OFFICIAL DISH / FOX ORDEAL DISCUSSION THREAD

vmike

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
Feb 15, 2008
31
0
KS
I had though this list would be much larger, but according to wiki, these are the fox O&O stations---
WDAF officially became a Fox owned and operated station in 1997, following Fox's purchase of the New World station group. WDAF was the only O&O of any major network in the Kansas City market.

WDAF channel 4 Kansas City
 

mdram

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 24, 2005
4,015
760
Md

llzel

SatelliteGuys Pro
Nov 14, 2007
383
0
St Louis
This all started with losing the VOOM channels with me. All indications are the Dish isn't the one that is playing fair.
With that said, I'm waiting to see what happens with Uverse negotiations with HGTV, FOOD, etc, and if that gets resolved by 11/1 then I'm switching, unless Dish resolves their issues. If Uverse doesn't solve their problem then I'm going to direct.

I'm upset that I can't watch FX national Geo and MY BLUES HOCKEY!
 

Ghpr13

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 1, 2009
3,212
0
Louisville, KY
That certainly could happen, but I doubt it. What I do think will happen is that those that stick around for awhile will get used to what isn't there and find they don't actually care about it at all. That is the one thing Fox doesn't want to happen as it takes away their leverage.

I've not been greatly affected by all this. I never watch the RSNs and only a couple things on FX that I can get via Hulu just fine. And the rest of Fox's channels aren't of any interest to me. The local Fox is not an O&O, so I can still get them, but even if it was, I'd just get them via OTA like I do most of the time now.
Iparsons21,
I agree with what you say, except that when it comes to missing sports programming, people tend to get really upset and want their sports, making them a bit irrational, (as seen in this thread.)

I, myself, am in the same boat as you, except for SOA, I'm not really effected.

Well geeze, gosh dolly, dang garn. Might be like it was when I grew up. OH, THE HORROR!!! :rolleyes:
KAB,
How will we survive with only about 15 channels available? Do you think someone will invent a patch that we can put on our arm to help us with the withdrawal symptoms?:eek:

this is how dish negotiates. they walk away and hope the other side will come to them. its what i was told they did to my locals. ive been blaming the local station for years, now im beginning to wonder
mdram,
Not disagreeing with you, but just thought you might want to take a look at this:
Michael's Insight

Ghpr13:)
 

mdram

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 24, 2005
4,015
760
Md
so basically kerry wants to force fox to let cable vision carry them until they reach a contract agreement?
will there be a time limit? what if an agreement is never reached?
its not fair to fox. they will be giving away thier product to free.

goverment regulation is never the answer. deregulation and compitition is
if cablevision doesnt want to pay, customers can switch to another provider that does carry what they want
why do we only have the choice of 1 cable company in most areas?
 

osu1991

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,837
2,284
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Iparsons21,
I agree with what you say, except that when it comes to missing sports programming, people tend to get really upset and want their sports, making them a bit irrational, (as seen in this thread.)
The regular programming is available elsewhere via the web or dvd in a few months. With sports, it is exclusive to that channel and for the most part not available via the web. For Oklahoma sports fans, we get some relief as OU and OSU football are both on ABC this week, but next week we will be out of luck again; just like last week, with games being on FSN.
 
Last edited:

osu1991

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,837
2,284
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
so basically kerry wants to force fox to let cable vision carry them until they reach a contract agreement?
will there be a time limit? what if an agreement is never reached?
its not fair to fox. they will be giving away thier product to free.

goverment regulation is never the answer. deregulation and compitition is
if cablevision doesnt want to pay, customers can switch to another provider that does carry what they want
why do we only have the choice of 1 cable company in most areas?
Fox already gives their programming away for free via OTA and on spectrum that was given to them by us the consumers via the government. Not to mention the absurd amount of commercials that are in that programming nowadays, that we have to watch. It costs cablevision money to supply Fox's signal to consumers that choose not use OTA methods for reception. In my opinion Fox should be paying the distributors for expanding the reach of their viewership. There shouldn't be a cost for basic OTA networks distribution via cable or satellite in my opinion.
 

lobosrul

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
Sep 29, 2010
25
0
Albuquerque, NM
5 bucks per sub per month? Not sure I can buy that, but if its true, why didnt the providers balk at that too? I mean I'm sure some did did but you didn't hear so much fuss over it.
Its apprx $4.50 or $5 a month for ESPN and ESPN2 together. I've seen a couple of websites publishing the average monthly cost for cable channels. Add ESPN CL, ESPNU and ESPN News and its well over $5/month. ESPN is by far the most expensive basic cable channel.

