OFFICIAL DISH / FOX ORDEAL DISCUSSION THREAD

MikeD-C05

MikeD-C05

Pub Member / Supporter
Pub Member / Supporter
Nov 25, 2003
26,279
16,299
Nederland , Texas
There are several channels like BET, ABC Family , that I never watch at all. So in hd or not I didn't care because I never tuned in. I found out that I can do without a lot of channels since I mostly watch network tv anyway. The cable channels I watch are far and few and mostly in the summer. Further more if the price of programming keeps going up at the $2.00 - $4.00 range every year I will most likely drop down even further from what I have to something lower. I used to have AEP for years. Dropped down to Top 250 and dropped all premiums . I am down to Top 200 now and if they keep jacking I will drop down to top 120. If need be I can drop down to the Welcome pack and save even more and still get locals in hd ,as well as around 20 miscellaneous channels from all packs that I could still watch ,though in sd. I realize now that I do have options.
 
Ghpr13

Ghpr13

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 1, 2009
3,212
0
Louisville, KY
There are several channels like BET, ABC Family , that I never watch at all. So in hd or not I didn't care because I never tuned in. I found out that I can do without a lot of channels since I mostly watch network tv anyway. The cable channels I watch are far and few and mostly in the summer. Further more if the price of programming keeps going up at the $2.00 - $4.00 range every year I will most likely drop down even further from what I have to something lower. I used to have AEP for years. Dropped down to Top 250 and dropped all premiums . I am down to Top 200 now and if they keep jacking I will drop down to top 120. If need be I can drop down to the Welcome pack and save even more and still get locals in hd ,as well as around 20 miscellaneous channels from all packs that I could still watch ,though in sd. I realize now that I do have options.

MikeD-C05,
Bottom line, IMO, the only thing these disputes on network\carriers rates, have done and will keep doing, is making more people like your self reviewing their options and what they're paying for a service that they can get free or at a greatly reduce rate (if you consider NetFlix or Internet streaming). Causing them to really reconsider if they really need Dish, Direct, cable, etc.

Ghpr13:)
 
meStevo

meStevo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 20, 2004
14,061
8,521
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Yup, it's up to the providers to give us a reason to keep them in our houses as direct competitors and non traditional alternatives improve.

Sent from my Moto Droid using Tapatalk
 
L

Laddyboy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 12, 2006
3,149
12
Central IL/SW FL/Big Island
OK, that's fair. Yes if Disney had pulled it all, there would have been a lot of yammering about it. But by only pulling the HD, we found that in general, no one cared if Disney was in HD or not, or at least not nearly enough cared. Face it, the kids watching Disney channels wanted to see the channel, being in HD was nice but certainly not a big deal unless the parents made it a big deal. Frankly at this point in time, I would be surprised to see it come back in HD at all, there certainly is no general howling about the HD being gone.

The contract covering the 4 SD Disney channels hasn't expired. There never was a separate contract between E* and Disney for the HD versions of the channels. E* assumed it had the right to carry the channels in HD since it was paying for the SD channels. One assumes this has been the general way of doing business, i.e., the HD channels are thrown in with the SD channels for one payment. Disney disputed that assumption and pulled the channels, saying a separate payment and contract is needed. There's also a couple lawsuits in motion between E* and Disney for nonpayment/late payment and violation of most favored nation rate clauses as I recall.
 
whatchel1

whatchel1

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 30, 2006
9,099
48
Great High Plains
The contract covering the 4 SD Disney channels hasn't expired. There never was a separate contract between E* and Disney for the HD versions of the channels. E* assumed it had the right to carry the channels in HD since it was paying for the SD channels. One assumes this has been the general way of doing business, i.e., the HD channels are thrown in with the SD channels for one payment. Disney disputed that assumption and pulled the channels, saying a separate payment and contract is needed. There's also a couple lawsuits in motion between E* and Disney for nonpayment/late payment and violation of most favored nation rate clauses as I recall.

That is correct, personally I hope that Disney looses. I don't like the idea that they can push 2 different contracts. If it works for them all other providers will pull the same thing.
 
Tampa8

Tampa8

Supporting Founder - I'll stand up and say so
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
18,076
7,628
Tampa/Eastern Ct
I want to Thank Scott for letting this (and other) threads reach their own conclusion. It indeed gives a great historical documentation.

