# The Walt Disney Company and DISH Network Sign Groundbreaking Long-Term, Wide-Ranging Agreement



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

*The Walt Disney Company and DISH Network Sign Groundbreaking Long-Term, Wide-Ranging Agreement*


New Multi-Year Deal to Deliver Best in Sports, News and Entertainment to DISH Customers, In and Out of the Home
DISH First to Secure Rights to Carry Disney, ABC and ESPN Networks for Over-the-Top, Personal Subscription Service
Landmark Deal Adds Disney Junior, Fusion, Longhorn Network, ESPN3, To-Be-Launched SEC ESPN Network and the Full Suite of Authenticated WATCH Services
Expanded Video-On-Demand Content Available to DISH Customers at Home, On-The-Go
Dismissal of All Legal Proceedings Between the Two Companies
ENGLEWOOD, Colo. & BURBANK, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- The Walt Disney Company (NYSEIS) and DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQISH) today announced a groundbreaking, long-term, wide-ranging distribution agreement that will provide DISH customers with access to Disney's robust line-up of top quality sports, news and entertainment content across televisions, computers, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles and connected devices.

The renewal agreement supports the companies' mutual goal to deliver the best video content to customers across multiple platforms by strengthening the value of the multichannel video subscription today and by creating the opportunity for DISH to deliver new services in the future.

The extensive and expanded distribution agreement grants DISH rights to stream cleared linear and video-on-demand content from the ABC-owned broadcast stations, ABC Family, Disney Channel, ESPN and ESPN2, as part of an Internet delivered, IP-based multichannel offering.

Additionally, for the first time, DISH customers will be able to access Disney's authenticated live and video-on-demand products, including Watch ESPN, WATCH Disney, WATCH ABC Family and WATCH ABC using Internet devices in the home and on the go.

The agreement will result in dismissal of all pending litigation between the two companies, including disputes over PrimeTime Anytime and AutoHop. As part of the accord, DISH will disable AutoHop functionality for ABC content within the C3 ratings window. The deal also provides a structure for other advertising models as the market evolves, including dynamic ad insertion, advertising on mobile devices and extended advertising measurement periods.

"The creation of this agreement has really been about predicting the future of television with a visionary and forward-leaning partner," said Joseph P. Clayton, DISH Chief Executive Officer and President. "Not only will the exceptional Disney, ABC, ESPN entertainment portfolio continue to delight our customers today, but we have a model from which to deliver exciting new services tomorrow."

Anne Sweeney, Co-Chairman, Disney Media Networks, and President, Disney/ABC Television Group, said, "We knew early on we had a responsibility with this deal to not only do what was best for our business, but to also position our industry for future growth. After months of hard work and out-of-the box thinking on both sides, led by Bob Iger and Charlie Ergen, this agreement, one of the most complex and comprehensive we've ever undertaken, achieves just that. Not only were innovative business solutions reached on complicated current issues, we also planned for the evolution of our industry."

Added John Skipper, President, ESPN & Co-Chairman, Disney Media Networks: "We worked with DISH to smartly address the future of the multi-screen world on several levels. Together, we are adding value to the traditional video subscription by making great content accessible across platforms and delivering new products, including our WatchESPN authenticated networks, the highly anticipated launch of the SEC ESPN Network, expanded distribution for Longhorn Network, and a reimagined ESPN Classic video-on-demand channel. At the same time, we are creating opportunities to add new subscribers and introducing the value of a multichannel subscription to a small subset of broadband-only consumers."

"This agreement allows us to bring more innovation to the customer experience, including new marketing, packaging and delivery options," said Dave Shull, DISH Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer. "This paves the way for more customer choice and control over the viewing experience."

DISH will make available Disney Junior, Fusion, ESPN Goal Line, ESPN Buzzer Beater, as well as Longhorn Network and the upcoming SEC ESPN Network upon its launch. In addition, DISH, ESPN and ESPN Deportes customers will have access to the live and video-on-demand channel ESPN3.

As part of the agreement, DISH will launch ESPNEWS, ESPNU, Disney Channel and ABC Family in high definition. ESPN Classic will be reintroduced as a video-on-demand channel.
The extensive and expanded rights package gives DISH customers access to video-on-demand content at home, on computers and on-the-go through the DISH Anywhere app for tablets and smartphones, including:

ABC On Demand, a fast forward-disabled service that features a selection of top-rated primetime entertainment programming, including episodes of such popular current ABC shows as "Scandal," "Castle," "Grey's Anatomy," "Once Upon A Time" and "Revenge."
ABC Family On Demand, which features a variety of top-rated full episodes, refreshed monthly, from such popular millennial favorites as "The Fosters," "Switched at Birth," "Baby Daddy" and "Melissa & Joey."
Disney-branded On Demand offerings, including Disney Channel On Demand, Disney Junior On Demand, and Disney XD On Demand. Refreshed each month, the Disney Channel On Demand offering will include episodes from such series as "Mickey Mouse Clubhouse," "Sofia the First" and "Jake and the Never Land Pirates" for preschoolers, as well as variety of episodes from "A.N.T. Farm," "Liv and Maddie," "Jessie" and other popular series for older kids. Select episodes featured on Disney Channel On Demand will be available in innovative new offerings, such as playlists and monthly programming blocks, in addition to a number of episodes available in multiple languages. A variety of Disney Channel Original Movies will also be available. Disney XD On Demand features a selection of episodes from such series as the Emmy Award-winning animated hit "Phineas and Ferb," "Pair of Kings" and "Kickin' It."
Expanded On Demand content from ESPN, including content from ESPN Deportes and ESPN's award-winning original content from ESPN Films.
The companies also renewed carriage agreement for ABC's eight owned local stations, including WABC-TV in New York City, KABC-TV in Los Angeles, WLS-TV in Chicago, WPVI-TV in Philadelphia, KGO-TV in San Francisco, WTVD-TV in Raleigh-Durham, KTRK-TV in Houston, and KFSN-TV in Fresno.

*About DISH*
DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQISH), through its subsidiary DISH Network L.L.C., provides approximately 14.057 million satellite TV customers, as of Dec. 31, 2013, with the highest quality programming and technology with the most choices at the best value. Subscribers enjoy a high definition line-up with more than 200 national HD channels, the most international channels, and award-winning HD and DVR technology. DISH Network Corporation is a Fortune 200 company. Visit www.dish.com.

*About The Walt Disney Company*
The Walt Disney Company, together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, is a leading diversified international entertainment and media enterprise with five business segments: media networks, parks and resorts, studio entertainment, consumer products and interactive. Disney is a Dow 30 company and had annual revenues of $45 billion in its Fiscal Year 2013.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Curiously... DisneyXD is not mentioned... and that is the other Disney HD feed we lost a few years ago. Hopefully this was just an omission from the press release.

_edit: _Also... no word on when those HD feeds or already existing channels or the WatchESPN access will happen. They say "when launched" for those new channel carriage agreements... but no official timeline for the stuff that already exists.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> "We knew early on we had a responsibility with this deal to not only do what was best for our business, but to also position our industry for future growth.


Yeah, thanks for thinking about US, the people that pay your bills.


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

what about disneyXD and disney junior in HD


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

bluegras said:


> what about disneyXD and disney junior in HD


See above - and be patient!


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

Three days? Maybe Dish will take autohop all the way through Disney's offerings now...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

RasputinAXP said:


> Three days? Maybe Dish will take autohop all the way through Disney's offerings now...


I'll just wait until Day 4 ... or not watch ABC content. Everyone's taste is personal, but looking through the PTAT shows recorded from ABC on my Hopper "Last Man Standing" is the only one I see of interest (although I recognize other popular shows in the list). NASCAR is the only thing I watch regularly on ABC/ESPN - and this is the mouse's last year. (AutoHop doesn't work on sports anyways.)

The "we want the same deal" agreements are likely ... and if it will get the other three major networks off of DISH's back perhaps a three day no hop will become "normal". I guess we'll just go back to using our remotes the old fashioned way (or wait to Day 4).

ESPN Classic is occasionally used for sports overflows ... so seeing it convert to an "on demand only" channel removes a place where programs can start while something else runs over. Perhaps ESPN/DISH will need to use an alt channel for those occasions.

At least we're not losing channels and having other carriers laugh at DISH. Now it is their turn to get a deal like the one DISH has done.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

The kicker is STILL the tie between a PayTV subscription somewhere and web streaming. That has to end. There is no reason at all someone without PayTV should not be able to view those shows on the web. Disney is still tied to old school thought.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> The kicker is STILL the tie between a PayTV subscription somewhere and web streaming. That has to end. There is no reason at all someone without PayTV should not be able to view those shows on the web. Disney is still tied to old school thought.


Sure there is a reason, billions of reasons.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> The kicker is STILL the tie between a PayTV subscription somewhere and web streaming. That has to end. There is no reason at all someone without PayTV should not be able to view those shows on the web. Disney is still tied to old school thought.


Really? That's the only way id ever consider offering web content. It's the only way they will survive unless they decide to allow all their stations to be sold a la cart and that's not happening anytime soon.

If try allow people to stream all their shows without a provider they will lose billions in revenue and not be able to afford all the sports contracts and to keep so many channels. It's just not going to happen any time soon not should it really.

I'm much more for more packages with smaller numbers of channels as a way to heads a little towards a la cart without going all the way there.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

At least one thing I always suspected appears to have been confirmed... that being that Dish really wanted to use AutoHop as a negotiation ploy moreso than being a feature for the customers... I don't mind this, it is smart business... but I always ignored the "we are doing it because viewers have the right" angle to be smoke and mirrors... I always suspected they really wanted to use it as a wedge in contract negotiations with channels.

It sounds like "soon" Dish customers will be getting a lot of cool stuff and channels. Here's hoping the existing channels show up sooner rather than later!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> At least one thing I always suspected appears to have been confirmed... that being that Dish really wanted to use AutoHop as a negotiation ploy moreso than being a feature for the customers... I don't mind this, it is smart business... but I always ignored the "we are doing it because viewers have the right" angle to be smoke and mirrors... I always suspected they really wanted to use it as a wedge in contract negotiations with channels.


It certainly has turned into something they are willing to give up ... for a price. Hopefully if they trade away AutoHop to the other networks the customers will get something worth losing AutoHop for.



Stewart Vernon said:


> It sounds like "soon" Dish customers will be getting a lot of cool stuff and channels. Here's hoping the existing channels show up sooner rather than later!


The cool stuff is cool ... a lot of streaming content tied to DISH accounts. The four announced HD channels are in AT120 so nearly every customer gets the channel (and the online content). And two new RSNs isn't bad for the people who want them. It seems like a good deal.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Great news! Now, will Disney show up on the list of providers with Roku? Right now only cable companies are listed. Direct isn't either. I tried to setup Disney on the Roku using my sub to Charter Cable that I use for high speed and phone. I got it, but I cannot view much. It denies me access to most programs. It will be nice to have everything back in HD. Will the 211k work for "On Demand" services? There are tons of channels on the Roku that has "On Demand".


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

Satelliteracer said:


> Sure there is a reason, billions of reasons.


I'm glad you wrote that. There are some people who act like every provider of cable-television programming just sees a channels lineup &#8230; _happen_.


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

> DISH will make available Disney Junior, Fusion, ESPN Goal Line, ESPN Buzzer Beater, as well as Longhorn Network and the upcoming SEC ESPN Network upon its launch. In addition, DISH, ESPN and ESPN Deportes customers will have access to the live and video-on-demand channel ESPN3.


^ This part is great. It should light a fire under the collective a**es of the DirecTV people to deliver "Fusion, ESPN Goal Line, ESPN Buzzer Beater, as well as Longhorn Network and the upcoming SEC ESPN Network." (That's not to say _when_. But that, from the position of remaining a competitive business, it _must_ &#8230; happen from DirecTV. )


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

inkahauts said:


> Really? That's the only way id ever consider offering web content. It's the only way they will survive unless they decide to allow all their stations to be sold a la cart and that's not happening anytime soon.
> 
> If try allow people to stream all their shows without a provider they will lose billions in revenue and not be able to afford all the sports contracts and to keep so many channels. It's just not going to happen any time soon not should it really.


Equal Access would increase their customer base. More people would be able to subscribe. People that don't have access to, or can't afford a full PayTV service.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

I am most excited about ESPN3. This dramatically raises the value of my AT120 package for me.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> Equal Access would increase their customer base. More people would be able to subscribe. People that don't have access to, or can't afford a full PayTV service.


They would be giving up people who can afford a full PayTV service and choose not to. Don't forget that these are multi-billion dollar companies. They know how to maximize their profit. If there was more money in allowing people to drop PayTV carriers and buy direct they would be doing it. Only the small players who are scrounging for every dollar they can get would undercut their big PayTV contracts.


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

Great deal for DISH. I hope Directv doesn't take too long to get a similar deal.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

When does it start?


----------



## rajmarie (Apr 3, 2012)

Finally. Disney is one of the most watched channels for my kids and having it on-demand is bonus. And finally access to espn3.

Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

APB101 said:


> ^ This part is great. It should light a fire under the collective a**es of the DirecTV people to deliver "Fusion, ESPN Goal Line, ESPN Buzzer Beater, as well as Longhorn Network and the upcoming SEC ESPN Network." (That's not to say _when_. But that, from the position of remaining a competitive business, it _must_ &#8230; happen from DirecTV. )


Deals are up when they are up and Dish's deal was up before DIRECTV's. Based on the numbers, DIRECTV has been more than competitive as they continue to add customers while cable has not and even Dish has struggled at times. DIRECTV will have their turn at the table as well.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> Equal Access would increase their customer base. More people would be able to subscribe. People that don't have access to, or can't afford a full PayTV service.


Actually, no. Pretty simple math for Disney on this.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

> As part of the accord, DISH will disable AutoHop functionality for ABC content within the C3 ratings window.


Let me put this in what it means to me. It pretty much eliminates my interest in a Hopper to replace my 722 and 612 combination.

I don't want to use a system that won't allow me to watch a show until the fourth day after it aired. Yes ABC content could be recorded on one of the other two Hopper internal tuners. But in the long term we all know that CBS, NBC and Fox will want this deal.

Some shows are really time sensitive. For instance, on ABC "Dancing with the Stars" will be starting up soon replacing "The Bachelor", both of which are prime "around the water cooler" discussion subjects and are immediate internet "news" headlines. Every network has one or more of these, and sometimes, like on Monday, two are opposite each other.

The real problem here is that this wasn't negotiated as a separate package so I could opt out of paying for a Disney/ABC/ESPN conglomerate package. With that option, we'd get to know just how important to people it is to make this conglomerate wealthier.

As I think about it, this deal may mean my leaving Dish at some point because of equipment choices which really shocks me.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

phrelin said:


> Let me put this in what it means to me. It pretty much eliminates my interest in a Hopper to replace my 722 and 612 combination.
> 
> I don't want to use a system that won't allow me to watch a show until the fourth day after it aired. Yes ABC content could be recorded on one of the other two Hopper internal tuners. But in the long term we all know that CBS, NBC and Fox will want this deal.


To be clear, in case you misunderstood the press release, you will be able to watch the DVRed ABC show immediately.. it's just the AutoHop commercial skipping that will be delayed by 3 days. You can watch the DVRed content the night it is recorded and skip the commercials manually just like on any other channel.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

*DISH to Provide SEC Network Nationally for August 14, 2014 Debut*

ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- ESPN and DISH (NASDAQ: DISH) have reached an agreement for nationwide carriage of the SEC Network on DISH when the multiplatform network launches, August 14, 2014. The deal is part of a larger comprehensive long-term distribution agreement announced by DISH and the Walt Disney Company (NYSE: DIS). DISH is the SEC Network's first nationwide television provider.

