Do you think Dish will add....

[n1wbd]

The local digital "sub-channels" to our existing local package right now as you know we only get the main HD channel in our local HD packages. Like on the Burlington VT local channels Weather Plus on ch 5.2 and the CW on 44.2 etc. without having to install a OTA antenna.

Thanks Bob

 

[HDRoberts]

Not for a long time. Lets get all our main CWs, PBSs and MyNetworkTVs first.

 

[Quantum]

Do we think Dish will add... what?

 

[lakebum431]

Do we think Dish will add... what?

Did you read the thread?


To the OP, I really doubt it. They are not likely to get new subscribers by adding sub channels. Most subchannels are crap from what I've seen.

 

[Mr Tony]

unless the subchannel is a big network (fox, abc etc) Dish probably wont add them unless maybe the following happens

example....Duluth, MN CBS has CW on a subchannel. CBS come renewal time could say "you have to add CW or we're not gonna give you CBS" (in essence hold CBS hostage to add the subchannel)

 

[n1wbd]

unless the subchannel is a big network (fox, abc etc) Dish probably wont add them unless maybe the following happens

example....Duluth, MN CBS has CW on a subchannel. CBS come renewal time could say "you have to add CW or we're not gonna give you CBS" (in essence hold CBS hostage to add the subchannel)

Ok Iceberg I understand what your saying but my thinking ( I know I should'nt think it gives me brain damage ) is that in Feb 2009 when analog is dropped would the must carry rules apply to the "sub-channels" as well? So Dish would be forced to carry them if they carry the main channel.

Bob

 

[Mr Tony]

as of right now no...

as its written right now the rule is you have to carry the full powered analog channels in the market if they ask for carriage and they can come to an agreement. Low powered do not qualify but Dish usually adds the ones that are with the Big 4 (ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX) if they can agree.

I have a feeling come 2/17/09 the rule will just be the full power digital channels and just the -1 channel (usually the main channel). I guess if the subchannels could be added if Dish wanted to but they are usually slim pickens.....

as example here in Minneapolis the only "subchannels" we have are
ABC has a 24/7 replays of newscasts and some EI programming
NBC has Weather plus
PBS (2nd one) has 5 channels....PBS which is on there already, "the Minnesota channel" which is programs about MN from the various PBS stations in MN & WI, Create, PBS Kids and a 24/7 aeronautical weather

CBS has no subchannels
Fox, CW, My the subchannel is a SD feed of the station

so out of the above there isnt much.

Dish already has a CW feed for the markets that dont have one normally. Since there is no national "My Network" feed they cant really offer that. CW does have a national feed called CW+ which is for the smaller markets that has programming 24/7.

 

[okiekevn]

unless the subchannel is a big network (fox, abc etc) Dish probably wont add them unless maybe the following happens

example....Duluth, MN CBS has CW on a subchannel. CBS come renewal time could say "you have to add CW or we're not gonna give you CBS" (in essence hold CBS hostage to add the subchannel)

boy, that could get really ugly. i just think of the previous history of local channels trying to strong arm charlie. isnt baton rouge abc still down?

 

[Mr Tony]

I dont know...I'm just using the above as an example. I know stations that owned a big network and then had say a Fox on a digital subchannel or low powered channel did that.

Also some that own these what I would call obscure networks (Azteca, Univision, Telemundo) did that too. I remember when Pappas held all their stations hostage from Dish because they (Dish) didnt add like 4 Azteca stations. Once Dish addewd the 4 azteca stations then they got the other stations that Pappas owned (which in some markets was 2 channels)

 

[Quantum]

Did you read the thread?

Yer not getting it. I am pointing out the forum disruption and time wastage done by non-descriptive thread titles.

 

[KAB]

Yer not getting it. I am pointing out the forum disruption and time wastage done by non-descriptive thread titles.

Oh, give me strength

 

[Quantum]

Ah, go ahead. Spill.

 

[n1wbd]

Yer not getting it. I am pointing out the forum disruption and time wastage done by non-descriptive thread titles.

There's one in every crowd.

 

[lakebum431]

Yer not getting it. I am pointing out the forum disruption and time wastage done by non-descriptive thread titles.

That kind of attitude really isn't welcome here. If you don't like ambiguous thread titles then don't read the thread.

 

[kb7oeb]

Cable carries most of the sub channels in my area, I wouldn't be surprised to see stations demand their subs be carried in the next contract negotiation.

 

[Quantum]

That kind of attitude really isn't welcome here. If you don't like ambiguous thread titles then don't read the thread.

So what you're saying is that you approve of ambiguous thread titles.

Go ahead... tell me a lie.

 

[DishSubLA]

Considering how poor the PQ is for a lot of the LA digital sub channels, at some point down the line, Dish just may carry some of them because they needn't worry about preserving the PQ on them, so they can compress the heck out of them and it would still look terrible. My goodness, the sub channels here in LA are so bad, the bitrate must be minuscule, and being in MPEG2 doesn't help. Some locals here have as many as 4 or 5 sub channels. IT IS BAD!

 

[drdroo]

Weather Plus is going away at the end of 2008 anyway because of NBCU's acquisition of The Weather Channel.

I'd like my ABC/CBS/FOX/PBS/NBC in HD before people start getting their CW and My Network really. By the sounds of it the analog shutoff will probably hit before we get our locals in HD, which at least means my FOX will finally be in HD OTA.

 

[lakebum431]

So what you're saying is that you approve of ambiguous thread titles.

Go ahead... tell me a lie.

It doesn't bother me one bit. Not sure why you have such a bad attitude, but again, if you don't want to read a thread because of the title then don't. But there is no reason to be a jerk about it.

 

[KAB]

It doesn't bother me one bit. Not sure why you have such a bad attitude, but again, if you don't want to read a thread because of the title then don't. But there is no reason to be a jerk about it.

:up:up:up