Dish getting ready for war with Hearst?

[waltinvt]

This raises an interresting question

If a station gets pulled that happens to be a person's only channel of a particular network and they can't get the channel OTA, is that person then eldgible for the distant network - SD and / or HD ?

 

[garn9173]

unbelievable. For the record, Hearst owned KCCI here in Des Moines is number #1 in everything, including having the highest rated late local news of any local station in the country.

Edit: Also, Hearst as an interest in A & E, History Channel, Biography Channel, and History International and.......the ESPN Networks

http://hearst.com/entertainment/property/ent_cable_ae.html

http://hearst.com/entertainment/property/ent_espn.html

 

[CPanther95]

I doubt any of those Hearst channels invoke must-carry. If they do, Dish will have to carry them, but they'll get to carry them free of charge.

 

[Mr Tony]

If a station gets pulled that happens to be a person's only channel of a particular network and they can't get the channel OTA, is that person then eldgible for the distant network - SD and / or HD ?

nope. When CBS got yanked due to Viacom, I couldn't get another CBS (my CBS was an O&O one..WCCO in Minneapolis)

 

[mwgiii]

Wow this is getting ugly.

Looking at the Hearst list, almost all of them are major networks.

 

[Neutron]

What is Charlie's problem?

 

[philhu]

I think it is Hearst's problem.

Charlie is trying to keep rates down. Cable channels have been raising rates for years, these channels are almost like a bunch of mini-monopolies and the owners are touting them as such.

Charlie has put his foot down, and shown them they can't arbitrarily raise rates and get away with it. Recarriage/forced channels etc are soon to be a thing of the past.

 

[ScottChez]

Oh great, what about the Wife Factor?

First they take Lifetime and Lifetime movie,

Now they take Omahas No#1 TV news in our DMA.

I think people are going to notice these outages and start switching.

I wonder if they will let us out of our contract if we wanted to go to Cable or Direct TV? After all they had both Lifetime and our Local ABC when we signed the contract.

 

[rad]

Charlie has put his foot down, and shown them they can't arbitrarily raise rates and get away with it.

But it's OK that Charlie charges a $5/month mirroring fee for a box that you purchased? It's OK that Charlie charges you $5/month (soon to be $6) for having a 510 DVR but if you have a 501/508 it's free (and it's the same box except for a larger harddrive)? It's OK that Charlie makes you subscribe to the local channels via E* just so you can get the EPG info for the ATSC stations in your area? If you really care that much about rates arbitrarily raising then you should put your foot down and put E* on a service suspension until they cut out those arbitrary charges.

Sorry but Charlies just trying to add more $'s to his already sizable bank account.

 

[waltinvt]

nope. When CBS got yanked due to Viacom, I couldn't get another CBS (my CBS was an O&O one..WCCO in Minneapolis)

Things might be different now / soon. Especially since the national nets seem to be leaning toward a more direct to viewer approach (VOD, OnDemand,ITunes, etc).

Independent afilliates and even comglamorates like Hearst-Argyle, Viacom, etc might have it a lot tougher at contract negoiation time with the nat net.

This is why I believe "E" will put more emphisis on HD DNS that HD LiLs for the next few years.

 

[CPanther95]

All this because Lifetime wants to force "Real Women" down everyone's throats - and force everyone to pay for it for the duration of the next contract.

 

[Pepper]

Let me throw something in here that almost nobody remembers.

TV channels are supported by the advertisers.

I'm not saying Charlie should not make money to cover the cost of his infrastructure. But where do the advertiser supported channels get off charging him or any other infrastructure provider to broadcast that channel to their subscribers. They should instead be glad for the 12 million subs their channel goes to, that many more watching their sponsors.

They are all greedy and will continue to be so until enough of us decide not to take it any more and leave or at least step down to the next lower package price.

 

[CPanther95]

TV channels are supported by the advertisers.

Not any more. Carriage fees have become the norm, which is why programmers are more motivated to add new channels, than to develop more compelling programming for their existing one(s). "PAY" channels used to mean commercial-free, subscriber funded channels. Now all channels are "PAY" channels and not only are they primarily subscriber funded, they sell advertisements in larger and larger blocks, and put advertising bugs up on screen during programming.

The two most important reasons to increase their audience are the potential to increase their carriage fees and the potential to leverage that popularity to force the carriage of additional channels - increased advertising revenue ranks a distant third.

 

[Chris Walker]

All this because Lifetime wants to force "Real Women" down everyone's throats - and force everyone to pay for it for the duration of the next contract.

If I was Dish I'd drop LMN, bring regular Lifetime back, and add Oxygen in LMN's place to spite Lifetime.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Run run run as fast as you can
You can't catch me, I'm the Gingerbread Man!

Charlie has taken down Viacom, Lifetime, and now threatens a host of locals, but he hasn't yet hit a single channel that I watch!

I must say that this is great entertainment. We should have to pay Charlie for such entertainment.

Hey, wait, I think I am.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

So you are returning this channel purely for spite?

"Yes, purely for spite."

I'm sorry, Charlie, but we don't accept spite as a viable excuse for dropping a channel.

"Um, I'm sorry, I meant to say price, yes, I'm returning it because it is too high priced."

I'm sorry, Charlie, but you said spite first, and that's what we have to go by.

 

[BFG]

Hey, I get one of those channels, hopefully my Digital OTA doesn't act up

 

[roachxp]

Especially with all the ABCs in there right before SuperBowl. E* is just giving D* somemore wood for the fire.

 

[dragon002]

guys,

he pulled the same crap with the cbs / viacon dispute. he announced HIS rate increases FIRST. then screamed bloody murder that lifetime (whith which he has no contract with , wants more from him)...so what does he do.....blame them. he should have negotiated and signed THEN raised the rates accordingly, and he COULD have blamed them. and it would have stuck,

for some strange reason us directv techs and subs know who we are dealing with... a corporation. for some reason you look at charlie as a guy who provides you a way to fight the system, GET REAL, he is a billionare, he does not care. he isnt the great dbs hope, he is here to MAKE $$$$$$$$$$$

 

[GeorgeLV]

dragon002, yep Charlie is the 30th richest guy in all of America with $7,100,000,000 to his name. http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/54/FXHG.html