The channel will be available to fans and followers of the Southeastern Conference in DISH's America's Top 120+ and higher packages across the country. DISH subscribers will also have authenticated access to additional live events scheduled for the SEC Network's digital platform, with the ability to watch SEC Network content anytime, anywhere on their television, computer, tablet or mobile device.

"Few fan bases rival the passion and loyalty of the SEC, and DISH is proud to be the first nationwide television provider of the SEC Network," said Dave Shull, DISH executive vice president and chief commercial officer. "We strive to give our customers and consumers what they want, and there's no better place for the college sports fan than with DISH."

The SEC Network and its accompanying digital platform will air more than 1,000 live events in its first year, including at least 45 exclusive SEC football games, more than 100 men's basketball games, 60 women's basketball games, 75 baseball games, 50 softball games and events across all of the SEC's 21 sports. The network will be an all-access pass to nationally competitive events, news and information, expert analysis, classic games and in-depth features on the most storied conference in college athletics.

SEC Commissioner Mike Slive said, "This is an important day for the SEC Network. We are pleased to welcome DISH to the SEC family. More than five months ahead of the network launch, it's exciting to have a national distributor and our first satellite provider onboard. Now SEC fans from across the country have another way to show their conference pride and sign up to get the SEC Network."

"This agreement provides DISH customers nationwide with access to every SEC college football game this fall and an unparalleled fan experience of more SEC content than ever before," said Justin Connolly, ESPN senior vice president, college networks.

Details on the SEC Network's channel number will be available on www.dish.com at a later date. Financial terms and other details of the agreement were not disclosed.

*About DISH*
DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH), through its subsidiary DISH Network L.L.C., provides approximately 14.057 million satellite TV customers, as of Dec. 31, 2013, with the highest quality programming and technology with the most choices at the best value. Subscribers enjoy a high definition line-up with more than 200 national HD channels, the most international channels, and award-winning HD and DVR technology. DISH Network Corporation is a Fortune 200 company. Visit www.dish.com.

*About SEC Network*
The Southeastern Conference and ESPN have signed a 20-year agreement through 2034 to create and operate a multiplatform network which will launch in August 2014. The new network and its accompanying digital platform will air SEC content 24/7 including more than 1,000 events in its first year. The network will televise approximately 45 SEC football games, more than 100 men's basketball games, 60 women's basketball games, 75 baseball games, and events from across the SEC's 21 sports annually. Programming will also include studio shows, original content such as _SEC Storied_, spring football games, signing day and pro days coverage. Hundreds of additional live events from various sports will be offered exclusively on the digital platform. AT&T U-Verse, DISH and National Rural Telecommunications cooperative (NRTC) have agreed to carry the SEC Network.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

*DISH to Deliver Longhorn Network to Texas Fans Nationwide*

ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- ESPN and DISH (NASDAQ: DISH) have reached an agreement for DISH to carry Longhorn Network (LHN), the 24/7 channel devoted to the University of Texas, within the state of Texas and nationwide. The deal is part of a larger announcement made by DISH and the Walt Disney Company (NYSE: DIS).

The channel will be available to DISH customers in the America's Top 120+ and higher packages nationwide later this summer. In addition, DISH customers who receive LHN as part of their satellite service will be able to enjoy the network's exclusive live events and content on their computers and iOS devices - at home or on-the-go.

"DISH is the best place for college sports fans to follow the teams they love," said Dave Shull, DISH executive vice president and chief commercial officer. "ESPN has a long tradition of delivering the best in sports, and we are proud to be the first nationwide television provider of the Longhorn Network."

LHN launched in 2011 and televises more than 175 athletic events in 20 sports annually, as well as academic and cultural programming from in and around the greater Austin community. DISH customers have access to exclusive Longhorn games, Texas coaches' shows, dedicated pre- and post-game football coverage, basketball and baseball games, nightly news/information programming, in-depth features and all-access content and programs covering the history and pride of Texas athletics.

"We are excited to have DISH join the growing list of LHN providers," said University of Texas Men's Athletics Director Steve Patterson. "UT fans nationwide will now have access to this award-winning network that does such a great job in covering our university's sports and academics programs. As we have said from day one, this is a long-term commitment and we are very proud of our partnership with ESPN."
"This agreement with DISH presents a tremendous opportunity to bring Longhorn Network's robust content offerings to Texas fans across the country," said ESPN's Justin Connolly, senior vice president, college networks.

The deal between ESPN and DISH more than doubles LHN's national distribution. Details on LHN's channel number will be available on www.dish.com at a later date. Financial terms and other details of the agreement were not disclosed.

*About DISH*
DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH), through its subsidiary DISH Network L.L.C., provides approximately 14.057 million satellite TV customers, as of Dec. 31, 2013, with the highest quality programming and technology with the most choices at the best value. Subscribers enjoy a high definition line-up with more than 200 national HD channels, the most international channels, and award-winning HD and DVR technology. DISH Network Corporation is a Fortune 200 company. Visit www.dish.com.

*About Longhorn Network*
ESPN has a 20-year agreement to own and operate a year-round, 24-hour network dedicated to Texas athletics in partnership with UT and IMG College. Longhorn Network offers a variety of content, highlighted by more than 175 exclusive events annually from 20 sports, original series and studio shows, historical programming and academic and cultural happenings.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I could be wrong... but these two press releases today sure make it sound like Longhorn Network and SEC Network will be in AT120+ and above for everyone... as opposed to being in MultiSport like Pac12, and BigTen.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

phrelin said:


> I don't want to use a system that won't allow me to watch a show until the fourth day after it aired. Yes ABC content could be recorded on one of the other two Hopper internal tuners. But in the long term we all know that CBS, NBC and Fox will want this deal.
> 
> Some shows are really time sensitive. For instance, on ABC "Dancing with the Stars" will be starting up soon replacing "The Bachelor", both of which are prime "around the water cooler" discussion subjects and are immediate internet "news" headlines. Every network has one or more of these, and sometimes, like on Monday, two are opposite each other.


I rarely watch shows within a week of when they aired. It's often weeks, months or years later. I have several first run episodes on my HTPC from early last year I haven't watched yet.

I never watch amateur hour game shows.


----------



## dennispap (Feb 1, 2007)

Funny how the sec network launch was pushed up a week partly due to Dish networks interests.

"The SEC Network has moved up its launch date by one week to Aug. 14 in part due to the Dish Network, which this week became the channel's largest distributor, ESPN senior vice president of programming Justin Connolly said today.
"I think we looked at it as an opportunity both in consultation with Dish and then generally speaking to provide a little bit longer window of time for consumers and fans who may be making a decision in terms of provider," said Connolly, who oversees the SEC Network."

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/03/sec_network_moves_launch_date.html


----------



## thomasjk (Jan 10, 2006)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I could be wrong... but these two press releases today sure make it sound like Longhorn Network and SEC Network will be in AT120+ and above for everyone... as opposed to being in MultiSport like Pac12, and BigTen.


You are correct.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I wonder what that will mean for Pac12 and Big Ten next time those get negotiated. If Longhorn and SEC Network go to everyone nationwide... and Pac12 and Big Ten are only for those DMAs or Multisport... I'm betting Pac12 and Big Ten will want similar nationwide carriage when their next contract comes up.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I wonder what that will mean for Pac12 and Big Ten next time those get negotiated. If Longhorn and SEC Network go to everyone nationwide... and Pac12 and Big Ten are only for those DMAs or Multisport... I'm betting Pac12 and Big Ten will want similar nationwide carriage when their next contract comes up.


If that's the case I bet D* doesn't pick them up.


----------



## tommiet (Dec 29, 2005)

As Dish raised our programming prices last month, Dish will probably raise equipment prices in June... AGAIN.... To pay for more ESPN.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

tommiet said:


> As Dish raised our programming prices last month, Dish will probably raise equipment prices in June... AGAIN.... To pay for more ESPN.


HUH? I don't recall equipment prices rising separately from the usual February increases. When was the last time this happened?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

More channels than ESPN asked for (and received) more money.... and more channels will do so again this year. I get that some like ESPN and others don't, but blaming ESPN for costs of pay TV is beginning to be an old rant.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Michael P said:


> HUH? I don't recall equipment prices rising separately from the usual February increases. When was the last time this happened?


In February 2010 there were no package price increases, equipment fees increased instead. In June 2010 AT200 and AT250 got a $2 increase. In February 2011 there was an additional $5 increase (all AT packages). The 2011 increase came with a two year "no increase" promise. In 2013 there was an additional $5 increase on most AT packages, $10 on AT120+ and $15 on AEP. This year there was a $5 increase on all AT packages except AT120+.









I do not expect an equipment increase this year (beyond that already implemented). I believe DISH saw the agreement coming and made sure that they would be collecting enough revenue to cover the expected costs.


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

Not sure if anyone else caught the part about "ESPN Classic will be reintroduced as a video on demand channel." I wonder if going forward ESPN is willing to swap ESPN Classic for SEC Network? Much like they did a few years back when they let cable/sat switch ESPN Classic and ESPNU. 

Going forward this could be a big bonus for Dish Network-They will have LHN and SEC Network to add to Pac-12, BTN, and ESPNU. Pretty clear they could advertise to the college sports fan and say they have all the games and major conferences you want to see. Plus they are one of the few national providers that also have an authentication deal with the NFL Network for NFL Net and RedZone streaming via XBoxOne and the NFL Network iOS app.


----------



## Rduce (May 16, 2008)

Since I do not use a Hopper nor do I watch ANY ABC programing I really do not care that deal has taken away the auto hop feature. Additionally, since I have no doubt that all other Networks will want this deal I am happy that I only watch two and a half hours of network programing a week!


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> Analysts believe that it's only a matter of time before the pay-TV industry has to offer an Internet-only option, and the Dish-Disney deal is the clearest sign yet that the industry may reluctantly play along. Satellite competitor DIRECTV has also suggested it might offer a lower-priced Net service with basic channels and, in a statement to USA TODAY, says it is working on its own similar agreement with Disney.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/03/04/dish-disney-deal-advances-streaming-tv/6026927/


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> > Analysts believe that it's only a matter of time before the pay-TV industry has to offer an Internet-only option, and the Dish-Disney deal is the clearest sign yet that the industry may reluctantly play along. Satellite competitor DIRECTV has also suggested it might offer a lower-priced Net service with basic channels and, in a statement to USA TODAY, says it is working on its own similar agreement with Disney.
> 
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/03/04/dish-disney-deal-advances-streaming-tv/6026927/


DISH already delivers international channels via IPTV. Why shouldn't the PayTV providers expand beyond their traditional cables and satellites? DISH also holds assignments for terrestrial broadcast and data services.

At the end of the day they deliver content from the content providers to the customers. All part of packaged PayTV. The new school way of thinking.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

ESPNClassic most of the time has repeats of old games. That's good and all, but since they are already aired games... I think you can make a case for the content being On Demand content being more valuable than a linear channel anyway.

IF I want to watch a classic, even in instant-classic, game... I'd much rather be able to pick it from a list and watch whenever I want than to wait and hope it comes on the ESPNClassic schedule in the EPG.

I know I would probably partake of On Demand content for ESPNClassic more often than I ever tune to the channel.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

People were estimating the previous ESPN package to be in the $5/sub range even without Disney or ABC.

The new package with the additions including ABC and Disney is estimated where ... $10/sub range? Higher?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> People were estimating the previous ESPN package to be in the $5/sub range even without Disney or ABC.
> 
> The new package with the additions including ABC and Disney is estimated where ... $10/sub range? Higher?


That is pretty much the definition of an apples vs oranges comparison.
How about comparing everything vs everything? Or just ESPN vs just ESPN?

You're making it sound like the price of ESPN doubled when ESPN plus all the existing ABC content was already over $5 per month.


----------



## jsk (Dec 27, 2006)

Paul Secic said:


> When does it start?


When does it end? (Sorry, Paul, I couldn't resist 

Every time I hear of one of these "wonderful" deals, it makes me sick because I know that I am going to end up paying through the nose for something that I don't use. I don't watch any of the ABC/Disney/ESPN channels (except occasionally I can receive WPVI OTA and I watch their 70s style Action News - it's the best thing that ABC does - I'll hum the theme for days afterwards).

I wouldn't mind if the programming was better, but it seems to be going downhill fast. I'm getting closer and closer to cutting the cord; if it wasn't for Al Jazeera America, I think I might have already.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

ESPN Classic used to be in AT 250, but a couple years ago Dish moved it to the Sports Pak. I wonder if ESPN Classic will be back in AT250 then?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

OK, I'm going to be the Grumpy Gus about this because I think it is a major step backwards imposed by one of the largest and most profitable international entertainment conglomerates in the world.

:rant:



Stewart Vernon said:


> To be clear, in case you misunderstood the press release, you will be able to watch the DVRed ABC show immediately.. it's just the AutoHop commercial skipping that will be delayed by 3 days. You can watch the DVRed content the night it is recorded and skip the commercials manually just like on any other channel.


So what you and the press are telling me is that you've received clarifying information indicating that this....



> DISH will disable AutoHop functionality for ABC content within the C3 ratings window.


...means that the Disney folks settled for viewers pushing a skip button for the first three days and are further ok with auto skipping after that. So we know exactly what they did to all future viewers.

I guess it lets the other networks know that Dish was willing to give up the only significant benefit of having a Hopper over, say, having a DVR that is capable of simultaneously recording any five programs at once at any time (like the DirecTV Genie) or four programs at once at any time plus an incredible on-demand streaming selection (like the Xfinity X1 Platform)?

I agree with this assessment....



> Dish could not risk a blackout of ESPN, which is by many measurements the most valuable channel to American TV subscribers. So by agreeing to disable AutoHop, the distributor is putting its corporate interests -- and Disney's interests -- ahead of ad-skipping innovation.


And I don't get the enthusiasm for what's described in this AP article:



> ...The agreement opens the way for the satellite TV service to live-stream Disney-owned channels like ESPN and ABC over the Internet to customers' smartphones, tablets, video game consoles and other devices.
> 
> The goal is to attract so-called cord-cutters who have become disenchanted with large channel packages and rising monthly bills for cable or satellite service.
> 
> Charlie Ergen, Dish Network Corp. chairman, hinted at the underpinnings of the deal last month, when he admitted that the traditional pay-TV business model - charging customers $80 or $100 a month for hundreds of channels, many of which they never watch - is not appealing to younger people.


Unless someone knows something I don't, paying for the ability to "live-stream Disney-owned channels" such as ABC and ESPN over the internet means _watching commercials_. What I'm getting from all this is that Charlie caved to the pressure to force viewers to watch commercials along with paying the channels for the right to watch content _with commercials_.

You see the writer of the AP article wrote this omitting what I'm inserting in *bold italic*:



> With a string of recent deals, cable and satellite providers are beginning to acknowledge a brutal truth that companies like Hulu and Netflix have known all along: Many TV viewers, especially young ones, want shows and movies on their own terms - wherever, whenever and on whatever devices they choose _*without commercial interruptions*_.


