DISH -VS- VOOM - A Settlement has been reached!

BTW, last night's season premiere of The Walking Dead on AMC set another ratings record. Anyway, could these "deleted" emails confirm each and every point Cablevision/AMC/Rainbow/Voom made in this case the past 4 1/2 years? Is this the smoking gun that does along with the substantial extrinsic evidence Voom has produced in this case? We shall see.
 
Walking Dead has nothing to do with this case though.

AMC did a great job promoting this show, I was at the mall yesterday and they even were selling walking dead shirts and stuff.
 
Oh brother!!Just makes ya wonder if Dish tried to hide those emails on purpose?Trying not to be the judge here but,it sure seems that way to me.

It didn't look good for Dish before and, if the court finds that Dish was involved with various monkeyshines, the judgement and penalties could be substantial. This is the kind of evidence in which Judge Lowe could reconsider Voom's motion for summary judgement if they refile.
 
What really bothers me on Dish's effort about the missing emails is,it would have been very easy to pull those emails up using free software that's all over the web.I mean did they honestly believe for a second that AMC's legal team wouldn't be able to find them?:eek:
 
just an fyi, the judge does not need to re-consider vooms summary judgement motion, he can simply issue a summary judgement himself. i believe these are the documents that dish most recently attempted to conceal but which the judge and the appellate court ruled they must turn over.
 
That software works good on PC's but not on messages stored on an Exchange mail server.

Their retention policy at that time was followed and was automatic, its just that their retention policy was not long enough. :)

My question is why can't Voom produce those emails since they have them too?
 
That software works good on PC's but not on messages stored on an Exchange mail server.

Their retention policy at that time was followed and was automatic, its just that their retention policy was not long enough. :)

My question is why can't Voom produce those emails since they have them too?

Well apparently some kind of s/w worked for AMC'S legal team.If Dish wants Vooms emails then they might want to contact AMC's legal team.:D

I dunno just seems like a cluster you know what on Dish's part.
 
Sure did not take long for the Voom tech guys to find them when they got to look at charlie's computers. How long did it take, 24 or 48 hours?

Smells like fish that has been out of the water for a couple days.
 
why would amc/voom have them? it was an email exchange from one dish employee to another dish employee?

2005 email exchange between Ergen and his chief negotiator with VOOM, Michael Schwimmer (former dish employee)
 
Sure did not take long for the Voom tech guys to find them when they got to look at charlie's computers. How long did it take, 24 or 48 hours?

Smells like fish that has been out of the water for a couple days.

I'm sure Voom's 'tech guys' were court appointed/approved 3rd party forensic investigators/auditors. It probably didn't take long to find the deleted emails since they had a narrow search objective (i.e., they weren't looking for porn, harassing correspondence , where Jimmy Hoffa is buried, who shot J.R. Ewings, etc.) and the tools to image and search the drives.
 
dish needs to settle now so it won't be as bad on them. bring back AMC networks and and dolan can start up a few of those old voom channels.

Of course, if I were Voom I wouldn't settle...well, not unless I got every penny I wanted. Heck, if Dish doesn't call Charlie to the stand, I betcha Voom calls him as a hostile witness. He is the witness list after all. Plus, Charlie was deposed and asked/answered his understanding of the spend requirement back in 2009. How would he explain his sworn deposition back in 2009 when he claimed the spend requirement include only programming, when emails recovered from 2005 and 2007 show that he, and his VP of Programming, knew the spend requirement included programming and customary overhead.

Yes, I see a settlement...$2.5 Billion for Voom. Of course, I am making the assumption the referenced article is factual and accurate.
 
what is the downside for dish to allow the trial to continue? a big judgement from the jury? maybe, but maybe not, you never know what a jury will do. regardless, dish could then appeal (though all that money would have to be put away in escrow). if they settle, no appeal. also, why would voom settle for anything other than the max or damn near close to it?
 
I would almost bet that if Dish loses they will appeal and drag it out much the same way they did in the tivo suit.Not sure what if any advantages that gives them,just seems to delay the inevitable to me.
 
what is the downside for dish to allow the trial to continue? a big judgement from the jury? maybe, but maybe not, you never know what a jury will do. regardless, dish could then appeal (though all that money would have to be put away in escrow). if they settle, no appeal. also, why would voom settle for anything other than the max or damn near close to it?

