DIRECTV Pulls Jessica Simpson HD Ads

[Jimbo]

I have seen it 2 or 3 time already today; seems maybe a slight wording edit. Still mentions 1080i but nothing about cable. Its not like anything about this make any real differences; cable, car companies, burgers, etc all make plays on words to say something that sounds untrue. Its all based on perspective and what data / survey they are using to back any claims.

I can't count the number of different companies I have read and heard making the comment "we have the best (fill in the blank) anywhere around."

Is all word play. No one but the "criers" really cares.

I agree with you Charper, I've been saying basically the same thing, just differently, "Who cares" if your a D* sub.
The commercial companies that make the ad's generally make several at different time lengths to fit into the needed time frame.

I still have not heard TW mentioed in ANY of the commercials, so I don't know how they consider it to be a slam against them.

Jimbo

 

[LonghornXP]

I agree with you Charper, I've been saying basically the same thing, just differently, "Who cares" if your a D* sub.
The commercial companies that make the ad's generally make several at different time lengths to fit into the needed time frame.

I still have not heard TW mentioed in ANY of the commercials, so I don't know how they consider it to be a slam against them.

Jimbo

Time Warner (I've got word that soon Comcast will join in) is going on these grounds below. The D* ad is simply telling non D* customers (ie E* customers and all cable customers including TWC and Comcast customers to name two of them) that to get the best picture quality out of their HDTV they must switch to DirecTV. They as in DirecTV doesn't even have to say a cable companies name. Time Warner Cable and Comcast are going on the grounds that this ad has been running within TWC and Comcast markets that are offering full bandwidth and full resolution HDTV signals. They know that DirecTV isn't doing this with any customer they can get and have anywhere in the country.

So Comcast and Time Warner Cable are going to sue DirecTV for losses from customers who saw that ad and assume that because its shown on TV it must be true (ie customers believe you cannot lie about your services and/or another companies services on a TV ad). This directly results in customers believing that DirecTV provides better HDTV quality compared to their current cable/sat company and as such the customer will defect from their current company over to DirecTV. These ads are being run at the busiest time of the year and will stick into the minds of brand new HDTV owners who will open their new HDTV set on Christmas and at that point will decide who they will go with for HDTV. So this issue isn't about what customers DirecTV has gained today from these ads but what customers they could and will gain after Christmas.

Also for these first time HDTV owners who most likely will only see DirecTV's HDTV quality first will not have enough time (30 day money back) to figure this all out for themselves because of course they have yet to see another companies HDTV offerings to compare. Because DirecTV requires a two year agreement its likely that these ads will result in customers being made aware of the truth of said ads when its past the 30 day money back period and thus being locked into a contract with a company based on false advertising information. This based on the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Laws is an illegal contract which cannot be enforced by DirecTV. You cannot enter into a legal binding valid contract based on false or untrue or misleading information.

 

[ScoBuck]

If I did anything except disgust you I would really be dissapointed. I may be the ultimate fan boy. I can still see the plan and I am happy with what I am getting for now knowing what is coming. You on the other hand are the ultimate idiot. You are very unhappy with what you are paying for yet continue to pay and complain when there are other options. You are the one that did so many so called upgrades that cost you a fortune. You are responsible for that. D* did not tell you to. They did not force you to. Once again, if I didn't disgust you I would be unhappy with myself. If we took a pathetic pol here Vurbano, believe me you would win hands down. That is what TV advertising is. Chunky Soup says their soup is great. Who are you to say it isn't? Coke says it is better than Pepsi, prove it's not.

For the most part I agree with you 100% and have said so. I should be a 'fanboy' - after all as you say, I PAY for the service I PREFER, not for a service I HATE. If I hated it, or just desired something different I would SIMPLY switch. He has been so NEGATIVE for SO LONG, he can't have any REAL committment that would cost THAT much to cancel. A couple of hundred dollars alone would NEVER make me stay with a provider I hated so much.

Seems he feels it is so wrong for people that LIKE DirecTV overall to say so, but in his mind it is PERFECTLY OK to be the ANTI-FANBOY at EVERY opportunity.

 

[Tampa8]

This is very much like the advertising/slogan problem Walmart had several years ago. Their advertising used to be "Always the lowest Price." At the prodding of Target, they were forced to stop saying that. Walmart never mentioned any other company either, but the advertising was considered false.
FYI - Duracell makes or made claims about being the longest lasting battery, but there were/are two differences to the outright claims of Walmart and it appears Direct Tv.
1. They were very selective in what they said the batteries lasted longer in.
2. They were selective because there were indeed independant tests done. However in some applications Duracell did not last longer, (Duracell of course did not mention that) but for whatever reason Duracell did last longer in some other applications.