I'm an old guy not some young guy up on the latest fads. I know that my best alternative to paying Dish or DirecTV or Xfinity $100+ a month is to really "cut the cord" (which really isn't cutting the cord) and use Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and iTunes in some combination of subscriptions and purchases at substantially less annual cost than having cable or satellite TV to view a lot of TV without commercials and, at least for the moment, a few days after they air stream for free shows from many channels if I'm willing to watch commercials.

Read this article published today TV Streaming Head-to-Head: Netflix vs Hulu vs Amazon Prime. Then think about how much subscribing to all three would cost compared to what you pay Dish.

I consider this acquiescence by Charlie as a clear indication that it is impossible to mount any real challenge to the five big TV conglomerates.

Now I must return to my spreadsheets to determine what is the most economical method of acquiring access to all the programming I want to see and, Charlie, so far you're not scoring well.
:rant:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

This is what Stewart was replying to:


phrelin said:


> I don't want to use a system that won't allow me to watch a show until the fourth day after it aired.





Stewart Vernon said:


> To be clear, in case you misunderstood the press release, you will be able to watch the DVRed ABC show immediately.. it's just the AutoHop commercial skipping that will be delayed by 3 days. You can watch the DVRed content the night it is recorded and skip the commercials manually just like on any other channel.


The press release said:


> DISH will disable AutoHop functionality for ABC content within the C3 ratings window.


Your assumption in your earlier post that one could not record and immediately watch ABC content was incorrect. It is only the AutoHop (commercial skipping) that will not be available within C3. The multi-channel record feature PrimeTime AnyTime remains intact.



phrelin said:


> ...means that the Disney folks settled for viewers pushing a skip button for the first three days and are further ok with auto skipping after that. So we know exactly what they did to all future viewers.


ABC will accept AutoHop after the C3 period ... apparently the value of those commercials has lessened after C3 - so it is a compromise. That is, until DISH and ABC work out a way to insert current ads in replayed ABC content. (That thought is also buried in the press release.)



phrelin said:


> What I'm getting from all this is that Charlie caved to the pressure to force viewers to watch commercials along with paying the channels for the right to watch content _with commercials_.


I still don't see where one is forced to watch ABC/ESPN/Disney commercials on the DVR. The skip buttons will still work and AutoHop will work on ABC after C3.



phrelin said:


> Now I must return to my spreadsheets to determine what is the most economical method of acquiring access to all the programming I want to see and, Charlie, so far you're not scoring well.


I hope that search turns out well for you ... for me there is a lot of content that simply is not available streamed at a reasonable price. Perhaps the younger generation has different tastes or is more patient with streamed media. If I went streamed I'd probably end up paying more for Internet bandwidth and losing any potential savings on a PayTV package. And I'd probably lose content.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Forcing people to subscribe to cable/satellite to be able to watch programs on the web without use of cable or satellite will ultimately cost them viewership. Maybe not this year or next, but in the not too distant future. This sounds like nothing but an effort by the cable/satellite companies to try and keep people from going IP only. It's an attempt to protect the company at the expense of the public.

And it will likely hurt both the carriers and the content providers.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> The bottom line is that customers who want to watch only the stations they really want (instead of a package of networks) and want to watch online instead of through a cable are becoming more important to video companies and that should ultimate be good for consumers.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2014/03/04/dish-disney-deal-could-help-speed-cord-cutting-options/


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> Charlie Ergen, Dish Network Corp. chairman, hinted at the underpinnings of the deal last month, when he admitted that the traditional pay-TV business model - charging customers $80 or $100 a month for hundreds of channels, many of which they never watch - is not appealing to younger people.
> 
> "We're losing a whole generation of individuals who aren't going to buy into that model," he told analysts. "Obviously you'd like to kind of have your cake and eat it too, and make sure that you come up with products that can engage that new generation."
> 
> ...


http://triblive.com/business/headlines/5703932-74/dish-service-deal

If I'm reading that right, it almost looks like Dish may be offering a separate service. Maybe a web-based Dish package where you won't need a dish and DVR box?


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I could be wrong... but these two press releases today sure make it sound like Longhorn Network and SEC Network will be in AT120+ and above for everyone... as opposed to being in MultiSport like Pac12, and BigTen.


That's the way I read it too, however if I'm remembering correctly when Big Ten and Pac12 first came out they also were available nationwide for a while before going to their current arrangement of being available as an RSN in their regions and available in the Multi-Sport for everyone else.


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

James Long said:


> ABC will accept AutoHop after the C3 period ... apparently the value of those commercials has lessened after C3 - so it is a compromise. That is, until DISH and ABC work out a way to insert current ads in replayed ABC content. (That thought is also buried in the press release.)
> 
> I still don't see where one is forced to watch ABC/ESPN/Disney commercials on the DVR. The skip buttons will still work and AutoHop will work on ABC after C3.
> 
> ...


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

david_jr said:


> > ABC will accept AutoHop after the C3 period ... apparently the value of those commercials has lessened after C3 - so it is a compromise. That is, until DISH and ABC work out a way to insert current ads in replayed ABC content. (That thought is also buried in the press release.)
> >
> > I still don't see where one is forced to watch ABC/ESPN/Disney commercials on the DVR. The skip buttons will still work and AutoHop will work on ABC after C3.
> >
> ...


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

All I know is that when I went to ESPN3 this morning, it didn't list Dish Network as one of the possible providers to have access to the service.

Granted, the French Open is still over a month away, so I can afford to be patient.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

APB101 said:


> ^ This part is great. It should light a fire under the collective a**es of the DirecTV people to deliver "Fusion, ESPN Goal Line, ESPN Buzzer Beater, as well as Longhorn Network and the upcoming SEC ESPN Network." (That's not to say _when_. But that, from the position of remaining a competitive business, it _must_ &#8230; happen from DirecTV. )


What is "Fusion?


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Paul Secic said:


> What is "Fusion?


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fusion+network+


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> I rarely watch shows within a week of when they aired. It's often weeks, months or years later. I have several first run episodes on my HTPC from early last year I haven't watched yet.
> 
> I never watch amateur hour game shows.


Me either!


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

jsk said:


> When does it end? (Sorry, Paul, I couldn't resist
> 
> Every time I hear of one of these "wonderful" deals, it makes me sick because I know that I am going to end up paying through the nose for something that I don't use. I don't watch any of the ABC/Disney/ESPN channels (except occasionally I can receive WPVI OTA and I watch their 70s style Action News - it's the best thing that ABC does - I'll hum the theme for days afterwards).
> 
> I wouldn't mind if the programming was better, but it seems to be going downhill fast. I'm getting closer and closer to cutting the cord; if it wasn't for Al Jazeera America, I think I might have already.


I don't watch ABC, ESPN et all. But I'm waiting for ABC Family Channel.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> Forcing people to subscribe to cable/satellite to be able to watch programs on the web without use of cable or satellite will ultimately cost them viewership. Maybe not this year or next, but in the not too distant future. This sounds like nothing but an effort by the cable/satellite companies to try and keep people from going IP only. It's an attempt to protect the company at the expense of the public.
> 
> And it will likely hurt both the carriers and the content providers.


You seem to be missing the point if they don't do that they would lose all their customers in the cable and sat fields and raise prices on ip delivery that equalled what they get today.

Hollywood will never decrease the amount I money they get. Not going to happen.

Ip deliver will never be cheaper than cable or sat for a full package. The only reason it might be for a very few today is because so few use it today and Hollywood is taking its time to concern themselves with it but they are never going to just let it be.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2014/03/04/dish-disney-deal-could-help-speed-cord-cutting-options/


The tradeoff is going to be you will pay a TON more for that channel than you do today. Or a better way to say it, Disney is still going to get theirs. Either through millions of customers having it bundled in their base package at $X per sub, or from individual customers paying $2X (or $3X or $4X). They are on the hook for billions of dollars to the NFL, NCAA, SEC, Texas, NBA, etc, etc. They have to make their money one way or another. It is going to be infinitely harder for them to gather all the customers to sell direct at a higher price point than to go through 10 major television distributors. Plus, they will have to staff up to handle customer service, more marketing, etc....all of which have enormous marketing and operational costs associated with them....that will flow down also to the price they are charging.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

inkahauts said:


> Ip deliver will never be cheaper than cable or sat for a full package. The only reason it might be for a very few today is because so few use it today and Hollywood is taking its time to concern themselves with it but they are never going to just let it be.


Unless ...

http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/211014-dish-to-offer-ip-based-service-without-the-dish/

If Dish were to follow through with that, they would have no hardware costs at the subscriber end, so monthly rates could be somewhat lower.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Right now we don't even have that option. We sub to Dish or Direct and using a Roku, Dish or Direct are not even listed as providers on the Disney site, just cable and fibre. So we are losing out.I hope once the contracts are signed, Dish ends up on that list of providers for Disney and ESPN 3. I guess the 211k I cannot do VOD, or at least Dish will not allow it, even though I am using a 500K hard drive, so the Roku will do VOD on Disney, if I can gain access to the channels. I tried using Charter Cable as a provider with Roku as I have them for High Speed and phone, but it only gave me limited access to Disney.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

It bears me repeating myself... I see the AutoHop compromise as a win for Dish. I never believed they could actually win long-term with it without paying for it through the nose... so Dish using it as a tool to negotiate always made sense to me. Without AutoHop, the negotiations would be "We want money" vs "We don't want to pay that much"... With AutoHop the game was changed... more nuances... Dish might pay more money but skip commercials and then the channels lose that revenue source... but Dish agrees to hold back the auto-skipping part for a few days so the channel can collect commercial revenue and it keeps the price down.

Some always have the "my bill went up, so thanks for nothing" response... but you aren't seeing the whole elephant here. You can't prove a negative... so there's no way to prove how much your bill might have gone up if the playing field were different.

I have always viewed AutoHop as a "cute" thing anyway... I can skip commercials myself... I don't "need" an automatic feature to do it for me... so it was a bonus to me... so I have no problems with them using it to get a better deal. Whether they pass that "savings" directly to me or not, in the long run it does help keep their costs down which does translate to savings for me even if it isn't exactly quantifiable right now.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> ABC will accept AutoHop after the C3 period ... apparently the value of those commercials has lessened after C3 - so it is a compromise. That is, until DISH and ABC work out a way to insert current ads in replayed ABC content. (That thought is also buried in the press release.)
> 
> I still don't see where one is forced to watch ABC/ESPN/Disney commercials on the DVR. The skip buttons will still work and AutoHop will work on ABC after C3.


Perhaps in my initial exasperation with the deal, I didn't express well and concisely my view of the long term, big picture meaning of this agreement. So let me begin again, first with the history.

It all began in the first half of the 20th Century with the 100% advertising-supported local broadcast channel model. Those channels were awarded licenses from the FCC to broadcast a signal over the public airwaves which viewers, after acquiring the right equipment, could view for free.

But in some areas, folks just couldn't get a decent signal. From Wikipedia:



> The abbreviation CATV is often used for cable television. It originally stood for Community Access Television or Community Antenna Television, from cable television's origins in 1948: in areas where over-the-air reception was limited by distance from transmitters or mountainous terrain, large "community antennas" were constructed, and cable was run from them to individual homes.


So for about 25 years, some people paid the cable system the cost of obtaining the broadcast channels signals which much of the audience paid only for equipment like an antenna and a TV.

Then came the HBO "premium" channel model. This was a channel on cable systems only. The model was to charge a "high" subscriber fee in lieu of advertising to cover the cost of content. Per Wikipedia:



> HBO is the oldest and longest continuously operating pay television service (basic or premium) in the United States, having been in operation since November 8, 1972.


Four years later Ted Turner added what we now know as the basic cable channel model - the channel we now know as TBS. That model theoretically and in practice included a very low subscriber fee most of which presumably went to the cost of cable delivery and advertising most of which presumably went to cover the cost of content. Of course, both revenue sources cumulatively were to help generate profits for the channel's owner and the cable company's owner.

Then, in 1992 the broadcast folks lobbied Congress to adopt the Cable Television Protection and Competition Act which established the "must carry" rule which seemed at worst innocuous and at best beneficial. It basically assured that all the competitors, satellite and cable, would carry all the local channels in each DMA. That set an expectation that ultimately resulted in retransmission fee disputes.

Since 2000, while chanting the mantra "greed is good" we've watched two international media conglomerates destroy this three-legged stool economic model - (1) ad supported FCC-licensed broadcast channels, (2) high fee subscription supported premium cable channels, and (3) low fee subscription plus advertising supported basic cable channels.

Before dealing with the two conglomerates let me first create a basis for comparison. HBO has not been given any government licenses. Cable/satellite customers do not have to pay for HBO in order to watch TV. I estimate that by around 2020, those who subscribe to HBO will pay to HBO about $5 billion a year for content they desire to watch and pay for.

Now on to the "greed is good" international conglomerates.

There's Rupert Murdoch's News Corp which noticed that the broadcast Fox Network wasn't making a satisfying amount of money from advertising. Welcome Americans to the high broadcast network "retransmission fee" which is basically a tax imposed on most Americans. You see, you and I cannot opt to watch HBO and Showtime without paying the tax to News Corp. And that tax will be relatively high by 2020 - generating for News Corp from the Fox Network and the 28 owned-and-operated local Fox and MyNetworkTV channels $4± billion annually, _in addition to advertising_ which up to that point was to support the FCC license holders.

Then in the "greed is good" group there is The Walt Disney Company which owns not only the Disney cable channel group, but also the ESPN cable channel group and the ABC broadcast network plus 8 owned local ABC channels.

Dispensing with the broadcast-network-and-channel tax first, by around 2020 ABC will generate for The Walt Disney Company about $3± billion which we American capitalist ideologues will pay if we want to watch HBO and Showtime.

And here's the rub about the Dish-ABC deal. When we started paying the "free to air" FCC-licensed-taxpayer-subsidized broadcast channels as much as, or more than, we pay for cable channels, Charlie came up Autohop so it would be easy to not have to watch commercials. That seemed like a fair trade from the viewer standpoint. They get to keep their government licenses, we pay retransmission fees, and we don't even know there are commercials making them more like HBO.

The fact is Charlie just gave that viewer benefit away forever for all broadcast channels and for all cable channels.

But that wasn't enough taxation for the Disney Folks. My estimate is that by 2020 the ESPN content tax in the typical lowest package will generate $9± billion which we will pay if we want to watch HBO and Showtime. Then there's the Disney Channel cable channel content tax which I estimate that by 2020 will generate $3± billion which we will pay if we want to watch HBO and Showtime. And we will see ads (nobody is fast enough with the FF or skip button to not see that there are ads).

Much is being made of the streaming deal, a really successful spin. This sounds really cool to the naive young generation. Let's go to the _LA Times_ "Company Town" media conglomerate news page for a reality check that doesn't depend on my opinion:



> As part of the deal, Dish customers also will be able to access Disney-branded video-on-demand products, including the Watch ESPN and Watch ABC applications, in their homes and on mobile devices. Those offerings do not allow viewers to fast-forward through commercials, part of the industry's strategy of attempting to preserve the lucrative economics of television.
> 
> ...But if and when it arrives, Dish's Internet service might look a lot like what Dish offers now - a set package of channels - and not the "a la carte" service that some consumer activists have been demanding from the industry.
> 
> ...


In other words, the agreement basically concedes that viewers will pay a lot - fees that could rival premium services like HBO - plus they'll have to put up with commercials. The agreement institutionalizes a new combined retransmission fee/ad viewing model with the "must-carry" taxation system fully incorporated.