Why didn't providers balk over it? Because its been a gradual increase year after year going back to about when ESPN got Sunday Night Football in the late 80's. ESPN became a must have channel for any sports fan. Then DBS came along and if a cable system dropped it they were risking a mass migration to D* or E*.

Whats really troubling is that if New Corps gets $2 or $2.50 a month just for FOX, how long will it be until were all paying the same for CBS, NBC, and ABC? We could be paying $10/month just for freely available channels. And whats really terrible is they'll be forced on every sub, even if you can pick them up OTA.
 

dms

Active SatelliteGuys Member
Pub Member / Supporter
Dec 7, 2005
23
0
Fox already gives their programming away for free via OTA and on spectrum that was given to them by us the consumers via the government. Not to mention the absurd amount of commercials that are in that programming nowadays, that we have to watch. It costs cablevision money to supply Fox's signal to consumers that choose not use OTA methods for reception. In my opinion Fox should be paying the distributors for expanding the reach of their viewership. There shouldn't be a cost for basic OTA networks distribution via cable or satellite in my opinion.
I concur regarding the ota signals ... sports programming does cost but it is also in an additional tier, so if that price goes up then the price of that tier should go up accordingly, but pricing should be based on the number of subscribers in that regional market that are not blacked out not on the total subscribers to that tier !!!!!
 

jonesy99

SatelliteGuys Guru
Jul 24, 2010
129
0
champlain valley ny
Its apprx $4.50 or $5 a month for ESPN and ESPN2 together. I've seen a couple of websites publishing the average monthly cost for cable channels. Add ESPN CL, ESPNU and ESPN News and its well over $5/month. ESPN is by far the most expensive basic cable channel.

Why didn't providers balk over it? Because its been a gradual increase year after year going back to about when ESPN got Sunday Night Football in the late 80's. ESPN became a must have channel for any sports fan. Then DBS came along and if a cable system dropped it they were risking a mass migration to D* or E*.

Whats really troubling is that if New Corps gets $2 or $2.50 a month just for FOX, how long will it be until were all paying the same for CBS, NBC, and ABC? We could be paying $10/month just for freely available channels. And whats really terrible is they'll be forced on every sub, even if you can pick them up OTA.
I dunno, I've been saying all along that it doesnt stop with dish or fox. Myself I do fully 90 percent of tv watching ota, could be it's time to get back to basics if that gets out of hand.
All of this greed runs counter to the state of the economy, with everything going up but your check, most people I know are looking to save, not spend more for Bullsh!t channels. Even if dish caves,m their still going to lose subs because a lot of them have had enough or just plain cant afford another damn fool price increase.
 
Last edited:

mdram

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 24, 2005
4,015
760
Md
Its apprx $4.50 or $5 a month for ESPN and ESPN2 together. I've seen a couple of websites publishing the average monthly cost for cable channels. Add ESPN CL, ESPNU and ESPN News and its well over $5/month. ESPN is by far the most expensive basic cable channel.

Why didn't providers balk over it? Because its been a gradual increase year after year going back to about when ESPN got Sunday Night Football in the late 80's. ESPN became a must have channel for any sports fan. Then DBS came along and if a cable system dropped it they were risking a mass migration to D* or E*.

Whats really troubling is that if New Corps gets $2 or $2.50 a month just for FOX, how long will it be until were all paying the same for CBS, NBC, and ABC? We could be paying $10/month just for freely available channels. And whats really terrible is they'll be forced on every sub, even if you can pick them up OTA.
are they asking for a increase in fee or inclusion in a lower tier?
if its the latter the only people affected would be those with the low tier.
it could also be a combination (ex 10% increase in fee and 40% increase in viewers by inclusion in lowest tier)

until the actual contract is leaked we dont have a 100% accurate view, its all speculation

for all i care put em in the lower tier, i never get that anyway so it wont affect me as much
(this is sarcasm)

but really we need facts, show us the paperwork
 

Geronimo

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 9, 2003
11,835
1,434
so basically kerry wants to force fox to let cable vision carry them until they reach a contract agreement?
will there be a time limit? what if an agreement is never reached?
its not fair to fox. they will be giving away thier product to free.

