I've paid for the Big 10 network through the multi-sports pack which Dish network required me to purchase to have access to the channel. Over the last year I've been able to watch zero Maryland games on the Big 10 network because they are blacked out. Meanwhile my neighbor who has DTV watches every game. I'm paying for the channel and I should be able to watch Maryland games since I freaking live in Maryland . They are not televised on any other channels
Maryland getting screwed over by Dish for Big 10 Network
- Thread starter plumerman2003
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 57
- Views 5K
You do need to switch to Directv or Cable if it carries the Big 10 to get the Maryland games if you are in Maryland. After the agreement with the Big Ten was agreed to Maryland joined the Big Ten and DISH is refusing to pay the added cost for showing games to subscribers in Maryland. Directv did pay the fee.
In case nobody has caught on, Charlie will not renegotiate channel contracts with the owners, because they think they can get more out of him when they spend the money to extend. If they had intentions of expanding, they should have taken that into account when negotiating the original contract and use it as a tool in their negotiations. Just like with the Fox south debacle, I side with Dish, as they are respecting the contract that was agreed upon in the first place.
I am tempted to say DISH should just pay it, but where do you draw the line? Directv would cost me much more a month and this is one of the reasons. Problem of course is the person who wants to see the game and thought they would is screwed. Bet if he asks for a credit for a few months he'll get it.
That's the thing. How is the average customer supposed to know this will happen? If I was signing up for Dish and did my due diligence to make sure they had the Big Ten Network I would assume that I was covered for football season. If you get a channel it's reasonable to assume that you get everything on that channel.
Think how dumb it would be if Dish had AMC but not the rights to The Walking Dead or HBO but not the rights to Game of Thrones. I'm not sure how a contract was written that says Dish can't show Maryland games in the state of Maryland but it's stupid and both sides need to come together and get it fixed.
Dish is advertising that they carry BTN to customers in Maryland without pointing out that they don't carry the games people in Maryland actually care about. This is the same problem I have with Dish advertising that they carry the RSNs in HD when they really don't. They only carry specific programs on the RSNs in HD.
Now on the business side of things, however, would you be ok with signing a contract with a company(Dish for example) and then dish gets more channels, and says unless you sign a contract for more money, you will not have access to any of those channels. By the way, these channels are highly wished for channels. Would you be ok? What if they crippled you current service unless you signed a new contract for more money. This is not very long after you sign up, so take that into consideration. That's where the trouble lies. These sports channels should taken into consideration what they will likely offer in the future. Now if you are saying that they should offer a warning that some areas may not be covered, I could get behind that. But what if they included why they wouldn't have access. Would BigTen sue? What if it was just a legal disclosure in the service agreement? As far as disclosures, should they tell me I cannot get Tucson locals in Phoenix? Where would that stop? It's already gone from one page to something like 13. I think they pretty much cover it when they say that no channel or programming is guaranteed across the board.
I don't understand some of the points you are trying to make. Maryland Dish customers not getting Maryland games on BTN is not like not getting locals from another market. BTN is available nationally on Dish in the Multi-sport pack which the OP signed up for specifically to get that channel. He's paying for the channel but all Maryland games are blocked.
Dish agreed to pay BTN more per subscriber in Big Ten states than they do for subscribers in non-Big Ten states. At the time Maryland and New Jersey were not Big Ten states but they are now. That's where the dispute comes from. Even if the Big Ten state rate stayed the exact same Dish would have to give BTN more money because more of their subscribers are now in Big Ten states.
I never said this was all Dish's fault. I do stand by the point I made in my last post though. The situation is stupid and both sides should come together to fix it.
Either that or they need to clearly tell customers in Maryland and New Jersey that they will not receive Maryland and Rutgers football games even if they subscribe to multi-sport to get BTN.
When Nebraska was added to the Big Ten Dish added it to the RSN's in Nebraska before that upcoming season
Does Rutgers get it in the RSN's....or do they need multi-sport?