And don't for one moment think this is not going to set the standard across the board. From that same article:



> The Disney-Dish deal is expected to serve as a template for other entertainment companies haggling over new carriage agreements with pay-TV distributors.
> 
> At an investor conference Tuesday, CBS Chief Executive Leslie Moonves praised the Disney-Dish accord.
> 
> "This is a great preliminary step for everybody," Moonves said, adding that CBS is scheduled to negotiate a new distribution deal with Dish by the end of this year. "It's going to be an interesting conversation."


Let's not kid ourselves. In the long run, this deal is a win for international media conglomerates, not for Dish, and it is a significant loss for viewers, particularly Dish customers who lose the effectiveness of the Autohop feature.



James Long said:


> The multi-channel record feature PrimeTime AnyTime remains intact.


What the Hopper box offers is the ability to record three shows during about 21 hours of the day. Yes during the three prime time hours the you have the capability to record six shows, but this is a reality only if you are interested in everything on ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox. That may or may not be competitive with a DVR that is capable of simultaneously recording any five programs at once at any time like the DirecTV Genie or four programs at once at any time plus an incredible on-demand streaming selection which does not get "charged" to your internet use like the Xfinity X1 Platform .

IMHO this deal is a major loss for Dish customers and for all viewers who would prefer (1) not to have to pay high monthly fees for channels they never watch and (2) not to pay high monthly fees for channels where they must deal with commercials. And by the way, it's a blow to Echostar's investment in Autohop that apparently nobody else recognizes.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> Unless ...
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/211014-dish-to-offer-ip-based-service-without-the-dish/
> 
> If Dish were to follow through with that, they would have no hardware costs at the subscriber end, so monthly rates could be somewhat lower.


See the article linked in Pherlins post.

That service is not going to be cheaper if it ever gets off the ground. And I mean in costs to provide as well as receive.


----------



## Orion9 (Jan 31, 2011)

phrelin said:


> So let me begin again, first with the history.


You got me thinking about history and prices.

Using my (questionable) memory (and checking google to make sure I'm not way off base) our 25" color TV, external antenna, and antenna rotor in ~1963 plugged into an inflation calculator comes out to be around $5000 in today's dollars. For that we got CBS, ABC, NBC. (And years later PBS.) No remote control and if you wanted to channel surf, you had to wait for the rotor on the roof to realign the antenna. NO recording ability. (I did actually make some audio recordings of Star Trek.)

Around 1975ish we added cable, Now my memory of the cable bill is kind of fuzzy but I'm thinking it might have been $18. That works out to be around $75 today. We got a box that I think had 3 rows of 12 channels per row but many of those slots were unfilled or reserved for premium stuff. I think this got us about 14 usable channels - all with commercials. I think adding a single premium channel back then was about $10 or about $40 today. (That's one channel - not all of HBO.) We never did add any of those. In fact my father was never convinced of the price/performance of cable back then. Still no remote. No recording. Commercial skipping meant leave the room. Same 25" SD CRT. Same little mono speaker.

Somewhere around 1980ish we sunk a couple of grand (pre-inflation) into VCRs and "good" tapes were about $20 but the picture quality was still a huge step down from the original so you didn't really want to watch them. We had a different cable system back then. The Sci-Fi channel appeared in the 90s but it was nearly unwatchable here. The cable guy that came to investigate said: well sorry our cable system was designed for 36 channels so it's a miracle that channels in the high 40s get through at all. We switched to Dish a few years later.

Today we have a $700 46" HDTV and pay less than $60/month to get Discovery, History, SyFy, and about a dozen other channels that we watch on a fairly regular basis. Still no premiums. With the included DVR (that doesn't degrade the picture quality) and premium previews we may never manage to catch up with all the commercial-free movies we've stuck on cheap disks. We're currently nearly 5 terabytes behind! Commercial skipping is now: press the advance button about 5 or 6 times and then pop a couple more back/forwards as needed. I feel a little guilty and leach-like for doing this but, hey - I have limited time. 

Overall it doesn't seem all that awful compared to the old days. So far at least. The major problem these days is trying to keep up with the DVR. Just too many other activities these days like posting stuff on the interwebs.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I never thought AutoHop had any real value except as a negotiation tool. We can skip commercials on any channel with any DVR that Dish has. AutoHop was a one-button solution, but it really didn't provide you with anything that you couldn't already do. Heck, before DVRs you could go to the bathroom, get a snack from the kitchen, go check the mail, take a quick phone call, or have a short conversation, and ignore commercials.

To my way of thinking... Dish found a way with AutoHop to monetize this thing that viewers were already doing on their own... Prior to AutoHop there was no wedge for Dish to exploit in contract negotiations. The channel would say "people want to watch us, pay for us or lose us and possibly lose customers"... Dish responded with AutoHop and said "we will let them skip commercials more easily than before OR you can cut us a break"...

AutoHop, to my thinking, only had value in what it could head-off in contract negotiations. It didn't otherwise provide you with something you couldn't do before.

PTAT, however, the auto-recording of primetime every night AND sharing a single tuner to record those 4 LiLs... THAT was a huge thing and a big feature for the Hopper... That value still remains intact as do the Sling features for various Dish receivers.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Orion9 said:


> You got me thinking about history and prices.


Your observations are accurate based on my memory. And yes, current technology offers a lot of features and has created that same level of backlog on my EHD's. But to me what you are saying is "kind of" comparable to saying a basic refrigerator is so much cheaper (using comparable dollars) than in 1960 that it's ok if your monthly food bill is significantly more. And I do understand that in this context, the temptation is to say this is not about food it's only TV.

IMHO there's a cumulative pernicious side effect to the cumulative combination

of eliminating telephone copper land lines (see my humble opinion in the thread Cord Cutters - The Next Generation; "The Copper Droppers");
plus the current (and future based on the Google super high speed system effort) system of providing high speed internet (see my humble opinion in the thread Plan for California rural broadband collapses); and
plus this new shift in the television content delivery paradigm.
That pernicious side effect can be defined as a cumulative impact upon those less fortunate. We are creating a class of people who do not have affordable, ready access to communication technology, some because they live in rural areas, some because they are poor, and some because they are the rural poor. If this technology wasn't critical to a young person's economic future, it would not be of concern. But the fact is if from the day you are born you can't get ready access to a phone, to high speed internet, and to television content, you're pretty much at a disadvantage.

I can afford to pay Comcast for high speed internet but am acutely aware it is my only real option. I can afford to use an alternative to copper wires for my home phone and have numerous options I am now considering. I can afford basic cable TV through a cable or satellite company and have three options, or I can choose to stream TV with numerous options available. In fact, In every way but total income, we are in that American upper middle class that can access all the essential, and a lot of non-essential, services and devices to keep us informed. It is fairly reasonable for me to think I probably will never experience the pernicious side effect. But it is a possibility for me and for anyone who is not a Warren Buffet.

IMHO we need a technology component to our economic safety net and we needed to put it in place before Netflix started putting servers in Comcast buildings.

But that is only my opinion.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Stewart Vernon said:


> AutoHop, to my thinking, only had value in what it could head-off in contract negotiations. It didn't otherwise provide you with something you couldn't do before.
> 
> PTAT, however, the auto-recording of primetime every night AND sharing a single tuner to record those 4 LiLs... THAT was a huge thing and a big feature for the Hopper... That value still remains intact as do the Sling features for various Dish receivers.


I've had a Slingbox HD for years and with my 722 and 612 can record those 4 channels, or any combination of 4 channels any time of day. Also, if my 722 goes haywire I still have the 612 until the new 722 gets here and vice versa. If one's Hopper dies you have to wait without TV until the new one arrives.

If the loss of Autohop can readily be dismissed because you can push the skip button over and over again as I do, so can not having that 4-channel autorecord feature be dismissed because I can just set the DVRs to record what I want by pressing buttons. And with the Hopper you have to press buttons to break up your recordings unless there is something I don't understand about it.

To me the only really desirable difference on the Hopper was the Autohop. But that's just my opinion.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

phrelin said:


> Let's not kid ourselves. In the long run, this deal is a win for international media conglomerates, not for Dish,


Perhaps you misunderstood ... DISH (and DirecTV and many of the cable operators) part of the international media conglomerates. This deal sets DISH up with a path into the future that does not rely on a dish. It isn't a battle of DISH vs the conglomerates ... it is a challenge of how the companies can work together to make money.



phrelin said:


> What the Hopper box offers is the ability to record three shows during about 21 hours of the day. Yes during the three prime time hours the you have the capability to record six shows, but this is a reality only if you are interested in everything on ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox. That may or may not be competitive with a DVR that is capable of simultaneously recording any five programs at once at any time like the DirecTV Genie or four programs at once at any time plus an incredible on-demand streaming selection which does not get "charged" to your internet use like the Xfinity X1 Platform .


The four major networks can be recorded at any time of the day while using only one tuner for up to four networks. Even though it is outside of PTAT hours one can record or watch Kimmel, Letterman, Fallon and Arsenio at the same time ... or whatever those four channels are airing while leaving the other two tuners free.

If you think DirecTV has a better product we can provide the phone number to sign up. There is even a link at the top of every forum page for DISH and DirecTV. But don't expect anything different from the aspect of big bundles of channels where one buys channels they do not want to get channels they want. It is the nature of the industry.



phrelin said:


> And by the way, it's a blow to Echostar's investment in Autohop that apparently nobody else recognizes.


It is a limitation to Autohop ... but if one was watching same night programming that is no loss (AutoHop usually does not work until sometime after 1am). I like the feature and will continue to use it as long as it is available, but I have lived without it.


----------



## Orion9 (Jan 31, 2011)

phrelin said:


> Your observations are accurate based on my memory. And yes, current technology offers a lot of features and has created that same level of backlog on my EHD's. But to me what you are saying is "kind of" comparable to saying a basic refrigerator is so much cheaper (using comparable dollars) than in 1960 that it's ok if your monthly food bill is significantly more.


Yes, that's a fair assessment. Essentially I can buy an HDTV and watch about 7-8 years worth of Dish TV for what the TV alone cost in 63. And that's ignoring maintenance on the TV which was fairly frequent. (Tubes after-all.) And then the Dish bill today is like the cable bill of the 70s.

So the overall cost to be entertained (mostly) was pretty similar and the quality (from a technical standpoint - image/sound) is much greater now as is the variety.

I agree that the poor are at a disadvantage - always have been - and in general things seem to be getting noticeably worse for them. Likewise America has been falling behind in manufacturing - a common way for the poor to advance, schools are getting more expensive etc. etc. But I think that's an issue well beyond the scope of a satellite TV deal. Perhaps if we had a functional government, stuff like this could be addressed in some way.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> Perhaps you misunderstood ... DISH (and DirecTV and many of the cable operators) part of the international media conglomerates. This deal sets DISH up with a path into the future that does not rely on a dish. It isn't a battle of DISH vs the conglomerates ... it is a challenge of how the companies can work together to make money.


While technically Dish is an international company, I do not see it as an international conglomerate in the way I view Disney/ESPN/ABC, Comcast/NBCU, and others. Yes, I recognize that Dish is creating a new "package selling" opportunity using the internet which might even turn out to be viewed a creative concept by some.

But Charlie was my last hope that folks who not watch sports and have no children in the home would have to pay nearly 20% of their TV package bill for ESPN and Disney Channel.



James Long said:


> The four major networks can be recorded at any time of the day while using only one tuner for up to four networks. Even though it is outside of PTAT hours one can record or watch Kimmel, Letterman, Fallon and Arsenio at the same time ... or whatever those four channels are airing while leaving the other two tuners free.


Hmmm. I stand corrected. I apparently missed that PTAT isn't really limited to PT except for the AutoHop feature. I'd still be stuck having only three tuners for those hours when I now record four cable channel shows at the same time, but I guess I could chase down repeat airings that are common on cable channels. Now if they'd let me keep my 612 operating....


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

phrelin said:


> While technically Dish is an international company, I do not see it as an international conglomerate in the way I view Disney/ESPN/ABC, Comcast/NBCU, and others. Yes, I recognize that Dish is creating a new "package selling" opportunity using the internet which might even turn out to be viewed a creative concept by some.


Multi-billion dollar companies ... not charities ... despite the comments of the leaders of the companies. DISH is a smaller multi-billion dollar company than DirecTV and the bigger content providers, but they are still huge companies.

Bringing package tiers to IPTV is not exactly an innovation (although CES may give DISH another best in show award for the offering  ). But it helps bridge the gap between the way the media companies like to sell their content (large bundles) and the new marketplace that wants mobile/portable content.



phrelin said:


> But Charlie was my last hope that folks who not watch sports and have no children in the home would have to pay nearly 20% of their TV package bill for ESPN and Disney Channel.


You're not the only one who believed Charlie when he said he was on our side. He isn't evil, but he is running a business.



phrelin said:


> Hmmm. I stand corrected. I apparently missed that PTAT isn't really limited to PT except for the AutoHop feature. I'd still be stuck having only three tuners for those hours when I now record four cable channel shows at the same time, but I guess I could chase down repeat airings that are common on cable channels. Now if they'd let me keep my 612 operating....


I remember having one TV in the home and no DVR/VCR. We watched what was on when it was on and compromised on channel selection. Eventually we got second or third TVs so others in the house could watch something else in another room. (Is the dividing of the family into separate viewing spaces part of the general downfall of the family? Is television really to blame for this social problem not because of the violence or evil suggesting content of the shows but simply because multiple TVs drives families into their own personal cocoon of programming?)

10 years ago we would have scoffed at people who complained that they could only record five or six things at the same time. 10 years ago being able to watch something while something else recorded on the same receiver was amazing! It seems that the more technology advances the less we enjoy it.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Funny some are saying that Dish blinked and caved on this deal, So what if they didn't and started removing ABC/Disney and ESPN channels? How you feel then?


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Would you rather they keep AH (after 1st day ) on ABC or keep the lawsuit going and fatten lawyers pockets, Either way no one wins other than ESPN, Truth of the matter is that once the ABC went into lawsuits with Dish over the AH, Both were losing money over these cases, so ABC was intent in recovering that money with ad revenue, and Dish was buying time at least after the price increases, since they already agreed in digital rights at that point, plus they had to write the code to delay AH for that specific ABC network, All for the purpose for gaining revenue for both companies (which isn't a bad thing) But in the end consumers loses and pays more for service, while both companies have a smile on their faces with your hard earned money.


----------



## TheGrove (Jan 10, 2007)

phrelin said:


> Hmmm. I stand corrected. I apparently missed that PTAT isn't really limited to PT except for the AutoHop feature. I'd still be stuck having only three tuners for those hours when I now record four cable channel shows at the same time, but I guess I could chase down repeat airings that are common on cable channels. Now if they'd let me keep my 612 operating....


Or, and your situation may not allow this, you could do what I did and replace my 722 and 622 with 2 hoppers. This way instead of only being able to record 4 shows I can now record 6 at once.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

phrelin said:


> But to me what you are saying is "kind of" comparable to saying a basic refrigerator is so much cheaper (using comparable dollars) than in 1960 that it's ok if your monthly food bill is significantly more.
> 
> We are creating a class of people who do not have affordable, ready access to communication technology, some because they live in rural areas, some because they are poor, and some because they are the rural poor. If this technology wasn't critical to a young person's economic future, it would not be of concern. But the fact is if from the day you are born you can't get ready access to a phone, to high speed internet, and to television content, you're pretty much at a disadvantage.


I think people tend not to look at total costs in perspective. They look at the price of an item, see it as higher than it used to be, and object.