It just would not make sense for Dish (Charlie) to have caved. From being both a subscriber almost since they started, and being active on the forums for just as long, I know that A) Charlie does not bluff when he finally takes action, and B) almost no one who threatens to leave over these things ever does, or is someone who will come back because they are never happy with any provider. (Always exceptions of course) So I am not convinced Dish was losing much in revenue compared to how many subscribers Dish will retain, and gain by keeping costs in check.

While I acknowledge Dish has recently raised the cost more than I would like with DVR fees that I think are getting out of hand, overall the cost for Dish has remained lower than most anywhere, and that didn't happen by mistake. So I have to think that while certainly each side got something they wanted, Dish probably held the upper hand.
 
lparsons21

lparsons21

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 17, 2009
9,876
7,990
Herrin, IL 62948
The contract covering the 4 SD Disney channels hasn't expired. There never was a separate contract between E* and Disney for the HD versions of the channels. E* assumed it had the right to carry the channels in HD since it was paying for the SD channels. One assumes this has been the general way of doing business, i.e., the HD channels are thrown in with the SD channels for one payment. Disney disputed that assumption and pulled the channels, saying a separate payment and contract is needed. There's also a couple lawsuits in motion between E* and Disney for nonpayment/late payment and violation of most favored nation rate clauses as I recall.

You are correct. It will be interesting to see if when the Disney channels in SD contract comes up, if Dish will even want the HD versions. It really does seem that darned few care about any of them being in HD. Why pay for it?
 
meStevo

meStevo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 20, 2004
14,061
8,521
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Just doesn't add up, Dish signs, Fox (who isn't going to discuss terms) and Dish put out politically correct press releases. The next day Cabelvision, who has been screaming bloody murder to the FCC and demanding what Time Warner is paying for a single channel of a package deal they agreed to with Fox signs their "unfair 70million to 150million" deal.

If Cabelvision sees Dish sign a deal that they'd rather have, they take that as more proof to the FCC that Fox is trying to bend them over a barrel. If Dish signs a deal close to what Cabelvision is being offered for Fox, then Cabelvision signs and throws a tantrum in their press release... which is what happened.

I am sure someone could make a compelling argument the other way (I haven't seen it yet) but it looks like Dish wanted to just put this one behind them and move forward before the local channels became an issue. The only facts anyone has is that Cabelvision completely caved, and that points to, more than anything, that Fox got what they wanted out of all of their disputes given the timeframe that everything went official.
 
C

chum1976

SatelliteGuys Guru
Sep 13, 2010
127
11
pa
Just doesn't add up, Dish signs, Fox (who isn't going to discuss terms) and Dish put out politically correct press releases. The next day Cabelvision, who has been screaming bloody murder to the FCC and demanding what Time Warner is paying for a single channel of a package deal they agreed to with Fox signs their "unfair 70million to 150million" deal.

If Cabelvision sees Dish sign a deal that they'd rather have, they take that as more proof to the FCC that Fox is trying to bend them over a barrel. If Dish signs a deal close to what Cabelvision is being offered for Fox, then Cabelvision signs and throws a tantrum in their press release... which is what happened.

I am sure someone could make a compelling argument the other way (I haven't seen it yet) but it looks like Dish wanted to just put this one behind them and move forward before the local channels became an issue. The only facts anyone has is that Cabelvision completely caved, and that points to, more than anything, that Fox got what they wanted out of all of their disputes given the timeframe that everything went official.

I agree. FOX had no intention of standing down so DN had to sign before the locals were dropped(would have been a PR nightmare), and once DN caved that put pressure on Cablevision since the FCC basically told them to get lost. There were several articles stating FOX got the money out of DN, but conceded about moving channels to other tiers.
 
Bobby

Bobby

Publican
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 7, 2003
63,129
16,107
Rohnert Park, CA
or.... Dish got what they wanted and Fox decided to give Cablevision the same deal and they went for it.... I see nothing that says that anybody caved and all we can do is speculate.
 
KAB

KAB

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 20, 2005
20,682
4,013
Fishers, IN
or.... Dish got what they wanted and Fox decided to give Cablevision the same deal and they went for it.... I see nothing that says that anybody caved and all we can do is speculate.

