Lifetime and Lifetime Movie Network off Dish due to contract dispute

Toggle sidebar
I guess that I just don't get it? If it's ONLY 4 cents a month more per customer, I would gladly pay the extra! I would pay a dollar more a month to get LMN back. I could really care less about Lifetime, but I want LMN movies. I pay $105.00 a month for Dish, and they can't find 4 cents out of it, or out of the increase coming up. I know a lot of you don't like the programming Lifetime offers, but the two women in this house want to watch movies, not paid programming late at night which is on so many of the channels! They could take 75% of the stupid shopping channels off, and find 4 more cents to give us something to watch and entertain us. That's my 4 cents worth. I am still about ready to stick an antenna on my roof and forget the whole thing!! My Mom is 80, I am 55, and we don't like the fantasy, drug related, violent things on these days. I don't like movies where every other word is the F word. Neither does my husband!

I guess that is more than my 4 cents worth!!!
 
The thing is if Charlie gives in to this channel then the other stations will also expect him to give in. Imagine this type of increase at least 5 to 10 fold.
 
tbenning said:
Rad,
There are 2 problems with this argument.
1) it assumes that all of the money DISH is asking for the price increase is going to programming costs. I have to guess that their other expenses are increasing too. Things like wages, benefits, Workman's comp insurance, electricity, Bandwidth costs etc are all increasing.
2) It also neglects that this is only 2 of many channels. Let's assume the average customer gets 120 channels...I would guess that it is actually higher than that since many of us get well over 200. If each channel asked for the same type of "modest" increase over the next 3 years of 2 cents per channel per month, then we'd have:
.02 x 120 channels x 12 months x 12,000,000 customers = $345,600,000.00
.04 x 120 channels x 12 months x 13,500,000 customers = $777,600,000.00
.06 x 120 channels x 12 months x 15,000,000 customers = $1,296,000,000.00
So, adding the 3 years together we'd see an ADDED programming cost to dish of $2,419,200,000.00 ($2.4 Billion) This added cost would not be covered by the $2.00 price increase in your example. DISH would be out over $1.4 Billion in programming costs even after that $2 rate increase. So, I guess it is safe to say that this 2 cents per channel per month increase is considerably higher than dish could afford to offer all of it's channels.
We all know that not all channels seek this type of increase. But I think it is easy to believe Charlie when he says DISH's programming costs have risen over 6% and DISH's rates are only going up about 4%.
Click to expand...

A few things against your agrument. #1, expense for infrastructure are reduced, can you say India? #2, you example has programming rate increase increasing every year, my example had it the same, which won't be what happens, increases will probably be larger an then extra revenue from things like DVR fee increases. #3, E* would be increasing the rates that they charge for advertising, they get to put their own ad's into specific commercial slots, and keep that revenue stream.

Without looking at Charlie's books and the contracts from the various content providers we're all just guessing as to what the real numbers are. But as other have said I find it curious that all the other major MSO's don't pull programming like this, so why does Charlie.
 
Last edited:
rad said:
can you say India?
Click to expand...
The last time I returned a call from someone at EchoStar Executive Services, I was told they were sent to the Phillipines for a few months. We may have closed our Naval Ports, but it looks like we're shipping them our E* Customer Service jobs.

Anyway, I'm sure the truth is somewhere in the middle...but it would appear this is going to be a long-term battle. At this point, I don't think either side is wanting to compromise. Who will blink first? I think it will be Dish Network. Sorry, but WE and Oxygen are not Lifetime; Lifetime is more of a religious experience for women from what I have observed. Who is right and who is wrong are unimportant at this time. Women want their Lifetime channels and they sign-up with someone who can provide them.
 
Stargazer said:
The thing is if Charlie gives in to this channel then the other stations will also expect him to give in. Imagine this type of increase at least 5 to 10 fold.
Click to expand...

Oh god no!! Charlie had better keep his filthy hands off my nickels...

You're talking about 40 freaking cents, you realize that right? How much is your bill going up, 2 dollars? 3 dollars? Lifetime wants 4 cents of that, give it to them...I mean wtf are we talking about here...They are a highly rated channel, like it or not. They've earned that 4 cents...