I put an antenna on my roof last summer. It gets all the local stations (some as far as 40 miles away) perfectly, thanks to digital technology. No ghosting, snow, and frequently in HD. Total cost of the setup was about $200. My 50" HD set was only $400. That's $600 in today's dollars for a lot of television. No monthly bills, either. And there are 14 different channels to watch.

When I signed up for DirecTV in 1995, it was $29.95 for the base package. It didn't include a bunch of channels that were on USSB, which was another $30 or so. But if you plug 1995 and $29.95 into an inflation calculator, you find that the same basic package today should cost about $75. AT120 is comparable to what they had then, and even with HD and a DVR, the package price is less than that.

But let's look at some other options for the rural poor. Let's say you need your broadcast stations, and you can't set up an antenna for reliable reception. Let's say the important thing is not HD, or ESPN, or the rest. Call up Dish and get their lowest SD package, including locals, and you pay $19.95/month. That's not the teaser rate. That's the everyday price. Since the advent of television, that's a hard number to beat, even in absolute dollars. Only lifeline cable service, which is going the way of the dodo, was cheaper.

The Internet of today is a different animal, in part because there was nothing comparable to it 15 years ago, let alone 50. It is a phenomenal source of information. It is amazing what you can learn on it. But it is also a phenomenal time-waster. Am I getting smarter reading these forums? Probably not. Am I really informing and educating others by writing this post? Again, most likely the answer is no. I'd be better served in bettering my mind by picking up a Charles Dickens book and studying what made it so appealing that it is still in print over 100 years after the author's death.

The Internet does not make us smarter. It makes it easier to access information. But it is not necessary for education. A reading of Neil Postman's "Technopoly" might be in order. And while you're at it, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" is a classic that should be required reading for anyone who owns or lives in a home with a television. For too long, we've bought into the promise that new technologies were going to deliver smarter, better educated and informed citizens. And for too long, we've ignored the good things those technologies have taken away.


----------



## fwampler (Dec 2, 2005)

Has anyone seen when ESPNU will be available in HD? Or has it been announced anywhere?


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

fwampler said:


> Has anyone seen when ESPNU will be available in HD? Or has it been announced anywhereê


As of today the Disney HD channels are on yet.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

One clue to look for, perhaps... Anyone with a Hopper... check your ABC recordings and see when they stop putting the AutoHop on them after the first night. Since this contract calls for a 3rd day delay... I would assume that would be one of the easier things to implement in this new contract... and Dish might have to prove they are sticking to that before they get the new uplinks for channels.


----------



## SDWC (Dec 14, 2005)

My HWS received an overnight update last night. There wasn't much detail on the splash screen and I was too busy trying to make it to work on time that I didn't investigate much. But perhaps the update is related to the ABC 3-day issue.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

And (of course) while Disney is raking in more money, they're cutting 700 employees.


----------



## Jim148 (Jun 22, 2004)

Wow, this sure generated a flurry of posts!


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

sregener said:


> The Internet of today is a different animal, in part because there was nothing comparable to it 15 years ago, let alone 50. It is a phenomenal source of information. It is amazing what you can learn on it. But it is also a phenomenal time-waster. Am I getting smarter reading these forums? Probably not. Am I really informing and educating others by writing this post? Again, most likely the answer is no. I'd be better served in bettering my mind by picking up a Charles Dickens book and studying what made it so appealing that it is still in print over 100 years after the author's death.
> 
> The Internet does not make us smarter. It makes it easier to access information. But it is not necessary for education. A reading of Neil Postman's "Technopoly" might be in order. And while you're at it, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" is a classic that should be required reading for anyone who owns or lives in a home with a television. For too long, we've bought into the promise that new technologies were going to deliver smarter, better educated and informed citizens. And for too long, we've ignored the good things those technologies have taken away.


I think I'm learning by reading posts such as yours. So I would say you are informing me. But yes, I have ignored many of the good things lost to me because of diversions offered by technology. I didn't miss out on Neil Postman's thoughtful musings which were 20th Century and am always aware of his observation "the tie between information and action has been severed."

But I never agreed with his "sky is falling" view of the information age:



> "Information is now a commodity that can be bought and sold, or used as a form of entertainment, or worn like a garment to enhance one's status. It comes indiscriminately, directed at no one in particular, disconnected from usefulness; we are glutted with information, drowning in information, have no control over it, don't know what to do with it."


I think to some extent beginning with the printing of books somebody was wringing their hands over the misuse of information. Everything he said was true prior to the 20th Century though perhaps ordinary people were not so glutted with and drowning in information. But even then, most people didn't know what to do with most of the information. They certainly didn't have the ability to search and sift through the information that we do, though effective use of that requires distinguishing bogus sources from potentially reliable sources and knowing when something contributes to a less distorted personal big picture view of the world.

To bring it back to the subject at hand, my gut tells me that this Dish and Disney agreement is bad for most Americans. In order to keep package costs affordable, something is going to have to give and I have a feeling in the end we'll have, to use a paraphrase of Postman's musings, television that confounds discourse about serious issues because of the use of superficial images and it will be continue to become less about ideas and thoughts and more about entertainment. In other words, this agreement means we'll be funding ESPN and the Disney Channel because the Disney suits have way to much clout in our society.

I guess I'm going to have to be contented with the realization that Disney subsidiaries distributed both "Frozen" and "The Wind Rises" and that the latter won "Audience Favorite" at the Mill Valley Film Festival and "Best Animated Feature" from the Online Film Critics Society. I can only hope my money helped "The Wind Rises" be seen by thoughtful young people.


----------



## pfred (Feb 8, 2009)

This is just another event in the demise of broadcast TV. What is inevitable is the "killer app" that will mean the vast majority of content consumers will get their content from the internet.
Some of us may remember that Lotus 123 was the killer app for the PC.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

pfred said:


> This is just another event in the demise of broadcast TV. What is inevitable is the "killer app" that will mean the vast majority of content consumers will get their content from the internet.
> Some of us may remember that Lotus 123 was the killer app for the PC.


Others will say "What's Lotus 123" as that company and its software have long since ceased to be...

There are too many problems, not the least of which being poor infrastructure, bandwidth/speed issues, and escalating costs that will prevent IPTV from being "the main thing" for years to come. There are too many roadblocks right now to internet-delivered content squeezing out the satellite and cable world.

Yes, there is some unique internet-created/distributed content... and that finds an audience and is doing well... but that is still not the majority of TV content being watched by a long shot.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Stewart Vernon said:


> There are too many problems, not the least of which being poor infrastructure, bandwidth/speed issues, and escalating costs that will prevent IPTV from being "the main thing" for years to come. There are too many roadblocks right now to internet-delivered content squeezing out the satellite and cable world.


Similar discussion on several threads it seems, but I'm hoping EchoStar/Dish/Excede are working on dealing with that problem with the "H" Band.


----------



## jefte1 (Feb 10, 2010)

So when is dish going to be launching the hd channels for espnnews,ABC family, etc.... in HD ?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

No one knows an exact date yet, just that they will launch this spring, which could mean anytime between March 20th and June 21st if they mean the actual season or anytime between now and July if they're being general. It's also possible that they won't give out an exact date in advanced so the first sign of it will be when they show up in the uplink report.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Watch the skies ...I do - and will report what I see as soon as I can.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> Others will say "What's Lotus 123" as that company and its software have long since ceased to be...
> 
> There are too many problems, not the least of which being poor infrastructure, bandwidth/speed issues, and escalating costs that will prevent IPTV from being "the main thing" for years to come. There are too many roadblocks right now to internet-delivered content squeezing out the satellite and cable world.
> 
> Yes, there is some unique internet-created/distributed content... and that finds an audience and is doing well... but that is still not the majority of TV content being watched by a long shot.


You know Walt Disney has to be rolling in his grave.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

Stewart Vernon said:


> One clue to look for, perhaps... Anyone with a Hopper... check your ABC recordings and see when they stop putting the AutoHop on them after the first night. Since this contract calls for a 3rd day delay... I would assume that would be one of the easier things to implement in this new contract... and Dish might have to prove they are sticking to that before they get the new uplinks for channels.


There is no 3 day delay on anything this week, so I guess that isn't what Disney is asking for


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

No effective date has been announced. We all should be patient.


----------



## Grandude (Oct 21, 2004)

Stewart Vernon said:


> Others will say "What's Lotus 123" as that company and its software have long since ceased to be...


Hey, I use Lotus 123 every day. Still a 'killer app' for me. :hurah:


----------



## thomasjk (Jan 10, 2006)

I used Visicalc long before Lotus 123 and Excel came along.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

thomasjk said:


> I used Visicalc long before Lotus 123 and Excel came along.


Funny you mentioned Visicalc. I mentioned it in a post yesterday:



phrelin said:


> ... And though it doesn't justify Prop 13, I have to acknowledge it wasn't so easy to calculate what was going to happen then, as VisiCalc didn't hit the market until 1979 and my wife and I didn't discover it until 1980. Back then we could do the math, but not everyone could. Now I couldn't do the math without a spreadsheet.


VisiCalc was a real eye opener to the potential of the personal computer in 1980. VisiCalc running on our Tandy Model II's, it could do about 85% of what I do with Excel today. 1-2-3 was introduced in 1983, the same year we bought a Tandy 2000 running MS-DOS (I really did not want to buy an IBM computer). In the late 1980's we locked into 1-2-3, Word Perfect, and dBASE on Compaq's.


----------



## satcrazy (Mar 16, 2011)

In the end we all will pay, as subs, whether we watch these channels or not.

Speaking for myself, I couldn't care less about ESPN, and I do not have children to entertain. I can live without the meager offerings of ABC.
What I can do without is yet another increase, and all the afore mentioned contractual lingo translates into just that, make no mistake.

I know I'm not the only one that thinks this is out of hand.


----------



## Lincoln6Echo (Jul 11, 2007)

All I care about is getting the *HD* feeds back for *Disney* and *Disney XD* for *Star Wars: Rebels *this Fall. I do not wanna have to wait to get the Blu-trays to see Rebels in HD.


----------



## hasbeen29650 (Mar 25, 2012)

I sure would like to see some implementation of the deal. No HD yet, no access to WatchESPN etc. Mostly all we have seen in press releases.


----------



## thomasjk (Jan 10, 2006)

Its been stated at Satguys that the contract effective date has not yet been reached and that significant back end work has to be done.


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

i just want to let you know that the disney HD channels are uplinked right now

5316 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family added to 110° TP 19 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 10 Ch 180
5316 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family added to 61.5° TP 10 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 10 Ch 180
5320 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) added to 110° TP 13 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 12 Ch 172
5320 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) added to 61.5° TP 10 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 12 Ch 172
9530 ESNWS (142 HD) ESPNews added to 129° TP 29 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 11 Ch 142
9530 ESNWS (142 HD) ESPNews added to 61.5° TP 10 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 11 Ch 142
9531 ESPNU (141 HD) ESPN U added to 110° TP 13 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 11 Ch 141
9531 ESPNU (141 HD) ESPN U added to 61.5° TP 10 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 11 Ch 141
9557 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) added to 110° TP 13 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 12 Ch 172
9557 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) added to 61.5° TP 10 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 12 Ch 172
9558 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family added to 110° TP 19 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 10 Ch 180
9558 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family added to 61.5° TP 10 (HD *TEST* Hidden) EPG linked to 119° TP 10 Ch 180

thanks

Allen


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

NOT available to customers yet ... Just to make that abundantly clear before the "why can't I see them" posts appear.


----------



## thomasjk (Jan 10, 2006)

And only on the 119 Sat.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

thomasjk said:


> And only on the 119 Sat.


According to the uplink I read... not on 119 at all... on 61.5 or 110 depending on the arc.

In any event... wonder why no DisneyXD in HD? That is disappointing, as I would have expected that to come at the same time as these HD feeds.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

thomasjk said:


> And only on the 119 Sat.


The channels are on 110 and 61.5 ... the EPG is shared with the SD channels on 119.
(DISH will probably split off the EPG for the HD channels at some point. Most HD channels do not use the SD channel EPG.)

The way I read the press release, DisneyXD was not promised in HD. It was mentioned for On Demand content and the four channels uplinked today were mentioned as being added in HD.
"As part of the agreement, DISH will launch ESPNEWS, ESPNU, Disney Channel and ABC Family in high definition."
"Disney-branded On Demand offerings, including Disney Channel On Demand, Disney Junior On Demand, and Disney XD On Demand."


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

do you think disney/abc will add more movies to the free movie section of ondemand?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

James Long said:


> The way I read the press release, DisneyXD was not promised in HD. It was mentioned for On Demand content and the four channels uplinked today were mentioned as being added in HD.
> "As part of the agreement, DISH will launch ESPNEWS, ESPNU, Disney Channel and ABC Family in high definition."
> "Disney-branded On Demand offerings, including Disney Channel On Demand, Disney Junior On Demand, and Disney XD On Demand."


Yeah, that's how I read that press release too... but it is disappointing if true. It also seems weird that they would go through all this for 6 months or so and leave out a previously carried HD feed from the re-launch.


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

the channels are now on

9530 ESNWS (142 HD) ESPNews 129° TP 29 HD - *AVAILABLE*
9530 ESNWS (142 HD) ESPNews 61.5° TP 10 HD - *AVAILABLE*
9531 ESPNU (141 HD) ESPN U 110° TP 13 HD - *AVAILABLE*
9531 ESPNU (141 HD) ESPN U 61.5° TP 10 HD - *AVAILABLE*
9557 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) 110° TP 13 HD - *AVAILABLE*
9557 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) 61.5° TP 10 HD - *AVAILABLE*
9558 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family 110° TP 19 HD - *AVAILABLE*
9558 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family 61.5° TP 10 HD - *AVAILABLE*
5316 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family 110° TP 19 HD Hidden - *AVAILABLE*
5316 ABCF (180 HD) ABC Family 61.5° TP 10 HD Hidden - *AVAILABLE*
5320 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) 110° TP 13 HD Hidden - *AVAILABLE*

5320 DISE (172 HD) Disney (East) 61.5° TP 10 HD Hidden - *AVAILABLE*.


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

now when are they going to add the abc/disney ondemand channels and also the apps also.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Some people are hard to please. 

Be happy!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Beating the horse... but I still would like to see Dish/Disney formally address why DisneyXD hasn't been mentioned as coming back in HD and if ESPNClassic is going away as a traditional channel in favor of On Demand. For all the details they seem to have nailed during the 6 month negotiation, they released press releases with holes in them that beg filling.

I find it very odd to put all this time into everything including agreements for channels that aren't launching for another 4-5 months... but leaving out some existing channels including one (DisneyXD) that they used to have in HD... it just seems strange not to cover all the bases and explain that.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> Beating the horse... but I still would like to see Dish/Disney formally address why DisneyXD hasn't been mentioned as coming back in HD and if ESPNClassic is going away as a traditional channel in favor of On Demand.


Press releases are generally written to be positive ... they covered the conversion of ESPN Classic to VOD is a positive way (the channel will be converted). DisneyXD content will be available on demand. While it is always possible that DisneyXD may still be coming I believe that the silence speaks ... it is not positive to say "DisneyXD will remain a SD channel".

