[FONT="]Dish Network did not get rid of the Absolute ($29.99 with locals) HD package. They just changed the name to Dish America Gold ($54.99, will be $59.99 Feb. 1, 2011) and Platinum ($10.00) HD. It’s not a very subtle way for Dish Network to raise their fees over 100%. I don’t mind Dish Network making a profit, but I do mind them making a killing. What if our electric or phone bill went up a 100%? It would concern a lot of customers.[/FONT]
I don’t mind Dish Network making a profit, but not a killing.
- Thread starter sateuser
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 77
- Views 9K
A company trying to make an extra buck any way it can short of getting hauled to jail? BLASPHEMY!
Everybody loves to immediately assume that Dish did this for the sole reason of making more money off these subs. Perhaps they did or perhaps they didn't. Maybe it's because the networks told them in no uncertain terms when various new contracts were signed that their HD programming had to be a part of a basic programming packaging including other programming that the provider had which was happened to be in SD.
that you bob?
Now that's funny
(my money is on a close family member, since no mention ofmultiple receiver fees). Although, maybe in a parallel universe.........
Worried about a non necessity like TV going up but the fact that gas has doubled over the recent years and they predict it almost doubling again within a year has not made you ride a bicycle to work.
(Of course, it may put us installers out of work. LOL)
You don't have to have TV if it bothers you.
Try moving to England where you have to pay a TV tax even if you want to receive TV through an off air antenna.
Competition is what can keep prices down. If you look at Dish quarterly reports the average profit per sub is around $5/month. Not exactly a killing. So, even if they went non profit, the average sub would only have $5 off their bill, and guess what, next year would have a rate increase to cover the increased programming costs.
The only way the system will change is if enough people get up in arms and get some sort of a la carte working through congress. Unfortunately I do not see anything short of a new law forcing the breakup of packages to change the system.
I find it unbelievable how many folks on here don't mind getting reamed on a regular basis. And could care less as long as it's happening to some other poor schmuck, and not themselves.
Amazing, just amazing.......I guess that's 'merica today.
Amazing, just amazing.......I guess that's 'merica today.
Or not have Dish. In many parts of the country, there is such thing as free over the air TV, some in high def even.
In my opinion, yes Dish is raising their costs. Imagine if Dish increased their costs with that of gas, or milk, or insurance...things that are essential to most people.
"maybe we should shut up and take it" ...maybe you shouldn't be purchasing it. You are the fool who did...knowing damn well there would be a price increase.
I think most people mind. But, it is not the fault of Dish that cable/DBS bills are high, it is the providers. The providers get away with murder since people are up in arms because their channel is missing and blame Dish. Then when Dish gives in and pays the requested fee and raises people bills Dish gets blamed again. As I pointed out above at $5/month/sub Dish is not really making what I would consider a killing.
No one wants Dish to drop their channel. Everyone is afraid of a la carte since they are convinced it will be their channels and shows that will be cut. Everyone is is cowed into paying the high bill because they are afraid of not getting whatever show they are so attached to. If you say you are not one of these people, why complain about it and just drop cable/DBS and just live with what you can get OTA, or go locals only on Dish/cable if you do not have OTA. But, no, people rather get on here and scream about rates and not take any responsibility for it.
Bottom line , Dish has control of their prices, So with that in mind its no ones fault but Dishnetwork.
I'm not going to blaim networks because Charlie decided he would take a gamble on an HD only pack for $29.99 knowing he was deceiving the networks contacts trying to rake in customers.
If cable and D* can't sell those channels for $30 per month, well then you knew it would be a matter of time before it bit Charlie in the a%^ and he had to raise your prices.
It was a good ride, but I look at it this way, you had a good pack and an unrealistic price for 3 1/2 years.
Now its time to join the rest of us and get back to reality!.
I'll Admit I was never a fan of HD only packs, All they did was cause issues with the Networks and effect the rest of the America's Top packages and their channels and prices.
And thats no one fault but Charlie's.
I'm not going to blaim networks because Charlie decided he would take a gamble on an HD only pack for $29.99 knowing he was deceiving the networks contacts trying to rake in customers.
If cable and D* can't sell those channels for $30 per month, well then you knew it would be a matter of time before it bit Charlie in the a%^ and he had to raise your prices.
It was a good ride, but I look at it this way, you had a good pack and an unrealistic price for 3 1/2 years.
Now its time to join the rest of us and get back to reality!.
I'll Admit I was never a fan of HD only packs, All they did was cause issues with the Networks and effect the rest of the America's Top packages and their channels and prices.
And thats no one fault but Charlie's.
I'm beginning to wonder if Charlie's minions are making all these favorable comments about the price increase. However, is seems some members just have a man crush on him and like to be reamed on a regular basis. I guess they never heard of soap-on-a-rope.
It will only be 3 yrs on 2/1/11. We're disappointed and trying to vent in hopes that E* will have a change of heart. NOT......:haha:haha
I have not totally decided what to do yet, but am leaning on the choice xtra with the hd xtra. If I am going to be forced to change I am going to get the most bang for the buck I can. At this point with the new customer deals D* is offering, it by far surpasses the measly little bone E* is trying to force on us.
I am holding out until 2/1, then I'll make my move.
I know this is the wrong forum for this question, but if someone could point me in the right direction(Scott, or someone else), as too where this is discussed or described, it will be appreciated.
But this thread brought up this question to my mind:
What legal right, if any, do cable companies have for "NOT" have multiple cable services available to customers in most areas of the country? In other words, I am serviced by TWC, with Comcast, and Armstrong, being availbe only about 3-4 miles away in other counties/towns, but they are not available to me for the purpose of making a "choice".
In other words, when a McDonald's opens, there is nothing stopping Wendy's/Burger King/etc... from opening up right across the street, and providing competition for them. Someone mentioned, and it is true, that competition helps keep prices down. But somehow, cable companies have somehow, skirted around this by having "territories", and not invadiing each others area. This is Bullsh*t, and I always wondered how they get away with it.
I know they have competition from the satellite companies(which you can get almost anywhere), but wouldn't prices drop, or services increase, if every area had TWC/Comcast/Armstrong/AT&T U-verse/Verizon FIOS/etc... available to them in any area? Wouldn't this keep prices down because now there is "real" competition from other companies for your money?
How in the hell do they get away with that? It wouldn't take too many cables to string along on telephone poles for nearly evry servcie to be made available to you. And the ones that die, die. While the ones that offer the best service/rates survive. Let the consumer decide.
But this thread brought up this question to my mind:
What legal right, if any, do cable companies have for "NOT" have multiple cable services available to customers in most areas of the country? In other words, I am serviced by TWC, with Comcast, and Armstrong, being availbe only about 3-4 miles away in other counties/towns, but they are not available to me for the purpose of making a "choice".
In other words, when a McDonald's opens, there is nothing stopping Wendy's/Burger King/etc... from opening up right across the street, and providing competition for them. Someone mentioned, and it is true, that competition helps keep prices down. But somehow, cable companies have somehow, skirted around this by having "territories", and not invadiing each others area. This is Bullsh*t, and I always wondered how they get away with it.
I know they have competition from the satellite companies(which you can get almost anywhere), but wouldn't prices drop, or services increase, if every area had TWC/Comcast/Armstrong/AT&T U-verse/Verizon FIOS/etc... available to them in any area? Wouldn't this keep prices down because now there is "real" competition from other companies for your money?
How in the hell do they get away with that? It wouldn't take too many cables to string along on telephone poles for nearly evry servcie to be made available to you. And the ones that die, die. While the ones that offer the best service/rates survive. Let the consumer decide.