 

[ScoBuck]

For gosh sakes - its only advertising. there are enough weight loss claims, ab-builders, and so much total B.S. advertised EVERYWHERE - why is this any different?

take a look at car ads. - use your DVR to stop and read the disclaimers on a car ad. its enough to make you wonder why people get so worked up about this crap.

 

[LonghornXP]

For gosh sakes - its only advertising. there are enough weight loss claims, ab-builders, and so much total B.S. advertised EVERYWHERE - why is this any different?

take a look at car ads. - use your DVR to stop and read the disclaimers on a car ad. its enough to make you wonder why people get so worked up about this crap.

But your most likely not locked into 2 years of service with all of those are you. I also remember one car company that advertised a car with a specific type of engine (horsepower rating) and it seems many cars were sold with an engine that could never reach the horsepower rating claimed. Well if you didn't know that car company was required to replace free of charge every engine on every car they sold that couldn't support the advertised horsepower as part of a recall notice.

The fact is that DirecTV is telling customers that their HDTV picture quality is better than cable and that is flatout illegal. This Christmas will have the most HDTV sets sold of any Christmas ever by a very large margin. A very high percentage of those sales will be the first HDTV set within a household. Of course people will want to view the superbowl on that new HDTV set and once they enter the world of HDTV they will remember that DirecTV ad with DirecTV saying they are better than cable. They will assume that ad is true as its against the law to lie in an ad and it will be this assumption that will hurt most customers. You must remember that you can't see HDTV with your own eyes until you both buy an HDTV set and get an HDTV box with a cable/sat company.

Honestly if I was an average Joe who didn't view these sites I can say I would most likely switch to DirecTV based on that ad as I would assume it would be true or they couldn't have aired it. Yes you and I know it doesn't work this way but the average Joe doesn't know this and ends up falling into a trap so to speak.

This would be no different than say Emachines selling a computer that they advertise having an Intel Pentium D 3Ghz CPU. But lets say if that CPU was really a Pentium D 2.4Ghz CPU that was overclocked to 3Ghz. Well of course your trusting that Emachines have their ads and specs of the machine true and the only way you can find this out is after the purchase. What happens if its a birthday gift and by the time to hook it all up you only have three days to return it. Lets say you run CPUID on the fifth day and find out its not the CPU you paid for. Would you not want that company to pay for what they did because I would that is for damn sure.

 

[Jimbo]

But, don't you think that people that are getting new HDTV's are gonna look into thier local cable company as well ?
If I was in that situation I would look at all my options first, I know that not all people do this type of thing, but that is not the providers fault, it's the person about to sub.

btw, Walmart continues to advertise about how they have the same Sony TV's that everyone else does, much cheaper.

MOST high quality Sony HD TV's are not found at Walmart, yes they carry Sony and they may be less expensive, but they are NOT the same TV. I have yet to even see Sony TV at Walmart that the local HD A/V store carries.

So the local A/V shop should sue Walmart, it's false advertisement .

Personally, I think any judge should throw the TW/ D* lawsuit out, because of how lame it is.
Thats a pretty broad picture that the TW's of the world feel they can say,,opps you said something we don't like, I think we will sue you.

Jimbo

 

[FlyingJ]

"The fact is that DirecTV is telling customers that their HDTV picture quality is better than cable and that is flatout illegal. " Quote from Longhorn...


No, it is not illegal. Now you are throwing terminology around. They only need to have a sampling of people when asked, that stated that their HDTV picture quality is better. Actually, with the way these flimsy nonlaws in advertising are written, I am not even certain they needed actual people. Could have been an electronic survey, or anything else imagined. When anything can be based even partially on opinion, all is fair game.

Ad is still on here in Columbus, not sure if there were changes to it or not.

 

[LonghornXP]

"The fact is that DirecTV is telling customers that their HDTV picture quality is better than cable and that is flatout illegal. " Quote from Longhorn...


No, it is not illegal. Now you are throwing terminology around. They only need to have a sampling of people when asked, that stated that their HDTV picture quality is better. Actually, with the way these flimsy nonlaws in advertising are written, I am not even certain they needed actual people. Could have been an electronic survey, or anything else imagined. When anything can be based even partially on opinion, all is fair game.

Ad is still on here in Columbus, not sure if there were changes to it or not.

