Fox News Sues Echostar

[Peter Parker]

However, not everyone subs to AT200. Therefore there are lots of people who are not receiving Fox News that should be. Everyone that receives AT200 also receives AT100 by default, but it's not the same in reverse.

But again what it comes down to is what did the parties agree to in the last contract. If theya greed that FNC should be in the most popular tier and that is AT 200 (And I don't know that either of those things is true) then the Fox suit does not have a lot of merit.

if it was expressd differently then Fox may well be in the right. but there sia lot we do not know here.

But it really is meaningless to say that there are people without Fox that should have it. there sis no right t o a TV channel. What matters is what was agreed to in the contract.

 

[Jeff_R]

First the HDNet dispute, now this. Its like they had some intern this summer go back through all their agreements to find loopholes and gaps to exploit.

What HDNet dispute? That was HDNet and D*, not E*, as I recall. D* wanted to place HDNet in the HD Extra pack. HDNet has and continues to be an HD channel you recieve with the HD Enabling fee.

 

[Tyralak]

What HDNet dispute? That was HDNet and D*, not E*, as I recall. D* wanted to place HDNet in the HD Extra pack. HDNet has and continues to be an HD channel you recieve with the HD Enabling fee.

No, you don't get HDNet with the enabling fee. You only get that channel with the $20 HD pack. The only thing you get with the enabling fee is your locals in HD (if availible) the "priviledge" of using your own off-air antenna, HDPPV, and any movie channels you subscribe to in HD.

 

[briani]

Why is FOX NEWS not in AT100? It is certainly comprable to CNN/HLN and CNBC/MSNBC in terms of content. Although I personally don't watch the channel it would make sense to make it available in the same package as the other major news channels.

 

[wtb955]

I hope he pulls Faux News and all the other crap fox owns ASAP.

Give it a rest.

 

[HokieEngineer]

What HDNet dispute? That was HDNet and D*, not E*, as I recall. D* wanted to place HDNet in the HD Extra pack. HDNet has and continues to be an HD channel you recieve with the HD Enabling fee.

News Corp owns both FNC and Directv. Thus the comment about them hiring some interns to go through all their agreements trying to find loopholes .

 

[TheKrell]

I can also imagine "most widely distributed" could mean the sum of all subs in an AT package, plus those above it. So, if AEP + AT250 subs + AT200 subs is greater than AT100 subs, then Fox News by contract agreement belongs in AT200. Possibly Fox learned that AT100 subs became numerically greater than AT200 subs (taken by itself) last January, and that is why they are sueing. (I don't know this; I'm just speculating.)

 

[abricko]

guess we'll not see any FOX HD programming added anytime soon... FoxNews, FX...

 

[jacmyoung]

Someone questioned Charlie’s business sense for not including FNC in AT100, but it can also be argued that he probably knew those who watch FNC are more dedicated viewers of this channel and will pay the extra $10 just to be able to have the channel. So why not make the extra $10?

My guess is back in 1998 when FNC still wanted to be on any providers they can get on, they agreed to the language “the most widely distributed package”, something they would never do today. FNC may have seen an opening when they got the latest E* sub data that showed since 01/07 AT100 has become more widely subscribed package than AT200.

This does prove the hard bargains Charlie always tried to pull off, because no one else appeared to have forced FNC to accept such term back then. Of course Charlie’s hard bargain nature can come back to bite him, just look at the outcomes of some recent court battles.

My own feeling is a new agreement will be reached in which E* will agree to include FNC and FOX Business in AT100, in exchange for a more attractive carriage fee by FOX News, probably just a tad better than every other carrier has to pay. Something similar to the agreement with the Big Ten Network, where the BTN was treated as a national channel on other carriers but on E* it is considered a regional sports arrangement so that whoever really must have that channel will have to be in a package that qualifies regional sports tier (again AT200 or above?), or pay a separate fee to get the regional sports pack.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I may not always agree with the news coverage on Fox News, but you got to admit they have the best looking News Babes on any news channel.

That makes Fox News a keeper in my book.

 

[RandallA]

I may not always agree with the news coverage on Fox News, but you got to admit they have the best looking News Babes on any news channel.

That makes Fox News a keeper in my book.

Really? I've never watched the channel so I could care less but now I have to pay more attention to it.

