It is not DIRECTV's job to strong-arm content providers. DIRECTV's job is to get the channels to my set-top box. MY job is to complain about sub-standard content by direct contact with the providers or by not watching.
If distributors are willing to carry a channel without having any HD content on it, what's the motivation to push for HD content? It should take more than a stretch-o-vision bone or simple upconverts to call yourself HD.
I'd imagine that the MTV networks see things as competing with themselves. They have to be wondering what the point is. Bravo went there once already.
Hmmm. ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNNews, ESPN Classic, ESPN DEPORTES, ESPNU (college sports), ESPN Alt (occasionally)
ESPN Ocho nearly here... Dodgeball? Moments away.
P.S. Loved the classic line in Dodgeball "ESPN the Ocho!" - funny movie
Obviously, like D*'s relatively long commitment, it is a method of subsidizing a HD DVR that comes without an up-front fee and optionally with no commitment. $6.99 may be survivable when $20 is not.
I would hope that the company would just include them as part of their basic packs and not increase prices for the hd version of the same sd channels. I can see going up for hd channels that have no sd equivalent as they are new channels not provided before; Hdnet, Smithsonian, MGM etc. What I understood about the hd channel is that the providers have already paid for the sd basic pack of hd channels like HBo /Showtime etc, and that the hd version is already negotiatied in the price of the pack ,so why the increase?
IF they were to include the hd channels without an increase they could advertise this big time and gain a ton of customers at the same time. Increase in volume customers would pay for the hd channels in a small bit of time. THey would slaughter the competition if they did this. IT would also set a precedent that all competitors would have to follow to stay in the game. We, the customers would win big time.
The only issue I see is that sooner or later they will price themselves right out of the average consumer's hands with the continued price increases. Remember the baby boomers, the largest demograhpic group of Americans since after WWII, are getting older , and with that comes fixed incomes . That means the first thing to go is luxuries like hdtv and large premium programming packs. Cable alread saw defections when satellite was created because they offered more bang for a much smaller buck. That is why I went with them and more selection. Telecos have started now that seem to have had a small effect on satellite customers, but the deflections are growing. Remember that internet tv is the next big thing to come that will take subs away from both satellite ,cable and the telecos. Sooner or later there will be a backlash if bigger and bigger price increases keep coming and there is little in value to show for them.
The backlash started here, beginning in 2006. Because of a DirecTV increase, I dropped my package from Total Choice Plus down to Total Choice. This year, I switched over to Dish Network and went with their $29.99 a month package, which offers more than DirecTV's similarly priced loss leader "Family" package...lost a few channels that I liked in the process, but the price was easier for me to live with.
DirecTV has tried recently, several times, to win me back in recent weeks, with free installation, and one year of guaranteed prices that are $10 cheaper than the normal rate. Quite a surprise, considering that someone in another newsgroup claimed that DirecTV was no longer interested in subscribers such as myself, who only desire their lower tiered packages.
Regardless of the provider, if these increases continue, my days with subscription TV are numbered. I don't watch most of the channels often enough to justifty $45 or more out of my paycheck each month.
D*'s HD-DVR is $199 upfront -after an instant rebate. They could get a lot more cable and DISH customers -if the DVR was better and it was free (like DISH's), albeit with the DVR charge.
I can understand wanting a cheaper package.What I can't understand is having a package like Dish's that is called a Family package,but it does not have Disney channels.
The Disney channels are relatively expensive. At the $19.99 price point, I'd guess they just couldn't pull it off.I can understand wanting a cheaper package.What I can't understand is having a package like Dish's that is called a Family package,but it does not have Disney channels.
The Disney channels are relatively expensive. At the $19.99 price point, I'd guess they just couldn't pull it off.
There is also a school of thought that thinks the Disney channels are more about full-press marketing to kids than helping them to become better citizens.
There's a giant conglomerate out there controlling our airwaves. Not even the FCC can control them. It's all about making money and satisfying their investors.:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?