I can't believe we're bitching about 4 cents here. Is there nothing else going on in the world?

BTW, I found her letter quite funny. Ergen-omics will be re-used around here for years to come...calling charlie out on "more for less" saying that it's actually "Less for More" is 100% true, etc...

Dish has said 76% but haven't given any data either, so before we all take sides, look at the evidence on the table.
 
The assumption should be (unless Charlie and/or Lifetime's CEO are idiots) that both sides are telling the truth.

1) First year: Lifetime and LRW go up $0.04 per month
2) LRW carriage is mandated
3) By the third year, there's a net 76% increase in the Lifetime package price from the current rates.

The truth isn't in the middle of the two sides - we just can't piece together the whole truth yet. What we do know is that the cheaper Lifetime is currently, the more significant a percentage increase that $0.04 is - the more expensive Lifetime is, the more significant the dollar amount of that 76% increase.
 
I would still like to know how Direct TV can afford these channels, yet Dish can't. I would also like to see Dish poll their customers with an amount of increase, and let the customers decide. Everyone I talk to you would pay more....but of course I don't know everyone!!
 
Would you pay more for all 100 channels you receive?

It's funny that the network conglomerates want to bundle massive amounts of channels with hidden (to the consumer) costs attached to every one of them - yet when they are trying to get sympathy, all of a sudden they speak in a la carte terms focusing on the cost of individual channels.
 
twinrocks said:
I would still like to know how Direct TV can afford these channels, yet Dish can't. I would also like to see Dish poll their customers with an amount of increase, and let the customers decide. Everyone I talk to you would pay more....but of course I don't know everyone!!
Click to expand...

Directv is raising prices in March and IMO they overcharge the Sunday Ticket subs to get revenue towards the TC package, so that's why I think they may be so willing to just "roll over" in negotations unlike Dish. Also you have to keep in mind if you pay annually with E*, you get a free month, the same is not the case with Directv.
 
76% over 3 years! If they only wanted 25% and a 1 year contract, what's the difference? Same increase, they just have to come back and work out the same deal 2 years faster. I'm sure other channels (and lifetime points this get) get more than 4 cent/month increases all the dime from E*. My bill is the proof of that.

Saying it'll be 76% more in 3 years than it is today is kinda lame. I'd like to see how much more expensive all the other channels are today compared to 3 years ago, i'll bet there's quite a few in the 76% range...
 
Chris Walker said:
They always raise prices in March after Dish announces their increase
Click to expand...

Ah, so you're just guessing, not stating a fact that you've seen somewhere that would contradict what the D* rep said. OK.
 
rad said:
First I've heard/seen this, source please? The last I heard/saw was in this thread, http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=50606 , which said no 2006 increase.
Click to expand...
It was a newspaper article in denver where a D* spokesman made a flippant remark about D* not raising prices in response to reporters phone call..There has been no official press release from d* on the subject.. Also some D* csr's (on a more directv friendly board) indicated that there IS price increase coming just not "in the new year" which could mean mid year (March)
 
Directv has to pay ESPN too, there's no way they don't raise prices. They just like letting E* annouce their increase first so they can snatch a few irritated Dish subs.
 
I'm not saying that D* won't raise their prices, it's just in Chris's post he said Directv is raising prices in March which makes it sound like he had seen an announcement saying that there was a price increase, not what he's saying now that they usually do a price increase in March. I was just trying to get clearification on his statement.
 

Similar threads

S
Dish contract ends 28Apr2024 - any reason to renew?
Replies
29
Views
3K
Bobby
Bobby
E
  • Locked
Dish Network Technician Name
Replies
6
Views
370
Bobby
Bobby
R
ATT Gateway and Dish Network
Replies
4
Views
810
Jon J
Jon J
K
CW 61 phx off dish
Replies
1
Views
700
Mr Tony
M
D
Dish Network 1522b Error Code
Replies
8
Views
1K
dlts4u
dlts4u

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts

Share this page

Share this page
Top
Back