# is the HD package worth the price?



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

I've had the HD package for a couple of weeks. Now that the first flush of excitement is over, I'm evaluating the content. The HD package is 20$, and that plus the new DVR fee I have to pay, which I never had to pay before having dishplayers, has added over 25$ to my bill. Essentially I could almost have the America's everything pack (all the premiums) added to my top 250 for what I'm paying for HD. But is the HD package worth the price?

I suppose it is different if you are interested in sports, but if you are interested in non sports programming, the content seems a little thin. There are a couple of good movie channels -- I like monsters, and I've watched some movies on some of the other channels. I like seeing UFO and while I haven't actually watched an episode of "flipper" I must say it always seems to be on and looks fabulous in HD. The news channel is beautiful to look at, but seems to recycle the same five minutes of news, then show video essays. Most of the other channels seem to be simucasts of what I already have, only in HD (and a lot of it isn't widescreen, just HD).

I can see charging expensive prices for the premium movie packages, because those vendors (HBO, STARZ) pay a premium price to be the first to run those premium movies and that drives the cost up up up. And I could see the $20 would be worth it if we had the few premium channels in the package (not that I care much for them) available with the HD package. But we don't. Essentially we seem to be paying a premium price for some very recycled content to begin with, that also seems to repeat a lot. I think 15$ or even $10 would be a fairer price for this package, (considering how cheap the encore channels are to add). 

I think I made an 18 month committment to this package, and I'm not kicking about it. I'm hoping it may grow on me. But it seems awfully pricey for what it actually contains. Am I missing something here? And how much is the price of this going to rise, given the HD channels that supposedly will be added in the future? It's nice that discovery is going to add more HD channels. But if we are already paying for them in SD and they simulcast them in HD, are we going to again be asked to pay another 5 or 10 dollars for the same content, broadcast in two defs? That just doesn't excite me. OTOH, I'd love for Dish to add some new content, like Chiller. New content to me is worth it, but paying premium prices for non premium simulcasts doesn't seem like a great value.

Adding HD to my existing top 250 package, plus locals, plus a couple of extra recievers and the stupid DVR fee has brought my bill up over $100 a month and that's the point where I look at what I'm paying for TV, and wonder if it's worth it. I do think the top 250 is worth what I pay. It's a great package. I'm just not sure about the HD package.

Any ops?


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

sansha said:


> I think 15$ or even $10 would be a fairer price for this package, (considering how cheap the encore channels are to add).


Well, it is unique (HD part, if not the programmes) and people are willing to pay. Thats what determines the price.

For eg., for _every_ South Asian channel we have to pay $15. 4 or 5 of those channels together drive the cost to as high as dish top 250.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

nataraj said:


> Well, it is unique (HD part, if not the programmes) and people are willing to pay. Thats what determines the price.
> 
> For eg., for _every_ South Asian channel we have to pay $15. 4 or 5 of those channels together drive the cost to as high as dish top 250.


Yes, but that's because those are niche channels. Because only a few people want them, the cost is high.


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

It's all in what you enjoy. We like the monster channel, equator, treasure hd and discovery as well as hgtv-hd and foodtv-hd. We've starting recording some shows (magnificent obsessions, collective intelligence, world heritage) that we never thought we'd be interested in but are actually pretty fascinating! They may not be new broadcasts but we've never seen them so they're new to us. We've heard that Discovery is going to be broadcasting 4 of their channels in hd by fall (animal planet, science, tlc and the regular discovery channel - we watch a lot of programming from these channels) and 2 more after that so the list is growing. Plus getting satellite network broadcasts in hd is worthwhile to us as well since we live out in the boonies where OTA isn't an option.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

In my opinion, it is not worth it. I was paying Dish $137 a month for AEP with
HD and Locals, and four receivers (including 2 622s). I have been a Dish HD sub since August 2004. I also have an 18 month commitment that runs out in August 2007. In March 2007, I signed up for Verizon at $110 a month. With Verizon I got more SD channels, the same number of HD channels
(36) and hooked up six TVs (instead of four) including two HD DVRs and two
HD boxes. Verizon also has better HD and SD picture quality than Dish. 

