miles away from the closest tower through hilly terrain at that.
I had trouble getting an analog SD picture with rabbit ears.
HD OTA is not an option for me.

 

[barnie]

Long Distance TV

If the local companies start charging for their service, which is free over the air, Why can dish not choose what market to carry, I would love NYC stations.
They are must carry because they are free. That does not even make sense.
It does not even apply to me, since I have OTA locals, but I was paying for them to get the guide.
They are commercial stations, they make their $$ thru local advertisement, that was the argument they used to stop Long distant.

Greed!

 

[mike123abc]

Stations want to charge for their signals because they can do it. Why would they want to pass up free money. It is not like they have to do anything special, they just demand money, the satellite/cable provider has to do all the work. They know that most their viewers are on cable/satellite so it is an easy way to get most of their customers to pay. It is better than trying to find advertisers.

 

[Pepper]

if they want to be paid for their programs they should cut out the advertising. then it would be worth paying for.

 

[HDRoberts]

Seriously, what a load of crap (that channel). Oh, we just want 2 cents a day out of the $5 you pay. Oh, did we neglect to mention that the $5 is per month? Our bad in making that an invalid comparison. Seriously, that 2 cents out of 17 cents, 12% of the fee just for one channel. I thought most local stations get less than 30 cents a month per sub, this one wants almost twice that.