Fair smair if Fox is trying to get their RSN put in AT120?.I say it's going to be a long winter.
OFFICIAL DISH / FOX ORDEAL DISCUSSION THREAD
- Thread starter zippyfrog
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 3K
- Views 458K
Fair smair if Fox is trying to get their RSN put in AT120?.I say it's going to be a long winter.
But that's why I point it out. Yes, I think it will be a long, cold winter until one side finally wises up. I just bet I know which side that is.
Given Dish's record I would bet that Fox wises up before Dish ever gives in.
My only problem with this statement by Fox, and also Dish reply to it, is that if what either one of them is stating is true, then why not release the figures that all Sat/Cable Co.s are being charged? I would think Fox would want to show that they're just asking for what the same rate they charge their "other partners". Why is the carriage charges such a big secret if Fox is charging everyone the same amount?
Bottom line, in this business as well as every other business, special deals are made all the time. All companies are not on an even playing field. Everyone tries to get the best deal for their company. With that being said, I tend to think Fox is the one stretching the truth in their statements.
Ghpr13
could be same rate (how much per sub), but if they are looking to get into a lower tier, then it raises the number of subs.... possibly considerably.
Even if Fox released the prices it was charging all carriers for its channels, it would not be an apples to apples comparison. Pricing is based on the number of channels purchased what tiers they are being placed on on much promotional support the programmer is offering, how many local avail commercials are granted to the satellite or cable company, how much cross promotion will be done and who will pay for it, etc.
If you are a cable operator in a major metropolitan area having some inventory of local ads to sell on an NFL or Super Bowl game is worth big bucks. In the cable market I'm in (small market ) the cable operator is lucky to get $25 from the neighborhood diner.
Jim
If you are a cable operator in a major metropolitan area having some inventory of local ads to sell on an NFL or Super Bowl game is worth big bucks. In the cable market I'm in (small market ) the cable operator is lucky to get $25 from the neighborhood diner.
Jim
Why would it matter? If either party is lying about the numbers, then that party will be damaged. That's why I believe both statements are based off of the truth.
Besides, I'm fairly certain that releasing pricing information about other partners such as DirecTV, Comcast, Time Warner's groups, Verizon FiOS or AT&T would probably violate confidentiality agreements.
Special deals can be made, sure. But let's show this...
A new contract with an unprecedented rate increase of more than 50 percent.
So the contract's value is increasing 50 percent, not the rate subscribers are paying...
And that is where Dish Network ties the price increase to the customer rates. Yet you never see Dish saying that Fox wants a 50 percent increase per subscriber.
However, as I said, it appears very likely the demand is to put much of the pulled programming into AT120, and that is Dish Network's objection.
Fox doesn't want to give the special deal anymore. Dish Network wants the special deal in perpetuity. It's that simple.
And Fox is pretty much spot-on that where they have a local FSN, the local cabler or direcTV has both the FSN and FX in the lowest tier. And the worse part for Dish Network is that this programming dispute does not affect AT120 subs at all.
Last edited:
Dish isn't the only retransmitter having issues with FOX's outrageous demands. Read the following:
UPDATED: Cablevision Tells Fox to Try Again - 2010-10-12 22:53:30 | Multichannel News
In this article they talk actual dollars and the article goes on to say that the FOX demands are outrageous and non-negotiable. FOX essentially is saying "pay up or else".
UPDATED: Cablevision Tells Fox to Try Again - 2010-10-12 22:53:30 | Multichannel News
In this article they talk actual dollars and the article goes on to say that the FOX demands are outrageous and non-negotiable. FOX essentially is saying "pay up or else".
Well with all these sports channels in the 9000s open in my guide,with HD Net Movies and HD Theater which channels am I supposed to be missing?.Fox who?.
Soooo what? Dish should just give in and put these chans in at120? As for those chaans being in the low tier cable, thats just wrong, at least in my market.
I dont have any issue whatsoever with charlie protecting both his margins and subs.
Could that be the reason dish rates were lower in general? Fox cant force dish to change its business model because its not in line with dtv. Its that simple....
I checked and the best info I could come up with is that Cablevision has about 3.25 million subscribers. So considering that they've been paying FOX 70 million per year for their programming and now FOX wants 150 million per year with no negotiation, a take it or leave it demand. One can only guess at what FOX's demands towards Dish are.
Count me as one of those who don't miss the pulled FOX programming at all.
For my first post in this group, I will jump in here with a really dumb question; Does Direct TV have the same issues with stations that Dish has?
A year or so ago, Dish got into a urinating contest with Fisher Broadcasting, who owns a number of broadcast TV stations on the left coast. As a result of this, the local stations were not available on Dish. Inconvenient to us because we can still get them over the air but DVR was a thing of the past. For what seemed like 6 months, all we heard was how much Fisher was being unreasonable (from Dish) and how unreasonable Dish was being (From Fisher).
The end result was they settled, we never heard the details, and every thing was hunky dory.
This asks the question, why do these things seem to follow Dish around? Are there issues with Direct also and we just never hear about them?
A year or so ago, Dish got into a urinating contest with Fisher Broadcasting, who owns a number of broadcast TV stations on the left coast. As a result of this, the local stations were not available on Dish. Inconvenient to us because we can still get them over the air but DVR was a thing of the past. For what seemed like 6 months, all we heard was how much Fisher was being unreasonable (from Dish) and how unreasonable Dish was being (From Fisher).
The end result was they settled, we never heard the details, and every thing was hunky dory.
This asks the question, why do these things seem to follow Dish around? Are there issues with Direct also and we just never hear about them?
Okay, so Dish Network is protecting the customers from outrageous costs. They pull channels in AT200 and above that cost about $3 per month per subscriber. How much did anyone's bill automatically decrease?jonesy99 said:
...but Fox doesn't have to be on a system that doesn't promote its programming in the most basic tier. I know some systems don't have an FSN or FX in the basic package, but most systems do.jonesy99 said:
woopy. I get all that OTA anyway, and it matters little to me weather its on the guide or not.
My point was the costs for dish's lower tier might be because they didn't cave in the first place, so were they to add crappy rsn's and fx in the low tier they would be forced to pass that cost on, given what fox is asking, that's likely to be substantial.
Do any providers bills decrease automatically when something gets dropped?
Thats a pretty weak argument when you're talking about 5 bucks.
Similar threads
- Locked