HD is worth it. I would not get a TV service without HD. Now that I am hooked on watching HD, I generally do not watch SD. However, the main
criteria in deciding which TV service to sign up with is whether you get the
channels that you really want. In my case it was sports. Verizon provided me
with three HD sports channels that Dish does not provide to me in SD or HD, CSN
Phila, YES and SNY. In subscribing to a HDTV service, it is not a good deal to pay
more for HD channels that you do not watch. Many people on this board mistakenly say that the Dish HD package is worth the extra money, because you
get more channels. I disagree vehemently. Dish made a decision to invest in
Voom and can only make it work by overcharging for HD. 

In NJ, where I live there is a choice of four HD providers, Dish, Directv, Verizon
and Patriot Media (soon to be Comcast). Dish's basic HD package is the most
expensive of the four providers. 

In analyzing Dish's HD offering, there are 32 national channels which can be
broken down into 15 Voom, one pay per view, and 15 channels that are offered
by the other three HD providers in my town (although not by each of the three)and A&E HD. Of the 15 Voom channels,
there is only one channel, Equator HD that I would consider subscribing to a la
carte. I more or less never watch any of the other 14 Voom channels. I have never
ordered an HD PPV event. 

Most of my HD viewing is on the following channels:

1) Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia (not provided by Dish)
2) Yes Network (not provided by Dish)
3) SNY (not provided by Dish)
4) CBS (provided by Dish but available OTA)
5) ABC (provided by Dish but available OTA)
6) FOX (provided by Dish but available OTA)
7) NBC (provided by Dish but available OTA)
8) CW (not provided by Dish)
9) MY (not provided by Dish)
10) ESPN (provided by Dish and all other providers)
11) ESPN2 (provided by Dish and all other providers)
12) TNT (provided by Dish and all other providers)
13) HBO (provided by Dish and all other providers)
14) PBS (not provided by Dish)

In your case, it sounds like you are not yet hooked on HD. You have to
decide which HD channels you really want to watch and does Dish provide them?
If most of your viewing is still SD, maybe Dish HD is not for you. 

In my situation, the decision to dump Dish HD was; Do I want
to continue to overpay Dish for one channel, Equator HD
and do without CSN HD, YES HD, SNY HD, PBS HD, CW HD and
MY HD? Answer no.


----------



## Slordak (Dec 17, 2003)

At the latest pricing, no, I don't think it is worth it.

It would be different if, say, Food Network HD ran the same content as regular Food Network, but instead it runs random episodes of shows from months or years in the past, making it almost useless.


----------



## kdwebsol (Jan 29, 2006)

I pay for it but I do not feel it is worth the money. I am a big NASCAR fan and the programing is moving to TNT HD and ESPN HD in the next few weeks. When the programing moves back to ABC I will canceling my HD service and pay the 6.00 fee to keep my 622.

Most of our TV viewing is Network TV and E* does not offer them in HD so I use an OTA and my local sports networks. And once again E* does not offer them in HD. 

I will miss a few of the HD channels but to keep them is an extra $14.00 a month (20-6) and once you have seen the loop of programing on most of the channels there is nothing new. 

If more HD is added before NASCAR moves to ABC I might keep, time will tell.....

Ken


----------



## allargon (May 3, 2007)

Huh? Mainstream sports programming in HD has disappointed me more so than anything else.

Discovery HD, National Geographic and Equator HD make it worthwhile. All 3 are very good in their own unique ways.

Ultra HD is what the style network should be visually. Unfortunately, the content isn't there.

The only national news I get in HD other than HDNews is NBC. That's it.

Here's one thing no one talks about--sound! Rave HD is great if you're a music lover. They repeat a lot, too.

The broadcast networks? I get those OTA. The only nice thing is that the 622 records them in High-def (no HD lite) for me.

Most disappointing other than ESPN are Food Network HD and HGTV HD. Those two formerly favorite SD channels of mine have horrible HD picture quality. The premium networks (just like A&E and TNT) often show upconverted shows. At least they make it obvious with bars on the side. (Sigh)

HDNet contains almost pure repeats. The same goes for UNIHD.