Does Rutgers get it in the RSN's....or do they need multi-sport?
because Charlie is cheap
since he isnt able to see the game you kinda answered your own sentence and question
Here's the other thing. All the other Big Ten states get BTN free as an RSN as long as they have AT120+ or higher. Since Maryland and Rutgers were added to the Big Ten after that deal was signed customers in Maryland and New Jersey don't get BTN as a RSN.
That just adds salt to the wound. Customers in Maryland already have to pay more money to Dish to get the Multi-Sport package if they want BTN but they get less content on BTN than every other Dish subscriber in the country.
That just adds salt to the wound. Customers in Maryland already have to pay more money to Dish to get the Multi-Sport package if they want BTN but they get less content on BTN than every other Dish subscriber in the country.
Must be why my Dish bill is lower that any other provider could offer me.
The agreements will need to change in the future. Conferences can just get one rinky dink team from a higher population state to get more money out of an existing contract. Why else have Rutgers?! SW Fl State or UTEP next? Or powerhouse Albany?
College Football is such a racket!
The thing is he's not paying for that channel. He's paying for that package. DISH is making the case by paying more for every contract after the contract is signed they would need at some point to raise rates more than they would otherwise, and/or sooner. Would that package have to rise in cost if they signed a few of these? He would be paying for that channel with Direct as in many cases he would pay more with them for that and in many instances RSN's and other contracts they pay more for after the original signing.
That said, it should be made clear that those games are not included before someone signs up with DISH. Yes you can go to the game finder and it tells you there but I don't think that is a reasonable way for new customers. As I posted I am tempted to say just pay it, but then eventually if that is the approach I would paying as much as Directv charges.
To use the example above for AMC, that is actually a good example. Does AMC come back to DISH when a new program airs that was not airing before the contract? Of course not. Nor does HBO.
Eh, Rutgers may not be a football powerhouse but they certainly aren't like any of the schools you compared them to. They came from the Big East, which was one of the BCS power conferences before it fell apart.
But he is paying for it. Maryland doesn't get it in the AT120+ as a RSN like the other Big 10 states. The OP stated he signed up for the Multi-sport pack to get BTN. That's a $13 add on to his regular package that advertises that it includes BTN.
I could see your point if he was in an area that gets it as an RSN but Maryland customers have to pay an extra $13 to get the same channel I would get for free in Michigan and he still gets less content than I would.
Yes. Theoretically that package would cost more, at least it would have to in Maryland. Multiply that with other sports who do this and it's never ending.
Even if DISH added Maryland football and passed the cost along, who does it get passed to? Every subscriber in Maryland? If it's to those who get the sports package in Maryland how much more not knowing how many subscribe or for how long. They would have to do what Directv (and cable) does and pass the cost on to everyone. Doesn't sound like much just for Maryland but what about all the other contracts demanding more money after being signed.
Even if DISH added Maryland football and passed the cost along, who does it get passed to? Every subscriber in Maryland? If it's to those who get the sports package in Maryland how much more not knowing how many subscribe or for how long. They would have to do what Directv (and cable) does and pass the cost on to everyone. Doesn't sound like much just for Maryland but what about all the other contracts demanding more money after being signed.
Look, is Dish doing what they are allowed in the contract a customer signs? Sure. Still, when Maryland has to pay an extra $13 to get the sports pack it seems like Dish could pony up the extra 50 cents or whatever the premium is that they have to pay BTN for customers in Big Ten states versus what they pay in non-Big Ten states.
It can't possibly be that big of a hit. It's not like they have to pay more per subscriber for every Dish subscriber. They don't even have to pay more for every Dish subscriber in Maryland. They only have to pay more for Dish subscribers living in Maryland who are paying the $13 for Multi-Sport.
And with that, I'll let this go. It doesn't actually effect me and I have made the points I wanted to.
In other Big10 States Dish is required by the contract to carry it in a lower tier and pay for EVERY dish subscriber in that state. As a "new" Big10 state, Big10 wants the same deal for all of Maryland, Dish isn't willing, so Dish gets blacked out for Maryland games in Maryland.
If Big10 would take an al-a-carte like deal at pretty much any price, Dish would probably accept it - they could just pass the cost + profit on to the subscribers.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)
Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)
Latest posts
-
-
T
-
T
-