I'd like everything in HD ... even stuff I don't watch. But today DISH has capacity for *FOUR* additional HD channels without going to 10 channels per transponder on the rest of their HD transponders or somehow finding additional space for channels. Which four remaining or future channels would you rather see in HD?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> . But today DISH has capacity for *FOUR* additional HD channels without going to 10 channels per transponder on the rest of their HD transponders or somehow finding additional space for channels. Which four remaining or future channels would you rather see in HD?


Congrats on the New HD.
Do they have a Launch planned? And since they have 2 Arcs does that mean they have space on one but not the other?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

damondlt said:


> Congrats on the New HD.
> Do they have a Launch planned? And since they have 2 Arcs does that mean they have space on one but not the other?


A launch would not help - DISH does not have spare licenses at the current orbital locations to add more transponders and there are already hundreds of spotbeams at each location for locals (no easy way to free up transponders by putting local channels on fewer spots). There is more room on Eastern Arc for new channels but not everyone can see that arc. (DISH had to give up their licenses at 148 because that satellite was needed elsewhere.)


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> A launch would not help - DISH does not have spare licenses at the current orbital locations to add more transponders and there are already hundreds of spotbeams at each location for locals (no easy way to free up transponders by putting local channels on fewer spots). There is more room on Eastern Arc for new channels but not everyone can see that arc. (DISH had to give up their licenses at 148 because that satellite was needed elsewhere.)


Thats not good. What about the 110 119 from Directv?

Would they sell or transfer to dish?. Or no way would Directv ever do that?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I would not expect DirecTV to sell or lease their DBS space to DISH. DISH needs a place to put future channels. That is their challenge.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I was wondering if this was an east vs west scenario... If I'm reading the uplinks correct, it looked like these HD feeds were new uplinks and did not replace any already existing "test" or "temp" or whatever uplinks... at least not on eastern arc... which led me to believe that bandwidth was not an issue... but then I can't say I paid as much attention to west as I do east since I am on east... and maybe eastern arc temp channels were not disrupted but western arc ones were?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Nothing was taken out of the uplink to add these channels ... but test channels in the uplink are not necessarily real channels on the satellite. In this case, on Western Arc the new channels filled out two transponders to the 9 channel level - on Eastern Arc the new channels were placed on a transponder on 61.5 that had only two HD feeds (the channel 100 HopView background and one HD RSN feed for a part time channel).


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Thats not good. What about the 110 119 from Directv?
> 
> Would they sell or transfer to dish?. Or no way would Directv ever do that?


I could only envision a swap of space if it was mutually beneficial. And we have been over it before and couldn't find any space dish has the DIRECTV would want and vice versa really.


----------



## shadough (Dec 31, 2006)

Was there any mention of Dish getting added to the 'provider' list for the WatchESPN App?


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I have been hoping that Dish would be listed as a provider on the Disney site. I have asked both Disney and Dish to solve this. I have the Roku, and so far Dish or Direct are not listed. Really odd. But it is nice to have them back in HD. Thank you Dish.

Patrick


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I guess Dish just does not have enough space for everything to be in HD. If they move everything to MPEG 4, would that free up bandwidth? By what it sounds, Dish will not have room for a lot ofnew HD for sometime though. That is too bad.

Patrick


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

mwdxer said:


> I guess Dish just does not have enough space for everything to be in HD. If they move everything to MPEG 4, would that free up bandwidth? By what it sounds, Dish will not have room for a lot ofnew HD for sometime though. That is too bad.


Getting rid of MPEG2 (or QPSK transponders as a first step) would free up space on existing satellites. But doing that would require replacing millions of older QPSK only receivers that are still in use. There are some SD receivers that can do MPEG2 on 8PSK transponders (a roughly 50% increase in channels per transponder). Getting everyone over to 8PSK, preferably MPEG4, will not be cheap or a quick transition.

Any answer has to take into account every supported receiver in the field. Even changes that only affect the HD signals need to work on receivers that were placed as early as 2005 (411 and ViP-211) and 2006 (ViP-622) or we're back to replacing receivers.

DISH can squeeze a few more HD channels on existing transponders so all is not lost ... but new HD comes at a cost. I hope people really enjoy what they have.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

James Long said:


> Getting rid of MPEG2 (or QPSK transponders as a first step) would free up space on existing satellites. But doing that would require replacing millions of older QPSK only receivers that are still in use. There are some SD receivers that can do MPEG2 on 8PSK transponders (a roughly 50% increase in channels per transponder). Getting everyone over to 8PSK, preferably MPEG4, will not be cheap or a quick transition.


While you may be right, at some point is has to be cheaper than acquiring new orbital slots and launching new birds.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

sregener said:


> While you may be right, at some point is has to be cheaper than acquiring new orbital slots and launching new birds.


It will get done eventually ... just like DirecTV will eventually get rid of all their MPEG2 only devices. DISH just needs to figure out how to get it done and remain (mostly) profitable.


----------



## rajmarie (Apr 3, 2012)

James Long said:


> It will get done eventually ... just like DirecTV will eventually get rid of all their MPEG2 only devices. DISH just needs to figure out how to get it done and remain (mostly) profitable.


Imo dish is waiting till the last moment in the hope that those subs will call in and ask for HD upgrade themselves. This will allow dish to Bill those customers upgrade cost plus tie them to another 2 year contract.
If dish wanted they could have at least swapped all legacy equipment allowing at least 8psk transition on western arc by now

Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk


----------



## jrh1985 (Feb 8, 2010)

I'm confused, weren't we supposed to get DIS JR the channel? Is it still coming?


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

jrh1985 said:


> I'm confused, weren't we supposed to get DIS JR the channel? Is it still coming?


Reread post #1.


----------



## thomasjk (Jan 10, 2006)

According to the press release Disney jr is included. So I expect it to come along soon.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Thanks for the update. Isn't the Eastern Arc all MPEG4 now? Are there more subs that use the Western Arc? Living on the West Coast (Oregon), I can use either Arc's but the Westerb Arc is higher so less apt to get rainfade.

Patrick


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

mwdxer said:


> Thanks for the update. Isn't the Eastern Arc all MPEG4 now? Are there more subs that use the Western Arc? Living on the West Coast (Oregon), I can use either Arc's but the Westerb Arc is higher so less apt to get rainfade.
> 
> Patrick


Once they formally started putting people on eastern arc years ago, yes, they made it a requirement to get the newer equipment for MPEG4... so while there could be a few legacy mixed arc/custom install scenarios... officially anyone on eastern arc is required to have the newer equipment.

Western arc, though, still has a lot of subscribers... and even people with a primary MPEG4 receiver on western arc might still have some legacy equipment in use too for other rooms.

Dish tries to entice people to swap to things like the Hopper partially to get that system out there but also to upgrade those folk... There will one day be a tipping point where less people are left to upgrade OR costs of satellite launch are prohibitive by comparison OR they are willing to cut and run on customers who don't want to upgrade... but we are likely years away from that point.

IF Dish takes the hard-line too soon to "force" people to swap out equipment... those customers might decide to switch to cable, DirecTV, or cut the cord altogether... so Dish has to be careful applying too much pressure too soon.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There is not much on Eastern Arc that is of use to a subscriber without MPEG4 equipment.

DISH loses 2.5 million plus subscribers each year and replaces them with new subscribers (at a cost of $842 each). That works out to 5.3 years to cycle through all 14 million customers. Unfortunately the customers they lose and replace are not necessarily the ones with the older equipment. Too many people bouncing back and forth between providers every two years or so.


----------



## Tiny (Feb 1, 2009)

:righton: :hurah: :hurah: :hurah: :hurah: :hurah: :hurah: :hurah: Today AT Last ESPNU and news in HD


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

Stewart Vernon said:


> There will one day be a tipping point where less people are left to upgrade OR costs of satellite launch are prohibitive by comparison OR they are willing to cut and run on customers who don't want to upgrade... but we are likely years away from that point.


I suspect we will have transitioned completely to IPTV by that point. Even now, cable/satellite has become what old folks subscribe to.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

James Long said:


> Getting rid of MPEG2 (or QPSK transponders as a first step) would free up space on existing satellites. But doing that would require replacing millions of older QPSK only receivers that are still in use. There are some SD receivers that can do MPEG2 on 8PSK transponders (a roughly 50% increase in channels per transponder). Getting everyone over to 8PSK, preferably MPEG4, will not be cheap or a quick transition.
> 
> Any answer has to take into account every supported receiver in the field. Even changes that only affect the HD signals need to work on receivers that were placed as early as 2005 (411 and ViP-211) and 2006 (ViP-622) or we're back to replacing receivers.
> 
> DISH can squeeze a few more HD channels on existing transponders so all is not lost ... but new HD comes at a cost. I hope people really enjoy what they have.


When will Dish put another bird up?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Paul Secic said:


> When will Dish put another bird up?


The next satellite should be Echostar XVIII (18) launching at the end of 2015 to 110. It is a replacement for Echostar X (10). It will not be adding any additional bandwidth.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

Wilf said:


> I suspect we will have transitioned completely to IPTV by that point. Even now, cable/satellite has become what old folks subscribe to.


Or people who don't live in a major metro area subscribe to. I know it's hard for some people to believe that not everyone lives in a big city or even real near to one and that once you're outside a major metro area there's just not the infrastructure to support something like IPTV. There's an awful lot of people out there for IPTV will never be a viable option unless there's a serious push to get real HSI to everyone, which there doesn't seem to be any serious effort to do.


----------



## TheGrove (Jan 10, 2007)

tsmacro said:


> Or people who don't live in a major metro area subscribe to. I know it's hard for some people to believe that not everyone lives in a big city or even real near to one and that once you're outside a major metro area there's just not the infrastructure to support something like IPTV. There's an awful lot of people out there for IPTV will never be a viable option unless there's a serious push to get real HSI to everyone, which there doesn't seem to be any serious effort to do.


Exactly, where I live I only had a 1.5mbps DSL line until a couple months ago. I can now get up to 4mbsp but that is as fast as I can get.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

There is a push by AT&T and Verizon to ditch copper and go all wireless at some point and that would reach everyone a lot faster than wiring everyone. But who knows.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

IPTV is MUCH farther away than some seem to think. Besides the poor infrastructure and rural coverage... the ISPs want to charge too much for high-speed and have bandwidth caps and overage charges which will make those services cost WAY more than current cable/satellite that people already think cost too much.

IPTV is fine as supplemental "TV" but will not ever become a primary source for most people unless and until some major paradigm shifts happen with the ISPs.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Agreed. Just bought a Roku box to supplement the Dish and while it is fun, even we went out and installed an OTA antenna, our viewing habits would have to change significantly before IPTV could be an adequate replacement. Not to mention the fact that my ISP wanted an additional $30 per month to upgrade to a faster speed. Add on all of the subscription fees for some of the individual channels that Roku offers on a pay basis and the savings doesn't seem worth it, at least not yet.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Meant to say even if went out and installed an OTA antenna


----------



## anex80 (Jul 29, 2005)

joetex said:


> Agreed. Just bought a Roku box to supplement the Dish and while it is fun, even we went out and installed an OTA antenna, our viewing habits would have to change significantly before IPTV could be an adequate replacement. Not to mention the fact that my ISP wanted an additional $30 per month to upgrade to a faster speed. Add on all of the subscription fees for some of the individual channels that Roku offers on a pay basis and the savings doesn't seem worth it, at least not yet.


I agree completely! I recently priced out what a cord-cutting scenario would look like for me. I added in the cost of subscription services like Netflix and Hulu, the subscription of an OTA recorder such as Tivo, and what it would cost to purchase all of the shows not available on subscriptions via Apple TV. The savings ended up being only $15/ month which I can easily justify considering the wealth of Sports programming available via Sat that I would not have with IPTV. I can see certain subscription services as a value add but I don't think its viable as a full fledged replacement, at least not for me.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

anex80 said:


> I added in the cost of subscription services like Netflix and Hulu, the subscription of an OTA recorder such as Tivo, and what it would cost to purchase all of the shows not available on subscriptions via Apple TV.


Isn't Hulu + Tivo a somewhat redundant system? Most of Hulu Plus (I know, not all) is to give you access to network programming a day or two later.

Tivo is not the cheapest long-term DVR solution for OTA, though it is probably the nicest. Channel Master's new DVR would work out to be less expensive, but does have a slightly higher sticker price.

Is it really necessary to purchase all of those shows? For instance, I'm a huge BBC fan, and Top Gear and Orphan Black are two series I really enjoy. Top Gear season 20 DVD is only $12 on Amazon. A month of BBC America was costing me $10. And Orphan Black's DVD will be out shortly after the show airs in the US, and my library will have it available for a loan shortly thereafter. So I can get that one for free. It won't be "the same" as subscribing to BBC America, but it will be a significant cost savings over the course of a year. Cord-cutting to save money takes more than just replacing the delivery system. It takes a different mindset about how important it is to watch the latest stuff.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> There is a push by AT&T and Verizon to ditch copper and go all wireless at some point and that would reach everyone a lot faster than wiring everyone. But who knows.


Yep at a ridiculous price and ridiculous data caps. Verizion is already trying it in our area. Might as well subscribe to Satellite internet.

Sent from my PantechP8010 using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

sregener said:


> Cord-cutting to save money takes more than just replacing the delivery system. It takes a different mindset about how important it is to watch the latest stuff.


Binge watching with no commercials more than makes up for the content not being the latest stuff in my case. After a couple of years with Netflix, I find it next to impossible for me to enjoy anything with commercials - even the 30-sec skip button is annoying.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> There is a push by AT&T and Verizon to ditch copper and go all wireless at some point and that would reach everyone a lot faster than wiring everyone. But who knows.


That will be ten years down the road.


----------



## lee635 (Apr 17, 2002)

Sorry guys. :grin: This is a generational thing. Younger folks are cutting the telephone and cable/satellite cord in record numbers. My two teenagers almost never watch Dish and ceratinly would not do something as uncool as watching live TV. We have netflix and amazon and that's about all they watch, plus a lot of goofy youtube-type stuff....


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

Youngsters don't mind watching things on that itty-bitty screen, but as they grow up (age) things will change.

Their big screen TV may be wireless, but they will not stick with the little screens - too little data on one page.


----------



## anex80 (Jul 29, 2005)

sregener said:


> Isn't Hulu + Tivo a somewhat redundant system? Most of Hulu Plus (I know, not all) is to give you access to network programming a day or two later.
> 
> Tivo is not the cheapest long-term DVR solution for OTA, though it is probably the nicest. Channel Master's new DVR would work out to be less expensive, but does have a slightly higher sticker price.
> 
> Is it really necessary to purchase all of those shows? For instance, I'm a huge BBC fan, and Top Gear and Orphan Black are two series I really enjoy. Top Gear season 20 DVD is only $12 on Amazon. A month of BBC America was costing me $10. And Orphan Black's DVD will be out shortly after the show airs in the US, and my library will have it available for a loan shortly thereafter. So I can get that one for free. It won't be "the same" as subscribing to BBC America, but it will be a significant cost savings over the course of a year. Cord-cutting to save money takes more than just replacing the delivery system. It takes a different mindset about how important it is to watch the latest stuff.


I realize there are cheaper alternatives to my scenario and if I ever actually did take the plunge I would probably utilize them. My point was to as close as possible mimic my current experience with satelite tv.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

My grandson lives with me now. I am 65 and he is nearly 19 and it is all about video games, Ipods, Smart Phones. He never listens to a radio or watches Dish. The younger generation growing up will not be supporting what grandpa does. . By the time these kids hit 30 or 40, the world will be streaming in most places. The first question he asked was "Do you have wifi?" I do, but if I didn't he would not have liked it. I think that is more important than food and roof over his head. They work, then the live for their games and such. Most of them do not interest me. I have Dish, OTA, my BUD, Roku, wifi radio, etc.