If you don't like any of the extra 15 Voom channels (I really only like 4), then it's probably not worth the extra $20/mo.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

no, its too high for the content, which is why we need more HD, i only watch 3 channels in HD, Discovery, Rave, and Monster, the rest are pretty crappy, sometimes I will watch Equator or a quick sports watch on HDnet


----------



## rcbridge (Oct 31, 2002)

It's all a personal choice!!
From the postings the answers are a mixed bag!
For me it is worth it and in the budget!!


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

I would drop the 20.00 hd pack except it would cost me 12.00 in hd enabeling fees to NOT have hd . So for $8.00 more I get all the hd channels . Dish has fixed it so that if you don't sub to the high end packs AEP + hd pack - with the hd dvr receiver,you get hit by fees like the dvr fee for $5.98 PER RECEIVER and the hd enabeling fees for 6.00 PER RECEIVER.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

sansha said:


> I think I made an 18 month committment to this package, and I'm not kicking about it.


Your 18 month commitment was for AT100 or better programming. If it isn't working out, you can downgrade to a non-HD package and pay an enabling fee.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

To me (and I only speak for myself) the $20 is a HUGE ripoff. Having said this I love the 622 so I currently pay the $6 "extortion" fee to have a 622 without paying the $20 HD fee.

So now I pay $6 to rent the 622 per month in addition to another $6 to have the 622 without the HD package.

I then took the $14 I saved and got a PAY package in which I can record HD from the free HD channel in that package.

Funny thing is that I watch far more HD from that one station than I ever did on all the HD package stations combined.

I know others may feel different but you asked for input... you got it 

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I would drop the 20.00 hd pack except it would cost me 12.00 in hd enabeling fees to NOT have hd . So for $8.00 more I get all the hd channels . Dish has fixed it so that if you don't sub to the high end packs AEP + hd pack - with the hd dvr receiver,you get hit by fees like the dvr fee for $5.98 PER RECEIVER and the hd enabeling fees for 6.00 PER RECEIVER.


I think you have some fuzzy math here.

You pay $6 a month to rent the 622 no matter what
You only pay an additional $6 if you do not take the $20 HD package

So I see this as a $14 savings.

Now if taking the $20 package waves my $6 rental of the 622 then I too would take the HD pack for only another $8 but the last time I checked you had to pay the $6 622 rental no matter what... unless you bought it of course but then they call it something else right?

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Slordak said:


> At the latest pricing, no, I don't think it is worth it.
> 
> It would be different if, say, Food Network HD ran the same content as regular Food Network, but instead it runs random episodes of shows from months or years in the past, making it almost useless.


I think you hit it on the head. My fav channel is Discovery. If they showed the regular shows in HD I would be all over this. Instead we get two channels that are called the same but that show different content. Yes the HD discover content can be decent (the first 6 or 7 times you watch the looping content LOL) but give me Mythbusters in HD and you sold me!

Just like when TV turned from black and white to color... eventually people will just get used to it and it will no longer be anything special. When "everything" is in HD then what will Dish use to justify charging extra?

*smiles*

-JB


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

jrb531 said:


> ... My fav channel is Discovery. If they showed the regular shows in HD I would be all over this. Instead we get two channels that are called the same but that show different content. Yes the HD discover content can be decent (the first 6 or 7 times you watch the looping content LOL) but give me Mythbusters in HD and you sold me!


I heard that this is supposed to be happening this fall (we need a smiley with his fingers crossed) - the regular Discovery, TLC, Science and Animal Planet have been announced (and I'm hoping will be picked up by Dish - another smiley with his fingers crossed) - so not only will you get Mythbusters but also Deadliest Catch and Dirty Jobs!!!:lol:


----------



## kdwebsol (Jan 29, 2006)

dbconsultant said:


> I heard that this is supposed to be happening this fall (we need a smiley with his fingers crossed) - the regular Discovery, TLC, Science and Animal Planet have been announced (and I'm hoping will be picked up by Dish - another smiley with his fingers crossed) - so not only will you get Mythbusters but also Deadliest Catch and Dirty Jobs!!!:lol:


If E* picks up these channels before NASCAR moves to ABC then I will keep my HD package. But, I do not think this will happen. If there is room for the Discovery channels then we would already have all the RSN in HD. Some would say it is contracts for the RSNs but I believe it is space and E* wants to keep some extra space for the HD channels that are free without any real HD content like A&E.

Ken


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

To Sansha,

From what I read on this thread is that you can opt out of the $20HD fee and
pay a $6 enabling HD fee. Net savings $14, but you would lose 15 Voom HD channels and HD pay per view. You would be entitled to HD channels in your 250 pack plus locals if you subscribe to locals. 

Is that really true? Are we paying $14 a month for Voom and HD pay per view?

I do not know if this is correct. I thought you had to pay the $20 HD fee to get
any HD at all.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

Sansha,

I just got off the phone with Dish Network and they tell me
if you pay the $6 HD enabling fee, you cannot watch any HD content at all.
The rep told me that you must pay the $20 HD fee to watch the HD channels
that come with 250 or locals.


----------



## dclaryjr (Mar 11, 2007)

I'm a sports fanatic so it's worth it to me. I watch ESPN and ESPN2 all the time, plus my wife and I both watch Equator and Rave a lot. My alternative is Time Warner which doesn't carry ESPN2 or the NFL Network (at least not here). So it's a no brainer for me.


----------



## marcuscthomas (May 4, 2006)

It's all personal of course, but....Soundstage is nice, the nature shows on NGHD and Discovery HD are great, Monsters is good, Sports are great, and a couple of other movie channels are pretty good. The best thing for me is having the HD Network feeds. 

$20/month is about one nice meal out. I can do without that for 30 days of HD, even if the content is so, so.


----------



## TiVoPrince (May 10, 2007)

*Anybody else*
think these will be yet another premium tier? Or that the HD package price will be adjusted based on the added channels.
Discovery
TLC
Science
Animal Planet 
at the current price may help to balance the cost/benefit. But raising from the current package prices or changing the subscription model makes it a whole new questin...


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

TiVoPrince said:


> *Anybody else*
> think these will be yet another premium tier? Or that the HD package price will be adjusted based on the added channels.
> Discovery
> TLC
> ...


It is only speculation. My guess is that the current model will be followed and
if the channels are in your subscription package, you will get the HD channel.
The HD fee of $20 may or may not be raised every year when the annual increase takes effect. I do no think that there will be another HD tier with a
separate price.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

sansha said:


> Yes, but that's because those are niche channels. Because only a few people want them, the cost is high.


Exactly. Same with HD programming for now (may be not that niche, so the price is not that exorbitant).


----------



## mikeyinokc (Jan 11, 2006)

It is worth it to me.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Hound said:


> Sansha,
> 
> I just got off the phone with Dish Network and they tell me
> if you pay the $6 HD enabling fee, you cannot watch any HD content at all.
> ...


Yes this is true but if you are not watching much, if any HD, then saving $14 and either banking the savings or, as I did, using that $14 to get a pay package with an included HD channel might be better.

As I said before, I dropped HD and saved $14. I then applied the $14 to Showtime and now watch more HD content on the Showtime HD channel than I did after the first few months of the $20 HD.

After a few months, when you have watched most of the looping (Read: repeats LOL) HD content then your HD package viewing "may" drop like mine.

As much as I liked the Monster Channel idea, most of the shows are real one-star crap. Put some good stuff on and you sold me but B-rated "mostly garbage" does not excite me.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

dbconsultant said:


> I heard that this is supposed to be happening this fall (we need a smiley with his fingers crossed) - the regular Discovery, TLC, Science and Animal Planet have been announced (and I'm hoping will be picked up by Dish - another smiley with his fingers crossed) - so not only will you get Mythbusters but also Deadliest Catch and Dirty Jobs!!!:lol:


If this happens (and it's not just upscaled) then I may go back. I think Mythbusters is already in HD and the SD format suggests this. $20 is a pretty good chunk of $$$ and with such a large cost on the package I would expect a "huge" portion of my viewing to come from this $20 package.

I dunno about the rest of you but after the first few months (after burning through all the repeat "looping" content) I found myself "forcing" myself to watch the channels to somehow try to justify my $20 monthly expense much like people try to burn unused cell phone minutes that they "have" to use.

Do you find yourself watching anything you want and it just happens to be the HD package because you like the content so much or, if you are honest with yourself, do you find yourself "forcing" yourself to watch the channels.

Now I am not suggesting that every HD channel is worthless but what you do watch... is it worth $20 a month?

For me the answer was no and as much as I hate paying Dish a $6 "extortion" fee, I am happier now.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

marcuscthomas said:


> It's all personal of course, but....Soundstage is nice, the nature shows on NGHD and Discovery HD are great, Monsters is good, Sports are great, and a couple of other movie channels are pretty good. The best thing for me is having the HD Network feeds.
> 
> $20/month is about one nice meal out. I can do without that for 30 days of HD, even if the content is so, so.


You get the HD networks if you get locals. You do not need the $20 package to get locals in HD.

The real question is... is it worth $20 a month for what you do watch?

It really sounds like you are trying to justify the expense when you compare it to other costs.

$20 is not going to break me either but when I applied that $14 savings (after $6 extortion fee) to another package I got a much better deal... at least for my viewing habits.

-JB


----------



## kdwebsol (Jan 29, 2006)

marcuscthomas said:


> It's all personal of course, but....Soundstage is nice, the nature shows on NGHD and Discovery HD are great, Monsters is good, Sports are great, and a couple of other movie channels are pretty good. The best thing for me is having the HD Network feeds.
> 
> $20/month is about one nice meal out. I can do without that for 30 days of HD, even if the content is so, so.


The problem with me is that I do not get my local RSN or local networks in HD and pay the same $20.00.

I use an OTA for my local HD and if I drop the HD package I will still get them. So when NASCAR moves back to ABC and E* does not offer my local RSN in HD or add some more HD channels with good content does not loop all month long then I will most likely drop the HD package.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

kdwebsol said:


> The problem with me is that I do not get my local RSN or local networks in HD and pay the same $20.00.
> 
> I use an OTA for my local HD and if I drop the HD package I will still get them. So when NASCAR moves back to ABC and E* does not offer my local RSN in HD or add some more HD channels with good content does not loop all month long then I will most likely drop the HD package.


You only get local HD if you pay for locals which is why it was so easy for me to cancel the HD package. If I could cancel my $6 locals and still get them with the HD package then I would have stayed 

-JB


----------



## motts (Apr 11, 2006)

I read through thr thread, but I got a questionI need cleared up. I subscribe to the HD package, and I find myself watching only espn, unihd, hdnmv, tnt, and discovery. Basically, no Voom or hd ppv. I also have the HD versions of Showtime and HBO, which I watch. 

So, is it possible to retain the ability to view the hd versions of channels you subscribe to in the sd package? In other words, can I drop the HD package, pay the $6 HD fee, and continue to watch HD content that I have available through whatever SD package I subscribe to? Do I also have the ability to watch Showtime and HBO in HD since I subscribe to them as well? How about channels like UNIHD and HDNMV? Sorry for the mouthful, but I am interested in this possible savings on my masive Dish bill.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

motts said:


> I read through thr thread, but I got a questionI need cleared up. I subscribe to the HD package, and I find myself watching only espn, unihd, hdnmv, tnt, and discovery. Basically, no Voom or hd ppv. I also have the HD versions of Showtime and HBO, which I watch.
> 
> So, is it possible to retain the ability to view the hd versions of channels you subscribe to in the sd package? In other words, can I drop the HD package, pay the $6 HD fee, and continue to watch HD content that I have available through whatever SD package I subscribe to? Do I also have the ability to watch Showtime and HBO in HD since I subscribe to them as well? How about channels like UNIHD and HDNMV? Sorry for the mouthful, but I am interested in this possible savings on my masive Dish bill.


Yes and no

Local SD includes the HD versions
Pay Packages include the HD version if available (IE Showtime includes the HD showtime)
The "base" three pacakages do not include the HD versions.