 

[sclaws]

I may not always agree with the news coverage on Fox News, but you got to admit they have the best looking News Babes on any news channel.

That makes Fox News a keeper in my book.

Sure, if you like your chics that look like Bruce Campbell
Greta Van Susteren | On The Record With Greta - FOXNews.com

 

[Peter Parker]

News Corp owns both FNC and Directv. Thus the comment about them hiring some interns to go through all their agreements trying to find loopholes .

news Corp owns a share of DirecTV which they are in the process of selling.

 

[Peter Parker]

Someone questioned Charlie’s business sense for not including FNC in AT100, but it can also be argued that he probably knew those who watch FNC are more dedicated viewers of this channel and will pay the extra $10 just to be able to have the channel. So why not make the extra $10?

My guess is back in 1998 when FNC still wanted to be on any providers they can get on, they agreed to the language “the most widely distributed package”, something they would never do today. FNC may have seen an opening when they got the latest E* sub data that showed since 01/07 AT100 has become more widely subscribed package than AT200.

This does prove the hard bargains Charlie always tried to pull off, because no one else appeared to have forced FNC to accept such term back then. Of course Charlie’s hard bargain nature can come back to bite him, just look at the outcomes of some recent court battles.

My own feeling is a new agreement will be reached in which E* will agree to include FNC and FOX Business in AT100, in exchange for a more attractive carriage fee by FOX News, probably just a tad better than every other carrier has to pay. Something similar to the agreement with the Big Ten Network, where the BTN was treated as a national channel on other carriers but on E* it is considered a regional sports arrangement so that whoever really must have that channel will have to be in a package that qualifies regional sports tier (again AT200 or above?), or pay a separate fee to get the regional sports pack.

Somehow I doubt that the 1998 agreement si still in effect.

 

[mruk69]

If you don't like watching the babes on FNC you change to channel 200 and watch a dog, posing as a Senator from NY.

 

[flyingsquirrel]

This is clearly about Fox Business Channel. Nothing more. Nothing Less.

Fox can't get Charlie to pick up FBC, so they looked around until they found something to sue over.

 

[mruk69]

This is clearly about Fox Business Channel. Nothing more. Nothing Less.

Fox can't get Charlie to pick up FBC, so they looked around until they found something to sue over.

So what if it is, they should of had this channel from day 1.
i think they will agree to carry it and in return Fox will settle out of court,

 

[flyingsquirrel]

They should have had FBC from day 1? Really?

Have you actually watched FBC?

It's a joke. And not a funny one. It's simplistic. It's slow (compared to CNBC, Bloomberg, et. al.). And all the anchors seem to have been chosen for either their looks (many of the anchors, men and women, are former models) or for their politics, or both. It's clear that much of the time they are reading stuff that they really don't understand.

As a result its ratings are falling from the sky at terminal velocity.

Fox Business Channel is trying to push business news for people who don't really understand business news. It is, to borrow a phrase, "The answer to a question that no one is asking".

As to other Fox entities, I don't think this is family feud. Dish just devoted acres of CONUS HD space to the Big Ten Network (distributed by Fox), was the first MSO to carry National Geographic (owned by Fox) in HD (almost a year before Directv, by the way), and I expect Dish to have Speed HD right around launch day in February.

This is strictly business. It's not politics. I have heard that Charlie is fairly Liberal. But he is clearly a businessman first and foremost.

 

[nick1984]

"The most widely available" would be the cheapest package any way you look at it. All Dish subscribers can afford at least the 100 package. Not all Dish subscribers can afford the 200 package due to financial reasons of the individual. Therefore, common sense dictates that the top 100 package is the most widely available package. It doesn't matter if more subscribers subscribe to the top 200, not all can afford it."


actually it does matter if more people sub to the at200. The contract says it must be in their most widley disturbuted package which will be the package that the most people sub to. Based on your logic then the dish family would be the most widely available since it is the cheapest

 

[rtt2]

Fox Business is complete crap - We tried it for a few days at work but the novelty soon wore off and quickly switched back to CNBC.

Pretty graphics and good looking women only get you so far. When it comes to hard news - that relies on accuracy and no fluff Fox falters. I really do not know any of my colleagues who actually watch the channel.

My prediction is FoxBusiness will soon act as spillover for FoxNews as time goes on.

If E* can save me some money denying carriage better for all of us.