every year we get a rate increase..not because of the reg. programing channels its always the sports channels like espn etc..if i had it my way i would put those sports channels in a "sports package" and if people want it they can pay for it instead of me..i dont like keeping up all those sports casters and those 18 millon dollars a year steriod baseball players..justs makes my blood boil just to think about that..just my 2 cents worth
i got a gripe about the rate increase!!!
- Thread starter tennguy
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 35
- Views 4K
I agree with you, and if I could do something about it I wouldn't have any sports channels in my package. (I am not a sports fan in the least)
But, I don't think Dish or Directv can do anything about this, because the programming is sold to them as packages, and if they want to carry one channel they have to carry all of them from that programmer. (of course not always, and not always every channel)
But, I don't think Dish or Directv can do anything about this, because the programming is sold to them as packages, and if they want to carry one channel they have to carry all of them from that programmer. (of course not always, and not always every channel)
I myself don't watch sports on TV either. It's boring and the whole pro-sports industry is a joke, I agree. Too much money from our econmy is blown on pro athletes.
It does make sense and that what's C-Band does. But there are things that prevent that from happening on DBS and Cable. The DBS and cable have to sign agreements with people like ESPN/ABC that their programming will be carried in a basic package. Also I think a lot of people would flip out because of the psche of them having to pay extra for sports (even though they're not) It's the same type of bad rap that DBS was charging extra for locals and cable didn't. The fact is that cable forces you to pay for locals where as DBS can save you money by having it optional.
It does make sense and that what's C-Band does. But there are things that prevent that from happening on DBS and Cable. The DBS and cable have to sign agreements with people like ESPN/ABC that their programming will be carried in a basic package. Also I think a lot of people would flip out because of the psche of them having to pay extra for sports (even though they're not) It's the same type of bad rap that DBS was charging extra for locals and cable didn't. The fact is that cable forces you to pay for locals where as DBS can save you money by having it optional.
I would definatly not lose any sleep over not having the sports channels tossed off my package. For crying out loud they are nothing but overgrown children playing a damn game. Why in the hell would I be interested in that considering they piss and moan over a few million dollers not being enough pay for what they do? The only games I'd be interested in watching is the hockey. Not the stuff over here it's too damn slow. European hockey blows ours away all day.
tennguy said:
welcome to satellite guys. i am a big sports fan, but agree they should be in a separate package. the reason they are not in a sep package is because of the agreements in contract with the provider and dish.
to all of those who gripe and complain about athelete's making too much money and being a bunch of over paid babies, do you feel that way about all entertainers? Wheter it be musicans, actors, actresses, authors, comdieans, etc. Much like athelete's, these folks are being paid millions and millions of dollars to showcase their god given abilities. Are there bad apples in sports? Yes, there are, but for every bad apple, there are two or three angels, same can be said about other entertainers, regardless of the "field" they are in.
Yes, I know this is a Dish Network forum, but everytime I hear somone ranting and raving about the millions of dollars athelete's make, I got on my soap box.
Yes, I know this is a Dish Network forum, but everytime I hear somone ranting and raving about the millions of dollars athelete's make, I got on my soap box.
I agree. If people pay what they pay to see whatever then they deserved to be paid what they are being paid... noone's holding a gun to anyone's head here.
If you're upset about other people making millions, maybe you better rethink your personal situation. Noone's holding you back but yourself.
If you're upset about other people making millions, maybe you better rethink your personal situation. Noone's holding you back but yourself.
garn9173 said:
Wow have I been waiting for someone to make this thread. Garn9173 you are 100% correct. I very much dislike all these gripers about sports being in a regular packege, and athletes getting paid soo much. The atheltes have without a doubt ablities that those of us in here, I assume, will never have. Some have the ability to shoot 56% from the 3 point line. Some have the ability to hit 60 home runs, some have the ability to throw 50 TD passes, and some have the ability to catch over 123 TD passes.
It is this ability that makes these people special, just it is 50 Cent's rapping ability, Jack Nicholson's acting ability, and JK Rowling's writing abilities. These people deserve everything they have and that they will get because they have a god given ability the sells. If you or I had the ability to hit 60 HR a season and bat for .350 at the same time, I think you would let it slide that you are getting paid soooo much. I think it is jelousy because many of us wish that we could live this glamourous life.
I am a HUGE sports fan, and I would pay extra for this package, but unlike my usual feelings, I want everyone to have to pay for it, because I feel that those that don't want it are whiney babies. Sports provide a thrill, an excitement that can only be matched by doing it yourself. I have spent countless times sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for that SO, or maked shot, etc.. and it provides a thrill and a high that I could not get in anyother way.