An ad cannot be opinion without a disclaimer which wasn't present with the DirecTV ad. The quote in the ad was "you just can't get the best picture quality on that fancy HDTV set without DirecTV". That is not stating opinion and its not talking about a survey. That quote is telling the viewer that no other company (ie cable companies, Dish Network and Verizon for that matter) provides the same level of picture quality that DirecTV does. Last I checked it can be proven without a doubt that many many many Comcast, TWC, BHN and Verizon customers are getting even better picture quality on HDTV compared to DirecTV. Its bad enough if DirecTV said their HD picture quality is just as good but no they are saying its better than anyone else when in fact its not nearly as good for tons and I mean tons of customers and even at worst other companies are no worse than DirecTV. Either way that ad is false and a lie on two seperate levels.

Also to the above poster keep in mind that very few people even think todo research about HDTV picture quality as most don't even know where to look. When they see an ad they expect it to be true and make their choice of provider based on that information. Why check your cable company out when you believe they provide a lower quality HDTV signal than say DirecTV. We on these forums are the very very very few and its our job to spread this information to the masses and its the state and national governments job to prevent consumer fraud because yes this is a form of fraud. Its also against both the FCC and FTC rules as well in case you didn't know but hey I guess the FCC and FTC run strictly on consumer opionion.

 

[RIRWIN1983]

Time Warner (I've got word that soon Comcast will join in) is going on these grounds below. The D* ad is simply telling non D* customers (ie E* customers and all cable customers including TWC and Comcast customers to name two of them) that to get the best picture quality out of their HDTV they must switch to DirecTV. They as in DirecTV doesn't even have to say a cable companies name. Time Warner Cable and Comcast are going on the grounds that this ad has been running within TWC and Comcast markets that are offering full bandwidth and full resolution HDTV signals. They know that DirecTV isn't doing this with any customer they can get and have anywhere in the country.

So Comcast and Time Warner Cable are going to sue DirecTV for losses from customers who saw that ad and assume that because its shown on TV it must be true (ie customers believe you cannot lie about your services and/or another companies services on a TV ad). This directly results in customers believing that DirecTV provides better HDTV quality compared to their current cable/sat company and as such the customer will defect from their current company over to DirecTV. These ads are being run at the busiest time of the year and will stick into the minds of brand new HDTV owners who will open their new HDTV set on Christmas and at that point will decide who they will go with for HDTV. So this issue isn't about what customers DirecTV has gained today from these ads but what customers they could and will gain after Christmas.

Also for these first time HDTV owners who most likely will only see DirecTV's HDTV quality first will not have enough time (30 day money back) to figure this all out for themselves because of course they have yet to see another companies HDTV offerings to compare. Because DirecTV requires a two year agreement its likely that these ads will result in customers being made aware of the truth of said ads when its past the 30 day money back period and thus being locked into a contract with a company based on false advertising information. This based on the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Laws is an illegal contract which cannot be enforced by DirecTV. You cannot enter into a legal binding valid contract based on false or untrue or misleading information.

OMG, their whoe basis is that because an ad was ran in "their" market they (D*) wust be basing them personaly. Thats the same logic as if AT&T sued Verizon or Bellsouth, ect... for saying they have the fastest,best, ect dsl when said company dosent serve said market, perhaps at&T should sue them for mking me think they are infirior because they advertised in at&t's territory, and thus muct be attacking at&t.

What it realy smells like is that cable is scared of what they know will be comming in 2007 from d*. and just exactly what math is TW using to compute the "damages"? lets see we are hemeraging x admout of subs because our service realy sucks, costing us x dollars, and based on last years figures of this time period, we estimate to looe x subscribers v.s. last year besause of a commercal by D*. I've seen less logic and more bs at a cow farm.

and since were on this topic, perhaps E* should sue one of my local cable companies Insight. For saying Big Ugly Dish when refering to satellite tv. since me joe dumbass would tie dish to dish network and thus figured ugly ment the picture quality. or d* should sue them as well for using a d* dish for a billboard, talking about "if you think its ugly now, wait till it rains. and it was a d* 1 lnb dish, and u could tell it was a d* dish by the lnb.

 

[hdtvtechno]

I just of thought of something...

It would be funny if Directv comes out and makes an commerical saying sorry they were misread / cheated... lol

 

[FlyingJ]

The fact that their is a suit involved does not mean for one instance that the suit is viable. Another form of media use is to of course file the suit whether it has basis or not to let the people know your agenda. Some people do read these and automatically assume that if a suit is filed than the company being sued must be doing something wrong.