Because they know if those are the terms, it'll be a cold day in you know where before AMC ever gets carried by Dish again. A price I suspect they, especially the senior Dolan, are willing to pay.
 
Dish didn't honestly believe they would get away with any of this, did they?

The Judge isn't buying any of it. He said, "Everybody involved in this litigation [for Dish] has no credibility when it comes to document exchange, when it comes to turning everything over you've been directed to turn over."

Its alleged that Dish "artificially suppressed its HD subscriber numbers to reduce its potential damages by a billion dollars."

Then there is the question of the audit reports, which may have been modified, as the below article suggests. Cablevision argues that, "It appeared to indicate that the report was modified just as the lawsuit was being filed and some of the edited versions appeared to be missing."

http://www.law360.com/articles/386018/mofo-dish-face-heat-over-altered-docs-in-2-4b-hi-def-suit

The article goes on to say, "Judge Lowe warned that he might hold an inquest to find out exactly who at Dish or Morrison & Foerster edited the documents or even strike Dish's answer to Voom's complaint if the situation isn't corrected."

Dish is also using the same basic argument they used when AMC was dropped, saying that AMC was not "worth the price of admission." Michael Schwimmer testified that, "My view was that the channels were weak, they didn't seem to be creating a lot of buzz in the marketplace..."

http://www.law360.com/articles/386434/cablevision-s-hd-programming-weak-ex-echostar-exec-says


Dish had a 3rd quarter net subscriber loss of 111,000 (20,000 more than analysts predicted) to a total customer base of 14 million. How many are betting most of those were AMC fans?


Source

The emails were discovered over the weekend and disclosed in court today — and they’re “hurting [Dish Network] in a big way,” according to an account from George Reed-Dellinger of advisory firm Washington Analysis. Susquehanna Financial Group’s Thomas Claps, who’s also monitoring the case, calls it “the most damaging evidence to date” against Dish in AMC‘s $2.5B breach of contract suit involving the satellite company’s 2008 decision to drop the now-defunct VOOM HD channels. It’s so important that Claps says Dish “may re-think its strategy” to have Chairman Charlie Ergen testify — and might be more motivated to negotiate a settlement with AMC that would return its channels to the No. 2 satellite provider before the end of the month when the jury is expected to reach its verdict. Dish dropped AMC in June.

The emails that AMC’s team found on Dish’s hard drives seem to cast a new light on an issue that central to the trial: Did VOOM’s backers (Cablevision and AMC, which the cable company spun off last year) live up to a condition in their carriage contract that required them to invest at least $100M a year in the fledgling networks? Dish says they didn’t — giving it the right to drop the channels – because the $100M requirement applied just to domestic programming, not overhead or overseas expenses.

But a 2005 email exchange between Ergen and his chief negotiator with VOOM, Michael Schwimmer, includes an appendix to the agreement with permitted expenditures and “overhead expenses are specifically referenced,” Claps says. Another email exchange when the agreement was completed in 2007 shows the execs agreeing that VOOM backers had to spend $100M a year on the venture — not just programming. “Schwimmer’s own words on April 27, 2007 are now directly inconsistent with his testimony” that the agreement was just about programming, Reed-Dellinger says.
 
Those emails don't mean too much so I predict the case will go on as planned and run its course at least until the last day before the jury gets it when both side will take one more hard look to see if they should reach an agreement.

Its all about what is written in the contract which is solid evidence. Not what some CEO thinks the contract might say. The CEO is not a legal expert. The CEO can also change his mind after being advised by legal council which is privileged client attorney info not allowed in court.
 
How is that? Dish's position is that the contract was for programming. Cablevision contends it included overhead and the emails appear to back that up.

Charlie Ergen did change his mind when he realized how unprofitable the deal was for Dish, which is why they have been so unscrupulous.

Those emails don't mean too much so I predict the case will go on as planned and run its course at least until the last day before the jury gets it when both side will take one more hard look to see if they should reach an agreement.

Its all about what is written in the contract which is solid evidence. Not what some CEO thinks the contract might say. The CEO is not a legal expert. The CEO can also change his mind after being advised by legal council which is privileged client attorney info not allowed in court.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)