Disney sues Dish again

lparsons21

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 17, 2009
9,925
8,073
Herrin, IL 62948
Absolutely! Dish hasn't changed a thing in this case. Starz is still a premium service, Charlie just gave a years subscription to some of us.

If this particular suit shows anything at all, it is that Disney is still one of the greediest companies out there. I suspect this will be a short lawsuit.
 

lakebum431

Pub Member / Supporter
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 5, 2005
17,004
4,898
Norris, TN
This one is really absurd. In this case, Disney has a deal with Starz, Starz has a deal with Dish. If Disney isn't happy about the deal that Starz worked out with Dish, then they need to talk to Starz about it. How is this any different than the (insert premium channel here) FREE for 3 months that every provider in the country runs.
 

nelson61

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
8,268
7,940
Where it's Warm
This all started when Starz cut a deal with Netflix a while back. Charlie says he told them they were going to cheapen the brand and it would cost Starz money since people would quit paying for a Starz premium subscription when it was cheap on Netflix and he said that is exactly what happened.

I'm guessing the one year free Starz promotion is being paid for by Starz in an effort to regain the premium service income they lost.
 

HDRoberts

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 13, 2008
4,795
31
Cleveland, OH
This all started when Starz cut a deal with Netflix a while back. Charlie says he told them they were going to cheapen the brand and it would cost Starz money since people would quit paying for a Starz premium subscription when it was cheap on Netflix and he said that is exactly what happened.

I'm guessing the one year free Starz promotion is being paid for by Starz in an effort to regain the premium service income they lost.

Excellent point, and why it is surprising Starz is not included in the suit. I noticed recently that Netflix is offering a Starz Play only steaming for $6.99, nearly half the cost of the real service, but with about all the movies available.

However, I'm sure Dish is at least splitting the cost. I doubt Starz is really losing money on the deal.
 

Hall

SatelliteGuys Master
Feb 14, 2004
18,409
3,199
Germantown OH
with "Starz" permission..
If you say so. I don't have access to the details of the deal, if any, between Dish and Starz. For all we know, Dish simply is paying the "bill" for us (at cost, not $11.99/mo or whatever Starz normally costs).
 

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
32,173
9,390
Moscow Russia
If you say so. I don't have access to the details of the deal, if any, between Dish and Starz. For all we know, Dish simply is paying the "bill" for us (at cost, not $11.99/mo or whatever Starz normally costs).
the argument is with Starz..they own the licenses not dish..starz would be suing dish if dish did not have permission
 

csmith5111

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 30, 2010
291
0
.
The big thing is that it is "at no cost to you" not free. It is costing someone. It is a gift for the thirtieth anniversary and I'm sure Charlie is footing the bill. Disney needs to lay off and take a breather. Their lawyers are going to burn out if they keep this up.
 

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)