That is absolutely, positively 100% correct. Some folks are grabbing facts and truths out of the air, then making assumptions on who did what and why, etc, etc. So, this him or them "caved" is just child's play.
 
DodgerKing

DodgerKing

SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 14, 2007
16,776
26
SoCal
That is absolutely, positively 100% correct. Some folks are grabbing facts and truths out of the air, then making assumptions on who did what and why, etc, etc. So, this him or them "caved" is just child's play.
I personally feel that nobody caved in; both sides agreed to terms that was satisfactory to each (usually indicates some sort of compromise)
 
Last edited:
iwc5893

iwc5893

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 1, 2007
2,178
0
The desert of WA, zip code EIEIO
What about making both sides provide the actual agreements when disputes like this get argued in the media and the public?

If they want to negotiate in private, then they can keep the contracts private. If they want to start websites, and issue press releases about "unfair" or "excessive" rates, then they should have to provide the details that form the basis for these claims.




Never going to happen, but it would be nice to see.
 
meStevo

meStevo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 20, 2004
14,061
8,521
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Why would Dish get what they wanted when Cablevision didn't? That's the only fact we have aside from ambiguously neutral statements from Fox and Dish about the deal. Fox got what they wanted from Time Warner and Cablevision, there's little reason to expect any different for Dish. This is especially true when Dish's sub numbers make it the 3rd+ fiddle in most markets, behind Cable and DirecTV, they only have so much leverage.
 
Dah-Henny

Dah-Henny

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 12, 2007
3,666
346
Boone, North Carolina
I personally feel that nobody caved in; both sides agreed to terms that was satisfactory to each (usually indicates some sort of compromise)
You're probably spot on. Fox didn't get what they originally wanted from CV either, but CV paid more than than wanted to, and publicly bitched about that fact after the contract was signed.

As far as the arguement of "who caved" goes, concerning E*& F*, it depends on what side of the fence you sit on...if you're on the Dish hater side, and there are several haters in this thread, then Charlie obviously cowered like a little baby, and succumbed to FOX, and if you're an E* apologist, then obviously Fox paid obeisance to E*, and let the mighty one win. :rolleyes:
 
meStevo

meStevo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 20, 2004
14,061
8,521
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
You're probably spot on. Fox didn't get what they originally wanted from CV either, but CV paid more than than wanted to, and publicly bitched about that fact after the contract was signed.

As far as the arguement of "who caved" goes, concerning E*& F*, it depends on what side of the fence you sit on...if you're on the Dish hater side, and there are several haters in this thread, then Charlie obviously cowered like a little baby, and succumbed to FOX, and if you're an E* apologist, then obviously Fox paid obeisance to E*, and let the mighty one win. :rolleyes:

I just don't see how you can say confidently either one caved which is what I have issue with. Fox got what they want in one dispute, per Cablevision and E* didn't boast about getting what they wanted after all their chest beating during this dispute. Turning around and then saying E* got what they wanted and Fox caved doesn't make sense to me.
 
J

Jhon69

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 19, 2006
3,472
91
Central San Joaquin Valley,CA.
I just don't see how you can say confidently either one caved which is what I have issue with. Fox got what they want in one dispute, per Cablevision and E* didn't boast about getting what they wanted after all their chest beating during this dispute. Turning around and then saying E* got what they wanted and Fox caved doesn't make sense to me.

See the quote below.;)

I agree. FOX had no intention of standing down so DN had to sign before the locals were dropped(would have been a PR nightmare), and once DN caved that put pressure on Cablevision since the FCC basically told them to get lost. There were several articles stating FOX got the money out of DN, but conceded about moving channels to other tiers.

You see it's very important for Dish Network to be able to offer the cheapest programming price in America.So no matter what some say this was a win for Dish Network and a win for Fox.;)

I also believe that Fox did not want to go into sweeps month(Nov.) with less viewers, that could effect their prices for the rest of the year.:rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

Scott Greczkowski
Replies
546
Views
73K
long_time_DNC
long_time_DNC
E
Replies
2K
Views
135K
crodrules
crodrules
Scott Greczkowski
Replies
1K
Views
204K
edisonprime
E
J
Replies
2
Views
1K
jp4miller
J

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

Top