And just to say this, what if I said I didn't want Lifetime, Spike, Nick, Bravo, or USA. Is this not the same...a sports fan not wanting to see the general entertainment channels adn only wanting the sports channels...we cant have it both ways people.
Yes, I do feel pretty much that way. Just more examples of celebrity worship. There is, however, a fundamental difference in the way top athletes and top entertainers obtain their millions and millions. The entertainers are rewarded because people choose to buy movie tickets, CDs, and premium channels. No fans, no sales, no millions. Even in the general entertainment channels we are forced to buy, choice is reflected in ratings which affect advertising revenue. Which brings us to the usually unspoken attitude of entitlement by the sports fans...garn9173 said:
This plays right into the amazing hubris of the sports industry which not only wishes, but demands, that everyone finance the figurative blank checks it keeps handing out.hpman247 said:
I have no argument with your interests and even agree with the second part. But this is private enterprise, in an economy that is supposed to be driven by supply and demand. The government can make everyone contribute to the needs of the nation or community. Professional sports fulfill no such need and I believe they are actually a drain on our society and economy. I wish the AT## packages contained NO sports at all but grudgingly concede that since these are general interest packages having ESPN and an RSN keeps them rounded out. The problem is that ESPN has reportedly priced itself much closer to the optional premium channels and far above the range of the other channels in these packages yet still demand to be carried in the tier paid for by the most customers or else the Mouse will take away other popular channels. To me, this crosses the line from capitalism (their right to set a price) to racketeering (extortion via forced bundling). Unless ESPN can keep its rates within reach of the channels it wishes to be carried with, it should be pulled out of AT60 and made a la carte or put into a sports bundle. E* should restrict the cheapest tier to the cheapest channels.
ESPN wants premium pricing with mandatory inclusion. The people are beginning to say "No, you can't have it both ways." The providers need to do the same.
If I want the other forms of entertainment mentioned above I can pay for them seperatly. If I want a movie I pay for a movie. If I want a book I buy a book. If I like the musician I buy the music. The point is here we don't and can't, not buy the sports. I say if you want the crap and want to pay, you pay. Maybe I'm just a little bit budget consciece here but if I can manage to live a fullfilling life on my income what in the hell does a whiney ass, spoiled, grown up kid have to piss and moan about a million here or there for their contracts. Absolutely nothing. Jealously isn't my beef. I could care less what they make at the end of the day. When I have to take my hard earned money out of my pocket though to pay their check when I'm not even interested in what they have to offer I have a problem with it. If you want to pay their salary fine. I don't. The sports packages should be offered seperatly and should be encouraged so by those of us that don't want it and the programming providers. If it were the case perhaps then some of these overinflated egos on the field would lose a little hot air and see what they are really worth.
Unfortunatly, like living in a major city with a professional sports team, everyone has to pay these childrens livelyhoods. You don't think so try moving to a city like Houston, Texas. The sports teams there whined and cried they couldn't win games because of the fields and equipment. The result was more overpriced stadiums that everyone in the city, regardless of any interest in the sports or not, have to pay. The way I figure it in that situation is, if they want a new field or stadium let them take some of those millions they are making and pay for it. I damn sure don't have the extra money to pay for their habits and tears. Same for the sports channels. Why should a majority of those that watch tv have to pay for the channels they don't watch when they could be packaged into a deal for those that do? Simple, the networks know they would lose their collective asses on the deal. So they do the next best thing that equates to robbery by forcing provoders to package the content and make it up from their customers. You don't think it's robbery then I challange you to not call up the credit card company the next time someone charges your card for items you didn't want, purchase, or use.
Unfortunatly, like living in a major city with a professional sports team, everyone has to pay these childrens livelyhoods. You don't think so try moving to a city like Houston, Texas. The sports teams there whined and cried they couldn't win games because of the fields and equipment. The result was more overpriced stadiums that everyone in the city, regardless of any interest in the sports or not, have to pay. The way I figure it in that situation is, if they want a new field or stadium let them take some of those millions they are making and pay for it. I damn sure don't have the extra money to pay for their habits and tears. Same for the sports channels. Why should a majority of those that watch tv have to pay for the channels they don't watch when they could be packaged into a deal for those that do? Simple, the networks know they would lose their collective asses on the deal. So they do the next best thing that equates to robbery by forcing provoders to package the content and make it up from their customers. You don't think it's robbery then I challange you to not call up the credit card company the next time someone charges your card for items you didn't want, purchase, or use.
MustangLX89 said:
Get 'em Mustang!! Thanks for posting my sentiments. ABC is using their other networks, the ones that everyone wants and is willing to pay for, to leverage their sports network, which hasn't ever carried any event that I would be willing to pay for.