Patrick


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The medium will adjust (which is part of the deal announced in this thread) but there is still a lot of support from the young ones for "event television". The popular show comes on and they watch it live or as close to live as possible. They "sync their second screens". They tweet the shows they watch and hashtag get interactive.

DISH's Hopper includes apps where viewers can interact. Click the blue button and choose "Social" and you can see tweets about the show you are watching. One can even tweet or post to Facebook directly from the app.

There are a lot more distractions for a 19 year old than when I was 19. My grandpa rarely watched television. My parents watched with the family. Times changed ... but the concept of "event television" ... gathering around to watch something ... is still strong. We have just changed the device we gather around and how we gather. We still need the content.


----------



## LazhilUT (Mar 24, 2012)

So I see some of the ESPN channels in HD already...ESPNews and ESPNU...
Is ESPN Classic going to HD?

When are the other Disney channels moving to HD as well? My son was watching DisneyXD and it was not in HD.
What about Disney Junior?


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

LazhilUT said:


> So I see some of the ESPN channels in HD already...ESPNews and ESPNU...
> Is ESPN Classic going to HD?
> 
> When are the other Disney channels moving to HD as well? My son was watching DisneyXD and it was not in HD.
> What about Disney Junior?


 ESPN Classic going to HD already.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The problem with the whole "young people only want" argument... Netflix and things like that are only cheaper now because the revenue is already coming from cable, satellite, and commercial TV... IF people "cut the cord" enough, and the people producing those shows are losing money... then one of two things happens:

1. They stop making new content.
2. They start charging the "cord cutter" more for access.

Youtube is free but has commercials and premium content. Netflix and others have raised prices OR lost access to content.

This will continue. There is no such thing as a free ride...

And people tend to forget adding the cost of their mobile data plan or their home broadband to the cost of their "cord cutting" scenario...

You will pay for the content somehow... or you will not get it.

It's a "be careful what you wish for" scenario... because if things go the way some folk seem to want them to go... instead of worrying if Dish will pay ESPN or drop their channels... you will be the one who has to directly pay ESPN or not watch their content... and you will not have the negotiating power that Dish currently does when that day comes.

I, unfortunately, see a day when content might be direct-sold to viewers by the content producer... and they name the price and they are the only way you can get that content... so you will pay or you will not watch... and popular content will cost a lot more because they know you want to watch it.

I don't think people will like that world once we get to it.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Paul Secic said:


> ESPN Classic going to HD already.


ESPN Classic is going away ... it will become On Demand only.



LazhilUT said:


> When are the other Disney channels moving to HD as well? My son was watching DisneyXD and it was not in HD.
> What about Disney Junior?


Only the four channels already converted were announced to be coming in HD. There are always possibilities, but I would not expect those two channels in HD.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I will be sad if we don't get DisneyXD and Disney Jr in HD. With all that negotiation time, if they left stuff out of the negotiation it will feel empty and have many (like me) wondering why they couldn't have solved things sooner.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I will be sad if we don't get DisneyXD and Disney Jr in HD. With all that negotiation time, if they left stuff out of the negotiation it will feel empty and have many (like me) wondering why they couldn't have solved things sooner.


I wouldn't consider the channels left out of the negotiation ... only that in the final agreement it was decided that those two channels would be carried in SD. Not all negotiations end in HD carriage. Perhaps HD carriage is specified for the future (when DISH has more capacity). Perhaps ABC/ESPN felt it was better to have SEC in HD than those two channels.

While I agree with the concept of "everything in HD" (even the stuff I never watch) it seems that DISH's carriage deal has compromise on both sides. And cooperation to allow for the most popular channels to be available in HD plus a lot of online content available. While the final agreement may not be everything either side nor every customer wanted they came to an agreement.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

Stewart Vernon said:


> And people tend to forget adding the cost of their mobile data plan or their home broadband to the cost of their "cord cutting" scenario...
> 
> I, unfortunately, see a day when content might be direct-sold to viewers by the content producer... and they name the price and they are the only way you can get that content... so you will pay or you will not watch... and popular content will cost a lot more because they know you want to watch it.


I think most people consider the cost of their home broadband to be irrelevant. I, for instance, would have high-speed Internet at home whether I had pay TV service or not. It's necessary for my education and job search. So using it for video is essentially free. And if I wanted to be a purist and increase the bandwidth for just video, that's only an additional $20/month. Which, combined with Amazon Prime (which I purchased mainly for shipping, but the video is a nice add-on), means I'm paying $28/month for IPTV and getting a ton of other benefits on the side. Compare that to the $70/month I was paying Dish for a Hopper and AT120, and got nothing but television for that price, and it's easy to see why cord-cutting is so popular.

What will hurt me far more is when the content producers stop releasing DVDs/Blu-Rays of seasons of shows and movies. I don't see my library picking up a video streaming service like they have Overdrive for books. But as long as they keep doing that, I'm able to "stream" a large amount of video for free using my library card.

I don't think the content producers will be able to name their price. They have a dual revenue stream problem - they can't sell ads on ESPN if nobody buys the service. And without the ability to force bundling, they may actually have to charge less for their service to keep it popular with most people. What will that mean if ESPN loses revenue? It will mean that sports leagues - college and pro - will lose revenue from contracts. Or broadcast may see a resurgence as their ratings climb. Either scenario doesn't sound too bad to me. Right now, we feed the money to ESPN and they feed it to the NFL, Big10, MLB, etc.


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

I suspect most of the "kids" using broadband to satisfy their content needs have someone else paying the bill for them. I have 3 in my house. I pay the Dish bill, the internet bill and the cell phone bill. I wonder how many of these kids will have such items when they have to pay the bill. Raise the cost of the content when they catch up to cord cutting and then we'll really see.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Let me try an analogy... everybody loves when I try analogies! 

You can buy stuff from a department store, or a thrift store... The thrift store only gets remaining unsold product from department stores.

So... you say, I'm switching to thrift store only because it is much cheaper. Then you say "everybody switch to the thrift store and save money"... so then everybody switches to the thrift store.

What happens?

The thrift store runs out of product because the department store goes out of business and the products are no longer made because they no longer have primary outlets and the thrift stores won't pay them as much...

OR

The thrift store sees the opportunity and offers to pay more to keep the product coming, but that means the thrift store has to raise their prices... and we are right back where we started.

Netflix, Hulu, Roku, Amazon, whatever you like because it is cheap... is only cheap because it is not the primary revenue stream for the content you are watching. IF the primary revenue stream is cut or severely reduced by people leaving cable/satellite in droves as some "wish" would happen... then the content will either go away OR Netflix and others will have to start charging more.

It's fair to price-shop and to want the best deal... but don't fall prey to the thought that something WAY cheaper will always be way cheaper... and hope the "big guy" goes out of business... sometimes you get what you ask for and realize it isn't what you wanted.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

Stewart Vernon said:


> So... you say, I'm switching to thrift store only because it is much cheaper. Then you say "everybody switch to the thrift store and save money"... so then everybody switches to the thrift store.
> 
> Netflix, Hulu, Roku, Amazon, whatever you like because it is cheap... is only cheap because it is not the primary revenue stream for the content you are watching. IF the primary revenue stream is cut or severely reduced by people leaving cable/satellite in droves as some "wish" would happen... then the content will either go away OR Netflix and others will have to start charging more.
> 
> It's fair to price-shop and to want the best deal... but don't fall prey to the thought that something WAY cheaper will always be way cheaper... and hope the "big guy" goes out of business... sometimes you get what you ask for and realize it isn't what you wanted.


I think a better analogy would be to look at mass-market paperbacks. They're about $7 now. Hardcovers, even discounted heavily by Amazon, are typically $15-25 for bestsellers. What if everybody switched to paperbacks? Obviously, the price would rise. But publishers continue to make and sell hardcovers in large numbers (and we can include eBooks at hardcover prices in this equation.) This is not a developing market, but a mature one, and it has been demonstrated that it works.

So why in the world would a publisher even make mass-market paperbacks? The answer is simple: it is a way to capture another revenue stream after the primary one has dried up. It's not as much money for the publisher, but the costs are low and any return is better than no return.

I don't think everyone will switch to streaming services. It's not for everyone, just as mass-market paperbacks aren't. Some people are always going to want the convenience and "first-look" availability of pay TV service. What we might see is a smaller catalog of free options, or products that take longer to appear on streaming services.

I'm still waiting to see what Dish charges for their ESPN streaming service.


----------



## pfred (Feb 8, 2009)

Lets make another analogy: The music industry.
I don't have exact numbers, but look at the inflation-adjusted amount spent last year on music versus pre-Napster, and I guarantee a huge difference.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

pfred said:


> Lets make another analogy: The music industry.
> I don't have exact numbers, but look at the inflation-adjusted amount spent last year on music versus pre-Napster, and I guarantee a huge difference.


You just cannot ever compare the music industry to the tv and film industry. It doesn't work for so many reasons.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

sregener said:


> I don't think everyone will switch to streaming services. It's not for everyone, just as mass-market paperbacks aren't. Some people are always going to want the convenience and "first-look" availability of pay TV service. What we might see is a smaller catalog of free options, or products that take longer to appear on streaming services.


That's the unstated part of my thoughts. I don't believe we will reach that tipping point. The main point of my thoughts, though, was for those who think we should want to reach that tipping point.

For many reasons, I believe we will not go there.... but I caution those who think and hope that we will.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

All information indicates that the 14-24 age group is watching "TV" on tablets and computers. Of course, they're not watching traditional TVs but what's important is that they are watching streaming video not on a schedule.

Whrn they get older and buy a TV like a Samsung 46-Inch 1080p Smart LED HDTV to watch TV "as a family" they will be watching streaming through Apps or a browser. Perhaps the "on demand" options of the $100+ cable/satellite subscription might appeal, but they are not sufficiently going to be watching so regularly and reliably on a live+same day or even 3 day schedule that the broadcast networks can sell their viewing eyes to advertisers.

Over the past decade the over 49 viewers have completely gained control of the live+same day ratings because they are the only reliable eyes.

That next generation is simply not interested in CBS telling them that to watch "The Good Wife" they have to turn on the TV at 9 pm on Sunday, oh and then if football ran over they have to sit there up to an hour waiting for it to come on. That's the revolution evolution that's going to change TV.

In retrospect, I'm not even sure why my generation let the purveyors of the "vast wasteland" take control of our lives and our families. I just know we did and it seemed OK at the time. But watching TV as a family was never a human interactive experience comparable to a weekend family outing or even nightly family dinner.

What's happening is the direction of "on demand" is shifting _from_ the media corporation successfully getting us all simultaneously line up in front of our TV's like deer blinded in the headlights.

No, you can't compare the music industry - say one track - to an industry in which it costs $1 million to create an episode of a series we'd like to watch. The amature cat videos on YouTube aren't going to replace TV. But the economic model of selling the episode directly to individual viewers who tolerate some targeted ads is viable instead of selling to a TV network which then sells it to a broadcast station or a cable or satellite system to sell it to you.

This won't happen tomorrow or even in my lifetime. But it will happen before those 14-24 year old folks reach 34-44.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

phrelin said:


> All information indicates that the 14-24 age group is watching "TV" on tablets and computers. Of course, they're not watching traditional TVs but what's important is that they are watching streaming video not on a schedule.


"All information"? Not one contrary report? I agree that the 14-24 age group streams ... but I believe the trend is overstated. You are making it sound like no one in that age group ever watches TV on a TV.



phrelin said:


> Whrn they get older and buy a TV like a Samsung 46-Inch 1080p Smart LED HDTV to watch TV "as a family" they will be watching streaming through Apps or a browser.


That is a prediction. Perhaps one of their apps will be a software Joey streaming from their DISH satellite subscription. Or if they have affordable high speed Internet their DISH streaming subscription.

Getting the data to the viewer will always be the challenge. Sending the same data to millions of people works best through broadcasting. Even if the satellite signal is received and stored until viewed a few hours later or in a binge viewing session at the end of the season, satellite is an efficient way of getting a lot of data to millions of people.

Providing individual server connections to content, especially multiple connections the same endpoint (different viewing surfaces within a home) is inefficient.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

People ultimately go where the content is if they want to watch it. I prefer HD, and if good HD is on, I ignore my SD channels... but if a program comes on an SD channel and that's my only option to watch, then I will... So there are unique things on Amazon, Crackle, Netflix, YouTube, and so forth... and people will find and watch that content... and maybe while there will watch other things out of convenience.

But as James says... the most efficient method is satellite or cable delivery (OTA too but not nearly as much choice)... I just don't see the streaming "taking over" as some keep wanting to happen or predicting.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> "All information"? Not one contrary report? I agree that the 14-24 age group streams ... but I believe the trend is overstated. You are making it sound like no one in that age group ever watches TV on a TV.
> 
> That is a prediction. Perhaps one of their apps will be a software Joey streaming from their DISH satellite subscription. Or if they have affordable high speed Internet their DISH streaming subscription.
> 
> ...


OK. "All information" may be a bit overstated but more and more polls and surveys indicated it is true. I have two granddaughters 18 and 11. The 18-year-old when she was young did watch very carefully screened DVD's with her mother. And she probably does watch a few things right now. But streaming video on her computer, iPad and phone is a big part of her viewing. The 11 year old rarely watches TV but spends a lot of time on streaming video.

In terms of efficiency in technology, I wrote software for a computer that had 64k of RAM. Programmers had to be extremely efficient. In a 4 GB environment, not so much and there's a lot of sloppy programming going on because efficiency isn't important any more.

Based upon source to viewer, analog broadcast TV was the most efficient way to get the video stream out until satellite. Today satellite is most efficient. And yet, cable is still the industry's signal source for the majority of homes.. And most of those cable TV homes can use the same cable as their ISP. And many of us satellite TV customers use cable as our ISP - I use Comcast. And Comcast and the others continue to upgrade their systems.

And Netflix and Amazon have servers in Comcast's buildings because in the end Comcast knows ... let's all sing "As Time Goes By" ... viewing habits are going to change.

Only one of my three 50+ "kids" regularly maintains cable/satellite TV service. I really don't see their kids, my grandkids, buying the "package of channels" over buying the "package of shows." Who they will buy from in 2030 remains to be seen.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

Once you start watching streaming TV, when it is without commercial breaks, it is very difficult to go back to watching regular TV chopped up in bit and pieces. Netflix has been sensitive to this, when they released the entire seasons of "House of Cards" for binge watchers (of which I am one). In some ways, I am reminded of TV in the fifties, when commercials were far fewer (and more clever).


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

But you can't possibly think that streaming TV with no commercial breaks can stay in place when streaming delivery of content surpasses Satellite and Cable delivered content, can you?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

david_jr said:


> But you can't possibly think that streaming TV with no commercial breaks can stay in place when streaming delivery of content surpasses Satellite and Cable delivered content, can you?


It depends on the price. People pay more for the commercial free (except product placement) versions of shows.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

david_jr said:


> But you can't possibly think that streaming TV with no commercial breaks can stay in place when streaming delivery of content surpasses Satellite and Cable delivered content, can you?


When was the last time you went to the movie theater and halfway through your feature, they broke to commercial?

