dishstandsbyyou gives you a great credit for fox dispute
- Thread starter bluegras
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 807
- Views 72K
- Status
http://www.keepfoxnews.com/
Realize you can change the text of the email in the www.KeepFoxNews.com where it purportedly sends an angry email. I changed it to congratulate Dish on holding the line and to screw Fox if they are going to screw us.
If these emails are any indication of anything they go into someone's spam folder and are never even read.
Realize you can change the text of the email in the www.KeepFoxNews.com where it purportedly sends an angry email. I changed it to congratulate Dish on holding the line and to screw Fox if they are going to screw us.
If these emails are any indication of anything they go into someone's spam folder and are never even read.
Well, gee. I think I'll try that too. But I can't find any comments link on the dishstandsbyyou website.
wasn't even asking for any money.....so just plain odd.
Wait a few more more days. I posted on Sat and just got the credit email today. I expressed a slight dissatisfaction with the # of disputes, but said I supported Dish in it all.
Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!
OK, so we have nothing but slanderous comments from Ergen so far, negociations have stopped (duh), Dish customers are being thrown a (credit) bone and a sucker bet "3 Valuable Gifts" package by Dish as customers drop off like flies and move on to other providers.
This is just the beginning. Due to an inherent latency phase, it will be weeks if not months before Dish sees the full impact of this debacle.
I report, you decide
This is just the beginning. Due to an inherent latency phase, it will be weeks if not months before Dish sees the full impact of this debacle.
I report, you decide
What is slanderous? There is no debacle. Fox's reporting of Dish losses of 90K is what is bogus....some estimate made by a Fox clown named Tim Carry based upon complaints he says were made.....what a crock!!!! I guess we'll see at the next earnings call subscriber numbers and they likely won't have any drop of this magnitude......and finally, the negotiations are Fox's efforts to tie the FS1 contract to Fox News....get real.
Calling a partner an "extortionist" without anything (but innuendo) to back your public attack is not slanderous?
OK
Carry maintains his position that the blackout is tied to the networks in question.
“These are big companies with many assets and properties,” he said. “Other things were discussed, but the negotiations broke down over core issues to Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network.”
- See more at: http://www.multichannel.com/news/di...r&utm_source=twitterfeed#sthash.atDiSTpT.dpuf
This is where he would have disputed those "Slanderous" claims. Notice he did not dispute it. He even agreed there were talks about it, and even tried to downplay it. If he wants to make the claim correct, maybe he will lay his cards on the table like Charlie did, and tell us what exactly those 'core' issues are that he mentions.
“These are big companies with many assets and properties,” he said. “Other things were discussed, but the negotiations broke down over core issues to Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network.”
- See more at: http://www.multichannel.com/news/di...r&utm_source=twitterfeed#sthash.atDiSTpT.dpuf
This is where he would have disputed those "Slanderous" claims. Notice he did not dispute it. He even agreed there were talks about it, and even tried to downplay it. If he wants to make the claim correct, maybe he will lay his cards on the table like Charlie did, and tell us what exactly those 'core' issues are that he mentions.
A basic definition of Slander can be found here: http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1969
As that definition notes, this would fall under libel and not slander. Here's the link to the basic definition of that: http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1153
I urge you to read them before continuing to claim that Fox has a defamation cause of action based on Charlie's use of "extortionist" in describing Fox and its tactics.
First and foremost: truth of the statement is an ABSOLUTE defense. Charlie didn't need to back up his statement with proof when he made it. Hypothetical: someone finds out that an individual in their neighborhood is a registered sex offender and decides to warn neighbors who have kids. They can tell people without presenting details of the person's previous convictions to avoid a charge of slander. It's sufficient that the statements they are making are true.
I'm confident that most people would agree that holding one channel hostage unless you are let out of a contract and enter into a new much more favorable one for a different channel sounds like extortion. Based on reported facts, Charlie seems safe.
But let's assume that the facts don't support Charlie, Fox would still have to prove that Charlie wasn't expressing his opinion of Fox and the situation rather than lying about facts. I haven't seen the video in question, so I can't comment on what exactly was said and how it was said, but such a claim would face a ton of hurdles if pursued in Court.
There's also a more practical aspect as to why it's doubtful Fox would sue. Ultimately, Fox wants its channels on Dish for ad revenue purposes. Suing Charlie personally for libel would just increase the odds that the exact opposite happens...
Last edited:
Subscriber acquisition cost can be found in Dish's quarterly filings with the SEC, no insider knowledge needed. It's not relevant to the point I'm going to make, so I'm not going to bother looking it up.
The cost benefit analysis that Dish has to make is much more complicated than you make it out to be.
Let's just go with the $54 million figure you made up (I think your math is wrong, but since the 90K lost subs is a made up number it doesn't matter).
I'm not sure what tier FS1 is in so I don't know how many subs subscribe to it. For the sake of ease of math, let's say 5.4 million. I also don't know what sort of increase Fox is trying to get for FS1, but again for ease of math, let's say it's $1/sub/month increase. Within a year Dish has paid more than your $54 million figure. And when it's time for the annual price increase next year Dish has to take the FS1 increase into account. At that point how many additional subs will they lose because of the extra price increase needed to cover the FS1 increase?
Please disregard the numbers, I was just using them to illustrate the point that this is a very complicated analysis that Dish as a business has to undertake. I have no doubt that they've crunched the numbers and acted in accordance with what projects to be the best course of action. And so long as the churn falls within the projections that led them to push back on the FS1 demands, I don't imagine they'll cave. And of course, Fox has done the exact same thing on their end with their numbers and projections. The bright side is that the situation is sub optimal for both parties so the odds of eventually reaching an agreement are quite high.
OK, we got it. You're always cherry picking, parroting, Dish stuff. What does Fox have to say about all this?
Fox responds to Ergen - "The terms of the agreement between DISH and FOX News Channel have expired. DISH has not agreed to renew, and is instead blocking you from watching our programming.
Despite the undeniable demand for FOX News Channel, DISH is putting its interests ahead of you by controlling what you watch and denying you access to Fair and Balanced™ news programming you can’t get anywhere else."
Having said that, there are segments on Fox that I really miss. I like the every day balanced news reporting, stuff you don't hear about with other networks (an omission is a lie). I love Neal Cavuto, Megan Kelley, Bill O'Reilly and his guests like Krauthammer and Dennis Miller but most missed is the really cool hosts & the great discussions on 'The Five', 5:00 EST.
Where ya been? The idea that there is a contract in place for FS1 that does not expire for some time - and then when Fox News comes up for renewal, the renewal for Fox News is tied to paying MORE for FS1 (which has a signed contract in place) is not extortion than I guess you simply do not understand the term very well. Really? Are you serious?
Open your eyes Mark609, Fox is trying to screw you.
Gosh you really drink the kool aid, don't you? Try reviewing the independent news articles rather than statements from Fox bozo Tim Carry. He also said Dish lost 90,000 customers over this.....which is a total bunch of b.s.
- Status
