HBO/Cinemax Takedown

stardust3

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Mar 7, 2006
7,561
4,589
.....
Charlie has said in the past the real negotiations don't occur until a channel is blacked out.

At this point there is no news of negotiations even occurring.
 

truedowneast

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
Aug 13, 2017
32
13
Gloucester NC
You crowd couldn’t agree on a red fence that was painted yellow, here’s my two cents worth “ their all a bunch of crooks that’ll rob you blind if you lettem chief “


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 
  • Like
Reactions: dishdude

Stargazer

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 7, 2003
16,562
335
Western WV
Hopefully someone else try’s again with a different network design and different equipment :)



Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!
I used to be co-owner of a wisp in this hilly tree’d environment about ten years ago. How has the new technology (prior to LTE) helped with terrain issues, speed at low signals and so forth? How has LTE helped beyond that compared to the existing WiFi technologies?
 

Stargazer

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 7, 2003
16,562
335
Western WV
Wow I spent over 2 hours reading this whole thread to catch up on what has been going on here at satguys, quite entertaining.

My two cents, AT&T chooses to drop the channels long enough to get the customers that would switch providers to Directv or stream the service to gain by cutting out middle man, figuring that all the subscribers will do so within a few months and after that they wouldn’t have as much to gain by keeping HBO off of Dish so they can then at that point negotiate a more fair deal with Dish to get the remaining customers back.
 

The Fat Man

Poster of Randomness
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 2, 2010
7,329
5,193
Land where we pronounce our "R" as "ah"
Some are assuming that's the case. We don't know what's really going on.
Logic would say this. It's a premium service, which is the least likely to go into a dispute. AT&T sets the price and the subscriber to the premium pays the price. Why would Dish have issue with having the premium, unless AT&T had an unreasonable provision in the discussion?

More than likely, AT&T set a number of must have subscribers, which Dish knew it wouldn't reach based on recent numbers. Most likely AT&T knew this as well. If this is the case, why would AT&T do this? More than likely, because they knew no matter what they would be able to screw over Dish. Either, they get greater money to DirecTV subs getting HBO for free, and Dish now loses a bit of its competitive edge as it has to raise rates, or the channel goes dark and Dish subs jump to DirecTV.

As for Dish, it is possible that Charlie said rolls the dice, I'm not paying them. But again, it's a premium network. There should be little negotiation. AT&T should say "your subscribers pay this, and you give that money over to us." Done.
 

zippyfrog

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 27, 2007
1,156
452
Chicago, IL
But again, it's a premium network. There should be little negotiation. AT&T should say "your subscribers pay this, and you give that money over to us." Done.
Exactly. This is what I always thought it was, which is why I was surprised that we would ever run into a distribution issue with a premium. There had to have been something else added to the contract that wasn't to Dish's liking.
 

dare2be

SatelliteGuys God
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 15, 2011
12,223
6,798
FL
My two cents, AT&T chooses to drop the channels long enough to get the customers that would switch providers to Directv or stream the service to gain by cutting out middle man, figuring that all the subscribers will do so within a few months and after that they wouldn’t have as much to gain by keeping HBO off of Dish so they can then at that point negotiate a more fair deal with Dish to get the remaining customers back.
Right, and AT&T wouldn't have the means or opportunity to make such a strongarm move if they didn't own both HBO and DirecTV. This dispute with a premium network wouldn't happen without that situation, which the yellow fence people just can't see.
 

Tampa8

Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,651
6,948
Tampa/Eastern Ct
.....

My two cents, AT&T chooses to drop the channels long enough to get the customers that would switch providers to Directv or stream the service to gain by cutting out middle man, figuring that all the subscribers will do so within a few months and after that they wouldn’t have as much to gain by keeping HBO off of Dish so they can then at that point negotiate a more fair deal with Dish to get the remaining customers back.
Very possible scenario or maybe only available online and from At&t services Either way this;

Right, and AT&T wouldn't have the means or opportunity to make such a strongarm move if they didn't own both HBO and DirecTV. This dispute with a premium network wouldn't happen without that situation, which the yellow fence people just can't see.
 

Jon J

SatelliteGuys Pro
Lifetime Supporter
Nov 16, 2005
400
251
Music City, USA
Exactly. This is what I always thought it was, which is why I was surprised that we would ever run into a distribution issue with a premium. There had to have been something else added to the contract that wasn't to Dish's liking.
Yes. As discussed here ad infinitum, HBO wants a minimum payment regardless of the number of actual subscribers.
 

ncted

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
4,396
2,957
Durham, NC
Logic would say this. It's a premium service, which is the least likely to go into a dispute. AT&T sets the price and the subscriber to the premium pays the price. Why would Dish have issue with having the premium, unless AT&T had an unreasonable provision in the discussion?

More than likely, AT&T set a number of must have subscribers, which Dish knew it wouldn't reach based on recent numbers. Most likely AT&T knew this as well. If this is the case, why would AT&T do this? More than likely, because they knew no matter what they would be able to screw over Dish. Either, they get greater money to DirecTV subs getting HBO for free, and Dish now loses a bit of its competitive edge as it has to raise rates, or the channel goes dark and Dish subs jump to DirecTV.

As for Dish, it is possible that Charlie said rolls the dice, I'm not paying them. But again, it's a premium network. There should be little negotiation. AT&T should say "your subscribers pay this, and you give that money over to us." Done.
Your logic and common sense are not wanted here. ;) :p
 

dishdude

SatelliteGuys God
Supporting Founder
Sep 7, 2003
14,828
23,178
Phoenix, AZ
Yes. As discussed here ad infinitum, HBO wants a minimum payment regardless of the number of actual subscribers.
We don't know what that number is, if it is in the current contract or if that is standard with other carriers and if other premium services also have the same contractual requirement. AT&T also claims they offered to extend talks under the current contract and Dish refused.

No carrier has more channel blackouts than Dish, and it's not like their rates are any lower, profit continues to rise with less subscribers.
 

Claude Greiner

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
12,762
3,463
Detroit - The Paris of the Midwest
I think this is not going to be resolved soon.

I don’t think enough customers have called in to complain, threatened to cancel service or HBO would be back already.

I don’t see either side budging on this issue. Unless Charlie gives in, I think there is a good chance that HBO will never be on Dish again

I don’t think AT&T cares if HBO is ever on dish either.
 
Top