It's simply a matter of what you're willing to pay to not put up with commercials. And if enough people will pay to avoid them, it becomes cost-effective to charge $2.99/episode for commercial-free viewing.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

sregener said:


> When was the last time you went to the movie theater and halfway through your feature, they broke to commercial?
> 
> It's simply a matter of what you're willing to pay to not put up with commercials. And if enough people will pay to avoid them, it becomes cost-effective to charge $2.99/episode for commercial-free viewing.


But that's not usually the conversation.

People complain when their cable/satellite bill goes up and say they are going to "cut the cord" to save money... The point to me is that IF enough people actually did that, then the prices would go up on those streaming services and they would be right back where they want.

So... complaining about high prices is good... but trying/hoping to drive one market out of the business in favor of another perceived cheaper one is likely to have ramifications.

Consider what we talk about in terms of picking channels vs picking tiers/packages... and people complain they only want to pay for what they watch... but then those before us set the trend by wanting discounted tiers instead of individual channels.

One day, if streaming is chosen because it is "cheaper" than satellite... IF satellite is driven out of business, then streaming will be the only game in town and we'll be back to higher prices on everything again and people will be dumbfounded as to how it happened and will forget that they actively chose that path.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

For me, watching "TV" without commercials and and paying more, is not an issue - I am fine with that. I feel fortunate in that (pseudo) sports and the newest, hottest movie are not items I have to watch. However, for the industry, the real issues are not old farts like me, it is the younger folks that mainly watch on their iPads and smartphones, and if they can't buy it in a convenient way - without bundles - they know how to easily "get it" without paying.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

Stewart Vernon said:


> People complain when their cable/satellite bill goes up and say they are going to "cut the cord" to save money... The point to me is that IF enough people actually did that, then the prices would go up on those streaming services and they would be right back where they want.
> 
> Consider what we talk about in terms of picking channels vs picking tiers/packages... and people complain they only want to pay for what they watch... but then those before us set the trend by wanting discounted tiers instead of individual channels.
> 
> One day, if streaming is chosen because it is "cheaper" than satellite... IF satellite is driven out of business, then streaming will be the only game in town and we'll be back to higher prices on everything again and people will be dumbfounded as to how it happened and will forget that they actively chose that path.


I understand what you're saying. But imagine if 75% of those who "cut the cord" put up an antenna and get at least the big 4 networks. We could see a resurgence in free TV. Right now, I don't need a streaming service to be content with my viewing options. My DVR is filling up with shows I haven't found time to get around to yet, and it's OTA-only. I'm getting most of my movies from the library, and a rare few from RedBox.

For people who are somewhat "content neutral", pay TV rarely makes sense. If you have a "must-have" show or two, streaming rounds out the package.

What could you do with an extra $800-1200/year, after taxes?


----------



## Orion9 (Jan 31, 2011)

sregener said:


> And if enough people will pay to avoid them, it becomes cost-effective to charge $2.99/episode for commercial-free viewing.


Yikes! It better be much less than that! Watching just one show a day that way would cost ~ $90/month or about twice what we pay Dish. And that's assuming the current $14.99/month internet plan is good enough for streaming. (And I don't think it is - but the next step in Internet prices around here seems to be around $40 to $50.)


----------



## Orion9 (Jan 31, 2011)

By the way, our local library is 5 miles away and would take a special trip. According to this site:

http://commutesolutions.org/external/calc.html

Making 1 trip a week to the library would add up to over $600/year in direct and indirect driving costs. (I zeroed out several of their costs and reduced others - their default estimate was higher.)

So, I'm all for libraries but using them routinely is not necessarily a big money saver (let alone a time saver) for many people. They probably work well if you're in a city and can walk to them.

There are some closer Redboxes and cost of the Blu-Ray rental _might_ be offset by the reduced distance. I've never actually tried a Redbox because there's always people already using it and I never want to stand in line. I might give it whirl someday.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Meanwhile... this happened:

*ESPN and Disney/ABC Television Group Launch WATCH Authenticated Products to DISH Customers*

*Live Linear Channel Streams and On Demand Content from WATCH ABC, WATCH ABC Family, WATCH Disney Channel, WATCH Disney XD and WatchESPN Now Available to DISH Video Subscribers at Home and On-the-Go via Multiple Devices*

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. & BURBANK, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- In the weeks immediately following the announcement of their groundbreaking, multi-year distribution deal, DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQISH) and The Walt Disney Company (NYSEIS) today announced the availability of WATCH ABC, WATCH ABC Family, WATCH Disney Channel, WATCH Disney XD and WatchESPN, enabling DISH's 14 million video subscribers to access live and on-demand news, entertainment and sports programming on computers, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles and connected devices. Access to WATCH Disney Junior as well as authenticated services from SEC ESPN Network and Longhorn Network will launch later this year.

DISH customers can now conveniently watch live programming from ABC Family, Disney Channel and Disney XD as well as live network streams of ABC, which are currently available in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Houston, Fresno, Philadelphia and Raleigh-Durham. Additionally, live events and programming from ESPN networks - including ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN3, ESPNU, ESPNEWS and ESPN Deportes - are now accessible. ESPN Goal Line and ESPN Buzzer Beater will also be available on WatchESPN when those channels are in season. Video subscribers will need to log in with their DISH online IDs and passwords to access all services.

In addition to live streaming, DISH video subscribers can watch the most current episodes of ABC and ABC Family original series the day after they air online at ABC.com and ABCFamily.com or on smartphones and tablets via the WATCH ABC and WATCH ABC Family apps, which are available free to download in the App Store, Google Play Store, Amazon Appstore and Windows Store. WATCH ABC is also accessible on Apple TV.

DISH customers can access live and popular on-demand programming from Disney Channel and Disney XD online at WATCHDisneyChannel.com and WATCHDisneyXD.com. The WATCH Disney Channel and WATCH Disney XD apps are free to download in the App Store and Amazon Appstore. The networks are also accessible on Apple TV and Roku.

For WatchESPN, DISH video subscribers can visit WatchESPN.com on their computers for live access to ESPN networks. Customers with a supported smartphone or tablet can also download the free WatchESPN app by visiting the App Store, Google Play Store, Amazon Appstore or Windows Store. The app features access to live content and on-demand video clips. WatchESPN live programming and on-demand clips are also available on Xbox 360, Xbox One, Apple TV and Roku.

*About DISH*
DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH), through its subsidiary DISH Network L.L.C., provides approximately 14.057 million satellite TV customers, as of Dec. 31, 2013, with the highest quality programming and technology with the most choices at the best value. Subscribers enjoy a high definition line-up with more than 200 national HD channels, the most international channels, and award-winning HD and DVR technology. DISH Network Corporation is a Fortune 200 company. Visit www.dish.com.

*About The Walt Disney Company*
The Walt Disney Company, together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, is a leading diversified international entertainment and media enterprise with five business segments: media networks, parks and resorts, studio entertainment, consumer products and interactive. Disney is a Dow 30 company and had annual revenues of $45 billion in its Fiscal Year 2013.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Awesome.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

FYI... I checked, and all the apps are functioning as described in the press release. I went ahead and downloaded the Disney Jr app even though that one doesn't work yet. I'm guessing we will not get access to that app until the channel itself launches on Dish.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I did the same thing tonight. Disney and Disney XD work fine now on the Roku LT. Thanks Dish & Disney!


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

Orion9 said:


> Making 1 trip a week to the library would add up to over $600/year in direct and indirect driving costs. (I zeroed out several of their costs and reduced others - their default estimate was higher.)
> 
> So, I'm all for libraries but using them routinely is not necessarily a big money saver (let alone a time saver) for many people. They probably work well if you're in a city and can walk to them.


For me, libraries are a $0 extra cost because I take my children there for programming at least once a week. So I can pick up movies while they're listening to story time, doing LEGO or playing chess. I've estimated that I take out somewhere between $10,000-$20,000 a year in materials between my children and myself. Most of that is not video material.

I drive within 2 blocks of the library on a very frequent basis, so I can combine errands which reduces the cost of dropping in to pick up a reserved item.

Your statement about a single $3 show per day being more expensive than Dish gets right to the point. That's what Amazon or iTunes charges now for a single HD show. But it is commercial free. Commercials really do pay the bills, much as viewers don't like them. I don't see the single episode price dropping significantly. What makes it work is that if you only have 1-2 shows that you must have that aren't on broadcast, it's cheaper to pay for those episodes than Dish service. It also reinforces the point Stewart keeps hammering (which I don't disagree with, by the way) that the end of cable/satellite service would not necessarily save viewers money. Viewing habits would have to change, as well.


----------



## jle1639 (Apr 15, 2013)

It time for direc get off their butt and adding some more hd channesl and we want the same as dish.


----------



## Orion9 (Jan 31, 2011)

sregener said:


> Your statement about a single $3 show per day being more expensive than Dish gets right to the point. That's what Amazon or iTunes charges now for a single HD show. But it is commercial free. Commercials really do pay the bills, much as viewers don't like them. I don't see the single episode price dropping significantly. What makes it work is that if you only have 1-2 shows that you must have that aren't on broadcast, it's cheaper to pay for those episodes than Dish service.


I just don't get this at all. I just checked a couple of shows on Amazon and yes indeed they sell for $2.99 per episode. But then again, the same show was available for less than half that on Blu-ray. And a quick check of the used Blu-Ray prices on Amazon seems to indicate that you can watch it on Blu-Ray for maybe 20-30 cents per episode if you only want to watch them once or twice and then resell them. Or you could give them to a friend or donate them to your library. I just don't understand the $3 download thing. Even 2 shows ends up being half the Dish bill (not including the internet fees) for just 2 shows.

I can understand how the ~ $1.40/episode and keep forever or $0.30/episode and keep for awhile model of Blu-Rays are reasonable, but I just don't understand $3/episode.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Where do I get the APPS for Disney et all?


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

sregener said:


> When was the last time you went to the movie theater and halfway through your feature, they broke to commercial?
> 
> It's simply a matter of what you're willing to pay to not put up with commercials. And if enough people will pay to avoid them, it becomes cost-effective to charge $2.99/episode for commercial-free viewing.


A movie at the movie theater is a pay per view and the commercials are at the beginning, not in the middle.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

With the Roku, I went to the Channels store and added Disney and Disney XD. Went to the channel, the info on the screen walks you through what you need to do. To register you use a computer and go to the Disney site. It took me all of 5 minutes. It is nice to have both channels now on the Roku. By the way, I did the same from ESPN. Too bad the Roku doesn't have ABC and ABC Family as far I can tell. I do have NBC, CBS, PBS, and FOX on there.


----------



## anex80 (Jul 29, 2005)

mwdxer said:


> With the Roku, I went to the Channels store and added Disney and Disney XD. Went to the channel, the info on the screen walks you through what you need to do. To register you use a computer and go to the Disney site. It took me all of 5 minutes. It is nice to have both channels now on the Roku. By the way, I did the same from ESPN. Too bad the Roku doesn't have ABC and ABC Family as far I can tell. I do have NBC, CBS, PBS, and FOX on there.


Perhaps you can explain the benefit of a Roku or similar device when you already have a Dish subscription and hardware. I can see the value when Dish releases their Internet only option but in the meantime, wouldn't it make more sense just to us the Dish hardware?

Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Not if it's a secondary tv that's hardly used and he doesn't want to spend the money on a box there.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> Not if it's a secondary tv that's hardly used and he doesn't want to spend the money on a box there.


Plus the Watch apps are a lot more than just live streams of the channels you get on TV. ESPN3 has exclusive games that don't air on regular TV, Watch Disney Channel and Disney XD frequently have new episodes available on demand before they air on TV.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Disney Jr uplinked ... *NOT AVAILABLE* ... Channel 168.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

The Roku is an amazing box. I spend enough with Dish, so I watch what I get for free with the Roku. The Roku LT was $50 online from Amazon. I have 312 different channel services in the menu and most have many sub channels. Probably all together well over 1, 000 channels I would guess. There is everything from International programming like France 24, RT and RT Documentry, BBC World, CNN International, and tons more. There are dozens of movie channels, as well as TV services that run old shows and movies. I am a sci fi fan from the 50s & 60s and I have seen many old flicks I have not seen before. There are dozens of PI channels, universary channels, streaming news channels nationwide. Lot of sports too, for those who enjoy that. A really fun box. Netflix, Hulu, WB Streaming, etc are there. We get Epix with Dish, well Epix is on Roku too. One nice thing having the Roku box, it is all available on demand. I can watch the programming when I want to. I only have the Dish 211K receiver that On Demand is not available. Oh yes, some channels like Disney, HBO, ESPN, Epix, you have to sub to the channel on Cable or Dish to get the On Demand feature, but most you just add. You can easily do a Google search of "Roku". Go on their site and check out the channel store. It is amazing what is there and how much materal is added weekly. The Roku 3 that is HDMI only (HD) also has You Tube. The other boxes do not as yet. There are also private channels you can search for. Lots of fun. With Dish, it is a real nice addition.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

By the by... I also checked out authorizing my Apple TV last night to the Disney/ESPN services.

As with the iOS apps, all worked fine except for Disney Jr of course.

What was weird was during the "we will now connect to your provider to authenticate" phase... I was never asked for my login... so the authentication was different on AppleTV than it was on the iOS apps. Strange.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> "Frozen" continues to sizzle for Walt Disney Co. (DIS:US), where quarterly profit rose 27 percent as kids snapped up DVDs and merchandise tied to the animated mega-hit.
> 
> Disney, the world's largest entertainment company, reported second-quarter net income of $1.92 billion, or $1.08 a share, beating the 95-cent average (DIS:US) of 25 analysts' estimates. Sales grew to $11.6 billion, the company said today in a statement (DIS:US), exceeding projections of $11.2 billion.


http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-05-06/disney-profit-rises-27-percent-as-frozen-dvd-leads-home-video-charts

Gives ya' a nice warm fuzzy about paying higher rates doesn't it?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

SayWhat? said:


> http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-05-06/disney-profit-rises-27-percent-as-frozen-dvd-leads-home-video-charts
> 
> Gives ya' a nice warm fuzzy about paying higher rates doesn't it?


Not sure what one has to do with another.

If you have a good year and earn more money than last year... do you offer to give money back to your employer because you feel that you "made enough" already?


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Update, You Tube is now available on other Roku units including the LT.


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

Not to defend Di$ney, but they also have to hedge against the next flop.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Wanna know where that rate hike went?



> Blockbuster bonus for Disney CEO
> Financial Feed - ‎16 hours ago‎
> 
> Iger's pay package was up 27 per cent from 2013, when he received $US34.3 million ($A41.69 million) in compensation. The change came in the form of a larger bonus: $US22.8 million ($A27.71 million), up 68 per cent from the year before.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Doubtful that the Disney CEO's bonus hinged entirely on the recent Dish/Disney contract negotiations. Disney makes a lot of money from a lot of other places.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Stewart Vernon said:


> Disney makes a lot of money from a lot of other places.


i.e. the over $1.2 billion in box office revenue Frozen made this past year.


----------



## neilo (Aug 7, 2006)

Any news as to whether Dish will get DisneyXD back in HD?

Star Wars Rebels Season 2 premiere appears to be broadcast as 4:3 (at least in the repeats) on DisneyXD - not even letterboxed.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

They didn't mention Disney XD HD being part of the deal, but if you have a decent internet connection you can watch the episodes in HD on Watch Disney XD:
http://watchdisneyxd.go.com/star-wars-rebels


----------



## neilo (Aug 7, 2006)

Thanks. It looks like that will probably work.


----------

