Derwin0 said:
Considering that they are anti-gay I would say there is a chance their study is biased.
Will Dish ever have LOGO?
- Thread starter maogdamian
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 115
- Views 9K
- Status
Considering that they are anti-gay I would say there is a chance their study is biased.
kb7oeb said:
Ya Think?
If it were up to Focus on the Family, Family Research Institute, and the like we wouldn't exist at all.
M Sparks said:
Munghwa Broadcasting Corporation. It's a Korean channel, one of the major Korean networks over in Korea and the big way we can get Charlie to get AznTV. Like the rest of you said about channel packages, well AznTV would be the less desirable one and MBC would be the most if Charlie wants to KEEP Korean Americans subscribed to Dish.
And the 10% number was made by a biased person as well. your point?kb7oeb said:
Either way, if I pick out 100 people I know, no where near 10 of them are gay. Might be different in NY, LA, or SF, but not in most of the U.S.
Either way, unrelated to the numbers game, is that strickly gay networks do not do well. Look at Pride in Canada which is more "gay-friendly". It floundered, and had to resort to porn to get some viewing. That didn't work and now it's numbers are in the tank and they've rebranded.
The reason Dish does not carry Logo is because they crunched the numbers and show it doesn't work.
Btw, 3 cents/viewer goes for ALL the subscribers in a particular AT level. That turns it into real money. Plus the cost to upload the channel. The use of bandwidth. These are all real costs. The question then becomes, will Dish make that money back by increased viewership due to the channel, or Dish slotted commercials on the channel? Evidently the accountants said no.
Dish wants to make money, not lose it.
I'm actually dropping Dish in 1 week to get DirecTV because of LOGO. I've waited for them to add it, I've contacted customer service only to get the standard canned answers.
Heck, LOGO is even going to be available on Sky Mexico and Sky Brazil beginning November 4th. Yet I can't get it through Dish here in the US.
I guess my "everything pack" subscription dollars will go to DirecTV instead.
Heck, LOGO is even going to be available on Sky Mexico and Sky Brazil beginning November 4th. Yet I can't get it through Dish here in the US.
I guess my "everything pack" subscription dollars will go to DirecTV instead.
M Sparky how do you get your informantion that Logo is only 3 cent a month are you in a position to offer this contract to Dish.
Personally I don't care about 80% of the channels I get and would love to see the day when all cannels are al carte, Lets face the facts most people watch the same 5 channels 90% of the time.
Personally I don't care about 80% of the channels I get and would love to see the day when all cannels are al carte, Lets face the facts most people watch the same 5 channels 90% of the time.
rowemance said:
No, I'm simply capable of doing simple research. See, they have this thing now called Google...
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117925433?categoryid=14&cs=1
rowemance said:
Agreed, but simple economics makes this unrealistic. Actually, it would probably work well for me, because the first channels I would drop happen to be among the most expensive. But on a whole, the industry would suffer.
It's bundling that made so much choice possible. I do believe it's gotten out of control a bit. I would like to see things bundled more like Bell ExpressVu does. You still have to take a basic, 50 channel package. But the more niche channels are bundled in groups of 6-10 in different interests. So instead of having a AT180 package, you'd have a bundle of NickToons, Boomerang, ect...a bundle of NFL, CSTV, FSC, ect... a bundle of VH1Classic, IMF, Fuse, ect. Supposedly, FIOS works this way.
As the OLN debacle has shown, this will probably never happen...
Derwin0 said:
The key words there are "I know". The less comfortable a person is with gays, the less likely they are to be amongst them.
Let's say you're Fred Phelps- the guy who picketed Matthew Shepard's funeral. To him, the only gay men that he knows are caracatures on TV, or dead. Any gays that encounter him are going to hide their sexuality out of fear. Total gay population? 0.0001%
Then, say you're an uptight, conservative midwesterner. You might know a few people at work that are out of the closet, but you certainly aren't going to make friends with them. There are probably other gays at work, but they don't feel comfortable being themselves around you. You would never do anything genuinely harmful to them, but they don't want to be the butt of your jokes. Total gay population? 1%-2%
Then, say you're a politically-middle-of-the-road, open-minded person in an average college town. (Me). Gays at work are comfortable around you. You have a few gay friends, but you don't run in the same crowds. Now we're at 5%-10%.
Then, say you're a artsy ultra-liberal in a big city. You tend to run in the same crowds, and maybe surround yourself with gay friends because it's "cool" Bang- we're at 15%-20%.
Finally, say you're gay. REALLY gay and REALLY out. You're in ACT-UP (does that still exist?). You live in The Village and go to gay clubs every night. You are Fred Phelp's worst nightmare. The guy that plays "Jack" thinks you're a "scoche too over the top". Well, now practically EVERYBODY you know is gay. Easily over 60%!
I hereby renounce my 10% figure. It's probably overinflated, and someone who seems to know better quoted a more reasonable figure.
But 1%? What a load of crap.
You evil sinners ARE trying to destroy the sanctity of marriage in America.Slamminc11 said:Ya Think?
If it were up to Focus on the Family, Family Research Institute, and the like we wouldn't exist at all.
If gays get married, it will make a mockery of all hetorosexual marriages, including the 50-something percent ending in divorce, and especially the ones taken place in Vegas, officiated by Elvis impersonators.
Why don't you go back to France, where you all came from! Now, I've gotta get back to my American Heterosexual sports entertainment, WWE. There's nothing to reaffirm my heterosexuality like watching a bunch of muscular, oiled men squeezing another guy's head between their thighs.
GaryPen said:
Evil sinners? Yes, because we all go around worshipping the devil and make sure we don't be anything close to God. Where has God told you himself that all gay people are evil sinners?
Are you saying that all the celebrities that get married and then divorce 4 months later are making a mockery of marriage, better yet, what about everyone who gets a divorce....they must make a mockery of marriage according to your theory. I'm sure you know some people who have gotten a divorce....do you go up to them and tell them they make a mockery of marriage?
CPanther95 said:
If I did I'm sorry. I just hate when people say things like that, joke or no joke.
- Status
