DISH Drops AMC Networks (AMC Back on DISH channel 131)
- Thread starter Sparkman
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 4K
- Views 583K
I do too, but I only watch at most one or two shows on it during the course of a year. Doctor Who and Primeval. I can get those 2 shows in other ways. Dropping AMC, if I were with Dish, would cost me much more to get the shows I want. And that is something that has to be considered, imo.
whatchel1 said:
Actually, I thought the crawls were too distracting this week. They seemed to ramp them up a notch. But, I fully understand the necessity of letting viewers know that they are in risk of losing a favorite network. How else will they find out, other than the channel being gone one day? Plus, the more subs that complain to dish, the more they might realize that AMC might be more popular with viewers than they thought.
But, I suppose I'm a fanboy of some AMC programming, as well as afanboy of putting customers first.
I'm not against BBC. I don't watch it much but what I have seen is generally entertaining. In the end I don't really want to lose any programing I pay for including BBC. Channels that aren't a big deal to me are a huge deal to someone else. It's AMC today and it will be a different channel in the future. Maybe one day it will be BBC.
If the channels were there when I signed my contract i want them to stay there while I pay for it whether I watch them often or not. I don't want my choices limited by what Dish considers value and I don't get the cheers that come from some encouraging them to remove channels that other people like. Tampa and KAB are not guilty of that but I have seen it many times in different dispute threads on this forum.
I was just using BBC as an example because people were talking about it in this thread.
See that's the thing. I'm nothing like your viewing I guess. I love the above programs as well as the Dramaville stuff, BBC World news (which I wish was carried 24X7), and special on music people and groups (they have a special on the Beatles & also one on John Lennon coming up in the next 2 wks). This is personal taste but AMC has about 1 show a week that is interesting. So unless you like rerun stuff that is maxed out w/ commercials why watch AMC? Each to his own but I think AMC has the rating it has in comparison to BBC HD due to it being on every program provider out there. All cable co's & sat companies have it.
If BBC was popular enough that a high number of customers wanted it all cable and satellite companies would have it too. If they decided the market wanted it they would provide it.
That is said of every channel. BBCA's carriage problems, is that it is not part of any of the large US media groups, so it makes it harder to compete on uneven playing field. When you have Viacom, Disney, Rainbow or Tuner saying carry our 6 channels or you can't carry any of them, then it makes it harder for a single channel like BBCA to get carriage. Their affiliation with Discovery Networks doesn't really help them when it comes to getting carriage.
Not really true. AMC has been around many times longer than BBC HD so the comparison isn't valid. That is why it is carried on some many providers. It was around in the C-band only days. Before there was HD. Even BBC SD is a relative new comer to the market. I understand why AMC is doing this. It is the fact that they have been around a long time and now have had to produce original programming to stay popular. Their selection of movies was reduced immensely when TCM got such a large library of classics. So unless they want to be dropped by providers they like say Showtime have had to adapt. That means original programming which cost them much more. Now each time they negotiate a new contract w/ another provider they try to stick it to them. As I mentioned they just did this w/ Suddenlink cable co. Plus the bad blood tween E & them just adds to the effort here. It's nasty on both sides and won't get any better soon. I've said several times in this thread I'm looking at D now to add but mostly due to the HR34. It has 5 timers built into it. Something I think E screwed up on w/ the new Hopper/Joey setup.
The oligopolic channel ownership landscape is the crux of the problem, whether its dropped/not carried channels, or exhorbitant price hikes. Either way, the consumer loses.
BBC isn't even in the top 20 ratings!
I don't care how long its been around its got nothing to do with whether people watch it or not. Thats just an excuse.
BBC is a LOW rating channel so why are we even talkng about it.
I don't care how long its been around its got nothing to do with whether people watch it or not. Thats just an excuse.
BBC is a LOW rating channel so why are we even talkng about it.
USA gets 63 cents approx. AMC says they are worth 75 cents. We do not know how much AMC is actually asking for. (I have seen 30 cents, Dish offered 15 cents, and it's my opinion Dish wanted the negotiations to include they did not have to carry the other channels) - but certainly nothing official of course) However starting at saying they are worth 75 cents certainly says to me AMC feels they are in the league of USA. I don't necessarily blame AMC for trying to project that idea and try to get more. My immediate point with BBCA was I am not aware of them saying they are worth being in the league of others with higher ratings, but AMC is.
That was a comment made to the press weeks ago. Like you said they probably aren't asking for anything near that price. You mentioned that you have seen that they are asking for 30 cents which seems reasonable for AMC to me. Again this is all speculation though because these are private negotiations. People can throw around numbers here all they want but none of us know the real numbers because we are not part of these private negotiations. Taking one little snippet from the press on either side is hardly proof of what is actually going on.
I agree King3Pj about who knows the actual numbers. We do know AMC feels it is valued actually higher than USA. Dish is not blameless in all this either and I am not losing sight of that...... 
I would like to see a comparison between what the ratings of the channels are vs what they charge.
If you don't know what they are asking, how do you know they value themselves at .75?
Also, how do you know USA gets .63? I thought that sort of info was relatively secret. But, if it is public information, why would a cable network ranked 15 to 17, depending on source, ask for more money than the #1 ranked cable channel?
If the .75 figure is even true, perhaps that includes all of their channels, not just AMC.
The President/CEO of AMC Networks told investors the channel was worth .75 per subscriber.
DISH Network Says It Will Ax AMC When Its Carriage Agreement Ends on June 30 | Adweek
Now are they asking that much, who knows.
Here ya go....
AMC Networks CEO: AMC Is
Time Warner Can Blame ESPN for Much of That Cord Cutting - Technology - The Atlantic Wire
Note the chart is arranged by cost not ratings. But it's up to date, and no one disputes USA is higher ranked than AMC year by year. Other sources show AMC gets about 25 cents.
"But, if it is public information, why would a cable network ranked 15 to 17, depending on source, ask for more money than the #1 ranked cable channel?"
Exactly.
By the way, that link talks about EXACTLY what Dish has been saying and why they treat Sports as they do. But that's a different discussion.
Last edited:
Thanks for the link. I especially enjoyed the following excerpt:
"DISH Net’s claims that AMC's ratings aren’t worth the price of admission are not exactly supported by Nielsen data. The network enjoyed a record first quarter, scaring up an average prime-time audience of 1.23 million viewers and 554,000 adults 18-to-49 on the strength of its original series The Walking Dead. The demo delivery marked a 33 percent improvement from Q1 2011.
Season 2 of The Walking Dead nailed down five of cable’s top 10 deliveries in the quarter. The Feb. 12 episode, which marked the series’ return from a three-month hiatus, delivered 10.7 million viewers, of which 7.26 million were members of the dollar demo.
Among the roster of cable networks that command a much higher carriage fee than AMC but do not deliver comparable ratings are a host of news and sports outlets, including CNN (54 cents), Fox News Channel (78 cents), CNBC (30 cents), NFL Network (73 cents), NHL Network (30 cents) and NBC Sports Network (28 cents). DISH Net carries all six of the aforementioned networks."
Yes, a very convenient comparison. News and Sports? Is that what AMC wishes to be compared to? Fox gets that because in their genre, they are tops in ratings by such a huge amount. AMC is not tops in their genre. And those ratings for a News channel is beyond good, because unless there is a crisis daily viewership is down for all news networks. But people want to be able to switch at anytime if the need arises.
Sports we already know are OVER priced. AMC would like to be overpriced like them. And notice, Dish does take a line with sports at least more than other carriers.....
Last edited:
