# Well, now I'm p*ssed... re: HD locals



## Lincoln6Echo (Jul 11, 2007)

Checking the latest D* HD local activations, I see that my little po-dunk market has finally gotten HD service on one of the DBS providers. And that would be the the Paducah, KY/Cape Girardeau, MO area, which covers my southern Illinois region as well. Never thought it'd happen so soon, although the HD channels have been available on the local digital cable service for about a year now or so.

Anyway, the reason why I'm pissed is because I'm obviously still with E* and I won't change, as I prefer the E* receivers and their software. I just wished Charlie gets his new birds up sometime soon. So they can start adding all these channels to the line-up.


----------



## bills (Nov 7, 2002)

Lincoln6Echo said:


> Checking the latest D* HD local activations, I see that my little po-dunk market has finally gotten HD service on one of the DBS providers. And that would be the the Paducah, KY/Cape Girardeau, MO area, which covers my southern Illinois region as well. Never thought it'd happen so soon, although the HD channels have been available on the local digital cable service for about a year now or so.
> 
> Anyway, the reason why I'm pissed is because I'm obviously still with E* and I won't change, as I prefer the E* receivers and their software. I just wished Charlie gets his new birds up sometime soon. So they can start adding all these channels to the line-up.


 i believe some channels are there,they just haven't turned them on, you are right about there equipement, it is beter than directv, imo...regards


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Yep, I saw that yesterday. It came at a good time as I am changing to Direct. I will miss my trusty Vip622, and Voom is a plus with me, but I'm tired of waiting. Since the picture and sound is virtually the same between the two services, it is down to which is providing more of what I want. Right now that is Direct.

IF Dish had been more forthcoming about what they were going to add, and exactly when they were going to add it, I might have waited. But since Charlie & Co. want to stay pretty much mum, I'll let them talk to themselves while I move on.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

Lincoln6Echo said:


> Anyway, the reason why I'm pissed is because I'm obviously still with E* and I won't change, as I prefer the E* receivers and their software. I just wished Charlie gets his new birds up sometime soon. So they can start adding all these channels to the line-up.


Yeah because it's obviously Charlie's fault that the satellites aren't launched yet.  Charlie's sats are waiting to go up and have been for a while (originally supposed to have been launched last year) but they have to wait their turn just like everyone else.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

tsmacro said:


> Yeah because it's obviously Charlie's fault that the satellites aren't launched yet.  Charlie's sats are waiting to go up and have been for a while (originally supposed to have been launched last year) but they have to wait their turn just like everyone else.


Yes, they were "_supposed to have been launched _last year." Now they are _supposed to be launched _this year. Let's hope Charlie isn't depending upon the same contingency plan he had in place last year - none. It is rocket science which isn't exactly a perfect business.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

phrelin said:


> Yes, they were "_supposed to have been launched _last year." Now they are _supposed to be launched _this year. Let's hope Charlie isn't depending upon the same contingency plan he had in place last year - none. It is rocket science which isn't exactly a perfect business.


My point being is that it isn't Charlie's fault that his satellite's aren't yet in orbit. He's paid for them and got them built and ready to go. They've been delayed because of delays at the facilities that launch the rockets. It just gets old hearing people blaming Charlie because Dish doesn't have every HD channel under the sun yet. It gets even more ridiculous when people make it sound like he actually has something to do with the fact that the new satellites have been delayed being launched.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

Here's the link for the announcement of 4 additional Directv locals.

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/2008/02/directv_launches_four_new_hd_local_markets.php


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

don't worry, I live in the Harrisburg pa market, and both Cable and Direct have local HD, and Dish Net has no plans for Harrisburg people in the future, so we're screwed, well not really, cuz I have Comcast now too


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

I get my locals OTA (all but Fox), so while I do hope Dish will offer them soon, it's no really big deal.


----------



## braven (Apr 9, 2007)

projectorguru said:


> don't worry, I live in the Harrisburg pa market, and both Cable and Direct have local HD, and Dish Net has no plans for Harrisburg people in the future, so we're screwed, well not really, cuz I have Comcast now too


Not having Harrisburg HD locals was the reason we left E* back in 02 for Concast. We knew it was only a matter of time until one of the DBS providers offered HD locals. Now we're happy DIRECTV subscribers.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

braven said:


> Not having Harrisburg HD locals was the reason we left E* back in 02 for Concast. We knew it was only a matter of time until one of the DBS providers offered HD locals. Now we're happy DIRECTV subscribers.


I just left Direct, and got the HD PACK from Dish net, and cable with HD with Comcast, to be honest, Comcasts PQ is much better, but I currently have more HD programming then anyone, cuz I have 2 sources:lol:


----------



## braven (Apr 9, 2007)

projectorguru said:


> I just left Direct, and got the HD PACK from Dish net, and cable with HD with Comcast, to be honest, *Comcasts PQ is much better*, but I currently have more HD programming then anyone, cuz I have 2 sources:lol:


Ha ha ha ha, not true, but whatever.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

braven said:


> Ha ha ha ha, not true, but whatever.


HD YES, especially better than Direct, except I could watch any channel with them, cuz they had everything so screwed up


----------



## Presence (Mar 14, 2004)

Waa. If they _really _are "local," then put up an antenna and get them OTA.


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

Not always an option for a lot of us -- I'm way too far away in this hilly terrain to get anywhere with an antenna, for instance -- but even for those who can, it is a considerable added hassle and expense.


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> -- but even for those who can, it is a considerable added hassle and expense.


Yeah, it cost me less than $50 to put an antenna in my attic.  I get 23 digital channels and all the networks are in HD. I'm ~ 22 miles from the transmitters. I diplexed the signal to the TV and the ViP622.


----------



## wii_dont_care (Feb 9, 2008)

Hunter Green said:


> Not always an option for a lot of us -- I'm way too far away in this hilly terrain to get anywhere with an antenna, for instance -- but even for those who can, it is a considerable added hassle and expense.


I can somewhat relate....

I am about 30-35 miles from the local transmitters, Dayton, OH area.

Here is my conflict. I live in a tri level house, 2 attics, 2 HDTV (1 vip 211, 1 vip 222), the attic closest to my dish/dish connections is difficult to access. I basically need to roof mount my antenna. All local dish & antenna installers act like I have 3 heads when I inquire about setting up an OTA antenna and running it thru my dish wiring.

I loathe Time Warner cable, but at least they provided locals in HD. The crazy part is, my mid level TV is getting 3/4 of my local channels in HD with a pair of non-amp bunny ears. My lower level TV, about 5 feet lower & 20 yards to the north gets squat with bunny ears amped or not.

Guess I am stuck, sitting, waiting, & watching in SD for local. (not to mention more HD channels that D* offers wouldn't hurt) :nono2:

Any suggestions.


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

TulsaOK said:


> Yeah, it cost me less than $50 to put an antenna in my attic.


I'll pay you $100 plus travel costs for a working OTA antenna that will get me the Burlington HD channels. If it only costs $50, you can't lose.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

tsmacro said:


> (Charlie) paid for (his satellites) and got them built and ready to go. They've been delayed because of delays at the facilities that launch the rockets. ...It gets even more ridiculous when people make it sound like he actually has something to do with the fact that the new satellites have been delayed being launched.


I debated about not responding to this, but I just couldn't let it go.

Corporate CEO's are usually held responsible for major decisions that result in significant customer discontent. Particularly when there was no plan B "just in case". Either we aren't the customers, or we deserve more information.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

phrelin said:


> Corporate CEO's are usually held responsible for major decisions that result in significant customer discontent.


Responsible to who? Shareholders? Charlie owns 80% of voting shares. I didn't see Murdoc being hung over the past 2 years when D* only had 10 HD channels.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

tsmacro said:


> My point being is that it isn't Charlie's fault that his satellite's aren't yet in orbit. He's paid for them and got them built and ready to go. They've been delayed because of delays at the facilities that launch the rockets. It just gets old hearing people blaming Charlie because Dish doesn't have every HD channel under the sun yet. It gets even more ridiculous when people make it sound like he actually has something to do with the fact that the new satellites have been delayed being launched.


You're right tsmacro, Charile doesn't own a launch pad.. What do you so called experts want him to do?


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

phrelin said:


> I debated about not responding to this, but I just couldn't let it go.
> 
> Corporate CEO's are usually held responsible for major decisions that result in significant customer discontent. Particularly when there was no plan B "just in case". Either we aren't the customers, or we deserve more information.


Yeah but the thing is here is that I think we're a long way from "significant customer discontent". All we have is maybe a handful of people (ok even it's a few hundred it's nothing percentage-wise compared to Dish's overall subscriber numbers) who are whining on a message board about Dish not adding their favorite HD channel fast enough. I'm not sure what you mean by a "plan B", but it seems to me Charlie had a plan A, B & C, three new satellites going up, seems to be covering the bases to me. What else do you expect? For him to build his own launch facility? To saturate the airwaves w/ ads saying how great it's going to be once they can deliver 100's and 100's of HD channels once they get their satellites launched, sometime a year down the road or so? Recognize that one? That was Directv's approach while trailing the rest of the industry in delivering HD content. Maybe they should after all it didn't seem to hurt Directv's subscription numbers. I'm sorry but this whole "Charlie owes me an explanation" is complete and utter BS!!! Dish network owes you the channels you pay for right now, that's it! If you think you can do better for your money then do so, that's your right as a customer. Dish will have new HD channels when everything's in place for these channels to be delivered by Dish. When that happens i'm sure there'll be an announcement, but until that point it's a work in progress and since none of us work in the appropriate depts at Dish we're not privy to that info nor should we be.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

tsmacro said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by a "plan B"....


Plan B is what they appear to be doing right now - reorganizing their existing transponders to give us what they can. It just didn't appear that there was a Plan B _before_ the launch that went "whoopsie, oh crap" which seems like a major blunder since even the Pentagon has satellites that blow up with the rocket. (Anyone know what the odds are that they'll get all the satellites up and working this year that they have planned? Is the success rate above 50%? 80%? Because 80% means that 4 out of 5 work out as planned, but it appears that when the "1" fails, all of the next ones don't work out as planned.)

And by the way, just because I plan to stay with Echostar as I have for 20 years, doesn't mean I'm not going to complain. Even if I'm the only dissatisfied customer, _I want them to know I exist and it matters to me so they'll try to do better next time._ In most businesses, you know one grumpy complainer means there are alot of others out there suffering in silence and you know most are not brand loyal, as I am to Echostar.

My other frustrations with Dish I tend to ignore. For instance, I generally tolerate the csr/installer competency problem because I haven't seen any better service elsewhere. But there are services with more HD channels right now, and I believe that the moment they knew Plan A wasn't going to work out, if they had a Plan B to implement, I would have had SciFi and USA in HD by January 1.

And anyone as successful as Charlie, isn't going to need defending. Prodding maybe. :grin:


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> I'll pay you $100 plus travel costs for a working OTA antenna that will get me the Burlington HD channels. If it only costs $50, you can't lose.


You made the statement "-- but even for those who can, it is a considerable added hassle and expense."

I can, and it was neither a considerable hassle nor a considerable expense.


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

So I guess you're not planning on doing it, eh?

I will concede that for people for whom it is _not_ considerable hassle or expense, it's not considerable hassle or expense. For the rest of us, the point still stands.


----------



## DirecTV-Sub (Feb 10, 2008)

tsmacro said:


> My point being is that it isn't Charlie's fault that his satellite's aren't yet in orbit. He's paid for them and got them built and ready to go. They've been delayed because of delays at the facilities that launch the rockets. It just gets old hearing people blaming Charlie because Dish doesn't have every HD channel under the sun yet. It gets even more ridiculous when people make it sound like he actually has something to do with the fact that the new satellites have been delayed being launched.


Regardless of whose _fault_ it is, the simple and easy to understand fact is that it is not mandatory for people to have to wait for what they want now. DISH hasn't offered customers discounts because of the delays, so why do customers have to feel any need to wait it out?

If you have to delay paying your bill for 2 months through no fault of your own, will Charlie allow to stay with them? NOT! Why should this _loyalty_ be expected to be so one-sided?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

DirecTV-Sub said:


> Why should this _loyalty_ be expected to be so one-sided?


It's like alot of marriages, and I'm the suffering spouse.:lol:


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> So I guess you're not planning on doing it, eh?
> 
> I will concede that for people for whom it is _not_ considerable hassle or expense, it's not considerable hassle or expense. For the rest of us, the point still stands.


And your point was?


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

...in my original post.

That there are people for whom OTA HD is neither difficult nor expensive is not at all relevant to a statement that for a lot of people, it is both difficult and expensive. And that that constitutes a valid reason to look forward to DISH carrying them.

And your point was?


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

DirecTV-Sub said:


> Regardless of whose _fault_ it is, the simple and easy to understand fact is that it is not mandatory for people to have to wait for what they want now. DISH hasn't offered customers discounts because of the delays, so why do customers have to feel any need to wait it out?
> 
> If you have to delay paying your bill for 2 months through no fault of your own, will Charlie allow to stay with them? NOT! Why should this _loyalty_ be expected to be so one-sided?


Nobody was saying it was mandatory for anyone to wait for Dish. In fact I said if people weren't happy they could switch and maybe should, makes more sense than whining on a message board about it. Why should Dish offer discounts, aren't the customers still getting everything they were getting when they signed up? It's not like anyone is actually getting fewer channels. Heck for most of us we're getting more channels than when we signed up without even having to upgrade to higher packages, they keep adding new ones, now the fact that over the past couple of months the amount of new channels added has slowed down but I don't get why anyone should get their feathers ruffled about that. after all i'm sure once it's possible they'll keep adding channels as they always have and if you don't have any patience yes by all means switch! I guess I just don't get what the big deal is, nor do I get what any of this has to do with loyalty.


----------



## DirecTV-Sub (Feb 10, 2008)

Looks to me like most people make excuses for whomever their provider is. My loyalty is to ME. If I think another company can give me what I want today, I would sign with them, not hope and wait for them - especially if they won't even tell me when I could expect the offerings I desire.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

I've never understood the 'loyalty' I'm supposed to provide a business entity that I have a business relationship with. And it is strictly a business relationship. When I was with Dish, I paid the bill for the services they provided, when it felt to me that I was paying my bill, but Dish wasn't providing what I wanted for the money, I moved.

Direct is neither better nor worse than Dish, but Direct has my locals in HD and the additional channels in HD that I want now. So I switched. In a couple of years, I'll look at the scenario again and if it seems like it is in MY best interest, I'll either stay with Direct or switch again. Either way, no hard feelings. I got good service from Dish and I didn't have problems with CSRs and tech support that some have reported.

I expect to have that same relationship with Direct.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Well, I did have a good relationship with my old C-band equipment. New HD stuff - not so much,


----------



## normang (Nov 14, 2002)

To me its has little to do with loyalty a little perhaps, but mostly -- Its a big hassle.. Switching to anyone else, whether it be from Dish to Direct, or vice versa, it costs time, money, even more hassle if things go wrong. Even cable, and their lame DVR's they have I keep hearing about... and high costs for what you get..

Eventually, it will be ALL the SAME.. Everyone will have the same channels. Sure, there will be exceptions, but anything that is remotely popular will be everywhere eventually, all you have to do is *wait*.. 

If the -wait- is a bigger hassle over changing all your equipment, probably spending something to do it; no matter what the deal, functional differences (features you may miss) possible installation hassles, taking time off to wait for an installer. Then switch, otherwise be patient, they aren't planning and trying to launch new satellites for nothing..


----------



## DirecTV-Sub (Feb 10, 2008)

tsmacro said:


> Nobody was saying it was mandatory for anyone to wait for Dish.


I read way too many postings by people stating their almost undying loyalty to one or another of these huge business entities. Hysterical how quite a few seem to be so dedicated to defending a television provider. I go where it is best for me, and no one of these companies will ever 'own' me.


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

It's funny how many people feel a need to refute all these "undying loyalty" posts considering how few, if any, of them there actually are to refute. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


----------



## Friendswood (Jan 17, 2008)

phrelin said:


> Well, I did have a good relationship with my old C-band equipment. New HD stuff - not so much,


lol....I was thinking about my old 10 ft. mesh C-band antenna just this morning. I don't miss the hassle of having to move the dish for different channels....but I loved being able to buy channels ala-carte!
I miss the "wild feeds" too.
Some kids came by my house in a pick-up a couple of months ago....saw my dish and asked me if they could have it if they took it down nice and neatly....which they did. I guess they sold it to a salvage or recycling yard.

btw....G5 was great!


----------



## Lincoln6Echo (Jul 11, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Yep, I saw that yesterday. It came at a good time as I am changing to Direct. I will miss my trusty Vip622, and Voom is a plus with me, but I'm tired of waiting. Since the picture and sound is virtually the same between the two services, it is down to which is providing more of what I want. Right now that is Direct.
> 
> IF Dish had been more forthcoming about what they were going to add, and exactly when they were going to add it, I might have waited. But since Charlie & Co. want to stay pretty much mum, I'll let them talk to themselves while I move on.


You're in Herrin? I'm just over in Harrisburg. :eek2:

Anyway...I think you all misunderstood me. I'm not blaming Charlie for anything...I said I just *wished* Charlie could get his new birds up sometime soon.


----------