So if you cancel HD you would still get local HD (if you pay for locals) and you would still get Showtime and HBO in HD but you would lose espn, unihd, hdnmv, tnt, and discovery (and the other HD package only channels)

Now maybe those channels are worth $14 a month to you. To many people they are worth it and I am not saying they are a rip to all.

TNT (unless something has changed) is an upscaled mess that should not be called HD - I like the content just not the presentation.
ESPN is great "if" they happen to show things you like - only the very hard core sports fan will watch anything they happen to show.
UNIHD shows stuff I like but so long after it was already shown on SD than I seldom watched the repeats.
Discovery is great until you already watch the stock HD shows they have. If they showed the same SD shows in HD this would be MUCH better.
HDNET is pretty good but they show very few movies and they loop them so much you are better off just renting the old shows.

Now if those channels are worth the extra $14 a month ($20-$6 extortion fee) is up to you. In my case I did watch a few of the HD chanels but not enough to justify $14 a month. I took the $14 and added another package that, incidentally, had a HD channel included that I ended up watching much much more.

-JB


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

This is the HD $14.00 package
A&E HD TNT HD Discovery HD HDNET HD HDMOVIES HD ESPN2 HD ESPN HD NFL HD Universal HD Food Net HD HGTV HD and the 15 Zoom channels for a total of 26 channels in HD that is what you pay $20.00 for. If this package is not worth it to you then do not get the HD package.


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

jrb531 said:


> I dunno about the rest of you but after the first few months (after burning through all the repeat "looping" content) I found myself "forcing" myself to watch the channels to somehow try to justify my $20 monthly expense much like people try to burn unused cell phone minutes that they "have" to use.
> 
> Do you find yourself watching anything you want and it just happens to be the HD package because you like the content so much or, if you are honest with yourself, do you find yourself "forcing" yourself to watch the channels.
> 
> ...


We have had the HD package for a little over a year and are still finding things we haven't seen that we enjoy. Maybe they aren't all new programs but if we haven't seen them, they are new to us. And as soon as we exhaust one, we always seem to find something else. And some of the programs we've found, like World Heritage, are still creating current episodes. We don't force ourselves to watch HD just because we have it as there are plenty of other things we like to watch (we dvr a lot of old movies from TCM) but we do sample some of the things we don't know about and sometimes we find a gem.

Considering that you pay $6 if you pass on HD or $20 if you don't, I figure that means you're actually paying an addition $14 if you want HD. Do I wish it was $5 (or free even)? Sure, who wouldn't? But, for us, the extra $14 is well worth it and affordable. It all comes down to what you enjoy, what you can afford and if it is worth it to you. Some people's 'garbage' is another person's 'Cool! That old frankenstein movie is on!'

It all comes down to personal preference.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

dbconsultant said:


> We have had the HD package for a little over a year and are still finding things we haven't seen that we enjoy. Maybe they aren't all new programs but if we haven't seen them, they are new to us. And as soon as we exhaust one, we always seem to find something else. And some of the programs we've found, like World Heritage, are still creating current episodes. We don't force ourselves to watch HD just because we have it as there are plenty of other things we like to watch (we dvr a lot of old movies from TCM) but we do sample some of the things we don't know about and sometimes we find a gem.
> 
> Considering that you pay $6 if you pass on HD or $20 if you don't, I figure that means you're actually paying an addition $14 if you want HD. Do I wish it was $5 (or free even)? Sure, who wouldn't? But, for us, the extra $14 is well worth it and affordable. It all comes down to what you enjoy, what you can afford and if it is worth it to you. Some people's 'garbage' is another person's 'Cool! That old frankenstein movie is on!'
> 
> It all comes down to personal preference.


I can respect this. The decision will have to be made in a few months when my 18 month commitment is up. While I understand the extra $6 charge (in addition to the $6 rental fee) to cover the expensive 622, once that 18 month commitment is up Dish will have recovered the cost of the 622 they provided me.

By my logic I should then be able to drop the HD package without paying the $6 extortion fee and just pay the $6 monthly rental fee for the 622.

