Dish Network Big 10 Notice

  • WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!

    If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!

    While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!

    Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!

    CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
And where are you getting these numbers? people say it, but show the proof.

Also, there IS a comparision, I dont watch MANY channels, if you add them up, I bet its more than HALF of my bill. I dont watch more than 2 or 3 SD channels anymore, but i have to pay for them. I dont watch half of the HD channels being offered, but i pay for them. So what can't I get a network that I want to watch?

Nobody watches all the channels. The fact is that the sports channels are BY FAR the most expensive in the basic packages. I'll give you the evidence: CHARLIE COMPLAINS ABOUT IT ON ALMOST EVERY CHARLIE CHAT.
 
That doesn't make any sense at all. Please explain how the Disney owned ESPN is supporting the Viacom owned MTV. There isn't some pool of money that all channels equally share. When Dish pays for MTV, they write a check to Viacom. When they pay for ESPN, they write a check to Disney(yes, I know one contract with Viacom will cover more than just MTV, but it doesn't cover any Disney stations). When a Time Warner station is pulled off the air due to a carriage dispute, it doesn't hurt the Viacom stations.

I'm talking about networks owned under the same umbrella.
 
That doesn't make any sense at all. Please explain how the Disney owned ESPN is supporting the Viacom owned MTV. There isn't some pool of money that all channels equally share. When Dish pays for MTV, they write a check to Viacom. When they pay for ESPN, they write a check to Disney(yes, I know one contract with Viacom will cover more than just MTV, but it doesn't cover any Disney stations). When a Time Warner station is pulled off the air due to a carriage dispute, it doesn't hurt the Viacom stations.

You answer your own argument.. ESPN/Disney uses ESPN and its large money to support, ABC Fam, Disney Toon Disney, etc. so if it wasnt for ESPN's money, those other channels wouldnt exist.

And the viacom stations with less viewers get by for less money due to many people pay to watch stations like ESPN, there was a time that 75% of my TV Viewing was either ESPN or FSN, and the rest was probably networks... so i pay $60 a month, to watch channels that really cost say $10, so my other $50 goes to support all the other channels that exist so other people can watch them.
 
You answer your own argument.. ESPN/Disney uses ESPN and its large money to support, ABC Fam, Disney Toon Disney, etc. so if it wasnt for ESPN's money, those other channels wouldnt exist.

And the viacom stations with less viewers get by for less money due to many people pay to watch stations like ESPN, there was a time that 75% of my TV Viewing was either ESPN or FSN, and the rest was probably networks... so i pay $60 a month, to watch channels that really cost say $10, so my other $50 goes to support all the other channels that exist so other people can watch them.

Bingo!
 
Nobody watches all the channels. The fact is that the sports channels are BY FAR the most expensive in the basic packages. I'll give you the evidence: CHARLIE COMPLAINS ABOUT IT ON ALMOST EVERY CHARLIE CHAT.


And I bet those same sport channels have the most viewers. you have more viewers you should get more $$

and charlie complains because thats cutting into his profit potential... as any good owner of a business would do, complain about the things that cost the most, while not mentioning the fact that if it wasnt for those things, revenues would drop drastically.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)