As another poster so eloquently put it: madantory inclusion and premium pricing. It's just not fair. Obviously, the best long-term solution would be for E* and D* to stand their ground, and force ABC to play fair. But anyone who saw the VIACOM war with E* knows where most of the splatter ended up: Right on Charlie's face. Even though VIACOM was the bad guy.
Oh, and to those of you who belittle others because they don't consider sports to be worth the money that it costs society: Your attitude is the same as the athletes', and is indicative of what's wrong with sports these days. Their "talents" only have the value that you and advertisers assign to them. There is no inherent value in sports "talent." If enough people get fed up, or grow up, to lose interest in these prima donnas, the advertisers wouldn't need them any more, and they would become irrelevant. When actors, singers, etc. get "too big for their britches" they get knocked down a few pegs. This doesn't happen in pro sports because of morons like you, who keep rationalizing their bad acts and unreasonable demands, and moving the line of credibility further out of reality.
But I thank you. Your childish rants make me more introspective. Perhaps it's time to stop the madness on my own TV, and just cut it all loose. After all, if I just move that big screen tv out of the way there are a couple of large windows that point to the real world. They've been HD for years. No new receiver, sat dish or multi-switch needed.
hpman247 said:
I've never been forced to buy a ticket to a Jack Nicholson movie just to see another one I wanted to watch. Last time I went to the newstand they didn't force me to buy a JK Rowling book along with my newspaper. I'm not forced to by a 50 Cent song from iTunes when I buy real music.
This quote is priceless. I don't even need to comment on it. You will never see the ridiculousness of it, because you're a friggin' moron. But perhaps more lucid people might read it more closely, and see how absurd your reasoning is.
Well being my moronic self,
, I said that because it deviates from my normal feelings about these matters. Usually, I am an a la carte fan, but in these circumstances, because of everyones attitude towards this I have changed my mind. I suppose I can see where you are coming from, but isn't that why there are favorites lists.Can't say much to this. That sounds like something my grandpa would say as to the reason he hasn't went HD yet. Personally, I prefer HDTV, to what I see outside. You cannot get the views outside that you can on the tele, unless you specifically go to the Grand Canyon, these Sunrise places, etc.
What I really think it comes down to is this: sports provide excitement and drama that nothing else can, not 24, Alias, Lost, etc. It is this excitement, this passion that these players show when in uniform that make them worth what their team chooses to play them. Some of you have said that living in a city you have to pay for these stadiums etc. I assume by way of taxes. Well what if I said that I didn't want to pay the Social Security tax (when i go to college and get a job), and I wanted to keep it for myself, because all the older people will break it down before I should, hopefully not, ever need it. That would never happen.
This is kind of off topic so I'll limit myself. There are some really great and honorable people in the sporting world. REggie White, Michael Jordan to name a few. But I see it as you saying that these men would be mature and these 18-29 year olds (approx) are not. Well to give you a story on my favorite sports team, Washington Wizards, Gilbert Arenas just decided one day to take 200 children to see the Spongebob Squarepants movie. He adopted a child who had just lost all of his family and posessions in a house fire. Yeah that's a really whiney ass grown up kid ain't it.
Even a blind pig can find a acorn. There are exceptions to the rule in any case including sports. On the whole I reiterate my previous posts for the rest, which is a majority, of those in the sports entertainment world.
The bottom line is I don't like being robbed whether by gunpoint or in this case by the provider because someone else needs a sports fix. Anyone that doesn't have a problem with it can kindly forward their name, address, social security number and mothers maiden name to me. I would like to get a newer used car and since your so generous with my money I figure you could be also in kind with yours. At least you could sleep at night with the knowledge I'm actually using for what you are paying.
The bottom line is I don't like being robbed whether by gunpoint or in this case by the provider because someone else needs a sports fix. Anyone that doesn't have a problem with it can kindly forward their name, address, social security number and mothers maiden name to me. I would like to get a newer used car and since your so generous with my money I figure you could be also in kind with yours. At least you could sleep at night with the knowledge I'm actually using for what you are paying.
it was interesting reading all those replys but i still think sports channel shouls be like movie channels..espn is about as high as a movie channel or higher maybe..anyone know what we are paying for espn??? dont get me wrong i like some sports..but espn is not worth what we are paying for it..its every year that channel gets a big bump in pay..
Tennguy, I still say if we had it that way then everything would be in this package format. We'd have to group Homestyle channels together(HGTV, Disc, DIY, etc), and then the general entertainment(USA,TNT,TBS, etc), and then music(MTV, BET) then childrens(Nogin, Nick, CN), then everything would be basically package a la carte, so no one will ever be happy.
One thing I would like to note is that I have never seen the "sports" people complain about the above channels.
One thing I would like to note is that I have never seen the "sports" people complain about the above channels.