goverment regulation is never the answer. deregulation and compitition is
if cablevision doesnt want to pay, customers can switch to another provider that does carry what they want
why do we only have the choice of 1 cable company in most areas?
Sen. Kerry is not advocating carriage at the old rate forever. Similarly he is not advocating that Fox or anyone else provide it for free.
 

lobosrul

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
Sep 29, 2010
25
0
Albuquerque, NM
are they asking for a increase in fee or inclusion in a lower tier?
if its the latter the only people affected would be those with the low tier.
it could also be a combination (ex 10% increase in fee and 40% increase in viewers by inclusion in lowest tier)

until the actual contract is leaked we dont have a 100% accurate view, its all speculation

for all i care put em in the lower tier, i never get that anyway so it wont affect me as much
(this is sarcasm)

but really we need facts, show us the paperwork
If you mean ESPN, yes Disney requires it to be in the lowest tier. FOX, the broadcast channel, is on the lowest tier of Dish already. You used to be able to choose whether to pay for locals, but not anymore, which is quite suspicious to me. Also, FX and FX News are (formerly for FX) on Dish's lowest tier. However, they're not available on any of the HD only packages, which is very suspicious IMO.
 

whitewolf8214

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
May 13, 2004
40,314
780
Space
This all started with losing the VOOM channels with me. All indications are the Dish isn't the one that is playing fair.
With that said, I'm waiting to see what happens with Uverse negotiations with HGTV, FOOD, etc, and if that gets resolved by 11/1 then I'm switching, unless Dish resolves their issues. If Uverse doesn't solve their problem then I'm going to direct.

I'm upset that I can't watch FX national Geo and MY BLUES HOCKEY!
AGREE ON NOT BEING ABLE TO WATCH MY BLUES GAMES OR MISSOURI TIGEERS GAMES ON FOX SPORTS MIDWEST.I GOT TIRED OF DISH PROGRAMMING DISPUTES WITH THEM LOSING VOOM DISNEY HD CHANNELS AND STILL NO WORD ON THEM AND NOW FOX SPORTS MIDWEST 2 YEARS IN A ROW NOT BEING ABLE TO WATCH MY BLUES I SWITCHED TO DIRECT TV AND STILL HAVE DISH UNTIL MY CONTRACT WITH THEM IS UP AND HAVE THE SMALLEST PACKAGE AVAILABLE AND THEY ASKED WHY IM GOING TO THE SMALLEST PACKAGE AND I TOLD THEM ALL THE CHANNELS THEY ARE LOSING TO DISPUTES AND MENTIONED THEM ALL THEY I SAID BEFORE
 

KAB

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 20, 2005
20,350
3,684
Indy
AGREE ON NOT BEING ABLE TO WATCH MY BLUES GAMES OR MISSOURI TIGEERS GAMES ON FOX SPORTS MIDWEST.I GOT TIRED OF DISH PROGRAMMING DISPUTES WITH THEM LOSING VOOM DISNEY HD CHANNELS AND STILL NO WORD ON THEM AND NOW FOX SPORTS MIDWEST 2 YEARS IN A ROW NOT BEING ABLE TO WATCH MY BLUES I SWITCHED TO DIRECT TV AND STILL HAVE DISH UNTIL MY CONTRACT WITH THEM IS UP AND HAVE THE SMALLEST PACKAGE AVAILABLE AND THEY ASKED WHY IM GOING TO THE SMALLEST PACKAGE AND I TOLD THEM ALL THE CHANNELS THEY ARE LOSING TO DISPUTES AND MENTIONED THEM ALL THEY I SAID BEFORE
Now this thread has turned into a shouting contest.
 

slocoma

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 22, 2004
156
0
Is there a thread or info posted somewhere on what could happen on Nov. 1 if no agreement between Dish and Fox is made. Like what channels are effected and which local affiliates would be dropped?
 

BobMurdoch

Playing XBoxOne/Supporter
Supporting Founder
Sep 12, 2003
5,767
188
Brielle, NJ
If FOX wants to use the public airwaves for free, then they should be expected to provide the same to the cable and SAT companies for free as well. If they don't want to provide the programming for free, then they are free to create FX2 and put all their valuable content there and charge whatever they think they can get away with. I never understood why we all just accepted that government supplied airwaves are free to some and not to others. If they don't like the arrangement they can surrender the airwaves.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top