 

[cybertrip]

I just saw the commercial on TNT-HD. So much for settling eh?

 

[LonghornXP]

Okay I think I understand at least some of the confusion. First the consumer protection laws have nothing todo with a company suing another company. So for example the state of New Hampshire could decide that this ad doesn't comply with their consumer protection laws and require DirecTV to refund hardware, programming, installation and waive any remaining contract lengths. But at the sametime just because a state says it violates consumer protection laws doesn't mean a suit could ever be won by another company.

Again my post has been very very clear that I'm talking about consumer protection laws, FCC and FTC rules and I never said the word sue. My personal belief is that the suit by both TWC and Comcast will either be dropped or thrown out for the exact reason "one" specific poster said. That reason is simple and that is because it will be very very very very hard if even possible to figure out specific damages.

So just to be clear I'll say it again in a simple manner.

1. DirecTV is in violation with nearly all state's consumer protection laws even though each state is in charge of enforcing their own residents. They also are in violation with several FCC and FTC rules but of course its up to both the FCC and FTC to enforce those rules which is sadly to say unlikely to occur.

2. So with everything directly above (section #1) said keep in mind the above has no bearing with regards to a suit. Also any class action suit isn't really considered a suit as it must be enacted at either the state or national level if not both. I also believe that any suit (except small claims court) will fail because damages will be very hard to calculate.

Also I don't believe this will be much of an issue for most customers because I believe most who would fall into this ad trap will not know any better and will at least stick out the two year contract which just so happens is the amount of time of most states Statute of Limitations.

Now IMO this goes on in some form all the time by all companies and I could really care less but also IMO it seems like DirecTV went a little bit further than most companies over at least the last several years. I'm a person who believes when something is wrong no matter how small you should still fight for it to be corrected and stopped in the future. Even if this only hurts 10 people IMO that is 10 more people hurt that shouldn't have been. Period its as simple as that.

 

[cablewithaview]

I contacted my Attorney General's Office, so I will see what comes of it. Every state should push to do something about this period, it is false and misleading. If you are in Alabama, go here: http://www.ago.state.al.us/

 

[ScoBuck]

I think you would be better off taking on an important cause - maybe like stopping the sale of tobacco products. At least at the end of the day its a noble cause.

 

[FlyingJ]

Agreed Scobuck, thanks for the clarification Longhorn, well put. Cable with a view, good luck.

 

[Ramy]

I thought it was misleading and not even true. I know for a fact as I've seen D* and my local cable co's HD side by side, and the cable co's HD wins hands down. The local cable co is running full 1920X1080i HD with only 2 HD channels on one QAM256 mux which has about 40mbps of bandwidth. D* is sometimes packing 3 HD channels on one of their 30mbps mux's. No contest there....

I wish I could say the same about my Cable company. Their HD is worse than D*.

 

[scotsmanron]

For the most part I agree with you 100% and have said so. I should be a 'fanboy' - after all as you say, I PAY for the service I PREFER, not for a service I HATE. If I hated it, or just desired something different I would SIMPLY switch. He has been so NEGATIVE for SO LONG, he can't have any REAL committment that would cost THAT much to cancel. A couple of hundred dollars alone would NEVER make me stay with a provider I hated so much.

Seems he feels it is so wrong for people that LIKE DirecTV overall to say so, but in his mind it is PERFECTLY OK to be the ANTI-FANBOY at EVERY opportunity.

I don't know about anyone else, but I just have a problem when someone can't see the faults in a company that they like. For the most part I like D* but they have their share of idiots and upper management has sure pulled some real boners. That is the same for a lot of companies....can you say Edsel? Of course most of you are too young to know what an Edsel is!!!!! Maybe Corvair? Nope, same problem. Maybe Betamax. In any case companies do stupid things all the time and we should call them on it. I pay for it, and within reason, they are here to make me happy, while making a profit. If they don't make a majority of us happy, they don't make a profit. Blindly following them doesn't say much for logical thinking does it?

As for staying with a company you don't like....sometimes you don't have a lot of choice as the alternatives are even worse. That doesn't mean that what you have couldn't improve.

One example: If D* had just taken the time/expense to give us one national HD channel every 3-4 months do you think we would all be complaining as much? If it had been every 3 months we would have had close to a dozen new ones by now. Yet we got CDUSA!!!

 

[scotsmanron]

I think you would be better off taking on an important cause - maybe like stopping the sale of tobacco products. At least at the end of the day its a noble cause.

One man's noble cause is another man's friend. Everyone choses their own battles to fight.