By my math:

18 month commitment to either $20 HD package and $6 rental or $6 extortion fee means:

$108 for the right to have a 622
$108 for the right to rent their box

So they got $216 from me and I still do not own the 622 so IMHO they got back their investment and I should be able to keep the 622 while just paying the standard $6 a month rental fee.

Now if Dish forces me to pay an extra $12 a month just to keep the 622 then I will prob have to move to Cable and take advantage of the Cable internet and phone service that is getting very attractive.

Now yes I could drop to a non-HD box but I never said I did not want HD as I want the HD locals as well as my Showtime HD... I just do not want the $20 HD package.

So is my logic flawed? Will Dish stick it to me just because they can?

Do they not require an 18 month commit so they can recover the cost they pay for the 622? If not then why a commitment at all?

So many questions 

-JB

P.S. Before anyone says anything about $216 not covering the cost of the 622... I also had to pay them $200 up front to get the 622 so they are into me for $416 for 18 months of a 622


----------



## gjh3260 (Mar 19, 2006)

Hound said:


> It is only speculation. My guess is that the current model will be followed and
> if the channels are in your subscription package, you will get the HD channel.
> The HD fee of $20 may or may not be raised every year when the annual increase takes effect. I do no think that there will be another HD tier with a
> separate price.


I agree. If you get these SD channels in your subscription now I would think the HD versions would be available when they go "live".

Regarding whether the HD package is worth the price, for me, I want to maximize my HD viewing after spending some good coin on an HDTV so it is worth it to me to get an additional 30+HD channels even though i probably watch only 7 or 8 of them for the most part.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

ROTFL

Why do I even call 

Me: If I buy a 622 for full market price and do not subscribe to "any" HD from you what will it cost?

Dish: $6 a month in addition to whatever package you pick

Me: What does this $6 fee go to?

Dish: Well the reciever can get HD if you wanted to pay extra for that so we charge you $6 a month because of this

Me: So you charge me $6 a month just because I own a HD reciever?

Dish: Well you have to understand that you could connect that 622 to an antenna and get HD over the air. For this feature we charge you $6 a month

Me: So I buy a box full price and you charge me $6 to use the box to record over the air shows that have nothing to do with Dish?

Dish: Well you are also paying for any HD programming that our channels may broadcast to your 622

Me: Name a single FREE HD channel that you are now sending me that I do not already pay extra for

Dish: Well there are none but if we ever did you would be ready to recieve them and for this you pay $6 a month


This goes on and on but what's the point.

The $6 extortion fee remains. I find it funny that they have no way to even justify the fee. They started by telling me that they gave me the 622 at reduced cost. I pointed out that I was renting it but understood that the 622 had a higher cost thus an extra fee. This is when I asked... what if I pay the $600 to buy it outright.

This is when the fun began and they tried to make up all sorts of reasons why I should pay $6 a month for something I owned even if I was not getting any extra HD service from them.

The kicker was when she asked me... "Why would you want a 622 if you do not want HD?" and I simply told her... It's my $$$ and if I wanted a 622 and paid 100% the cost then why does Dish have to charge me $6 for ZERO service from them?

Oh well. Maybe I'll call tommorow and see what other excuses I can get for the $6 fee 

-JB


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

dbconsultant said:


> We have had the HD package for a little over a year and are still finding things we haven't seen that we enjoy. Maybe they aren't all new programs but if we haven't seen them, they are new to us. And as soon as we exhaust one, we always seem to find something else. And some of the programs we've found, like World Heritage, are still creating current episodes. We don't force ourselves to watch HD just because we have it as there are plenty of other things we like to watch (we dvr a lot of old movies from TCM) but we do sample some of the things we don't know about and sometimes we find a gem.
> 
> Considering that you pay $6 if you pass on HD or $20 if you don't, I figure that means you're actually paying an addition $14 if you want HD. Do I wish it was $5 (or free even)? Sure, who wouldn't? But, for us, the extra $14 is well worth it and affordable. It all comes down to what you enjoy, what you can afford and if it is worth it to you. Some people's 'garbage' is another person's 'Cool! That old frankenstein movie is on!'
> 
> It all comes down to personal preference.


I agree with you 100 percent that it all comes down to personal preferences.
World Heritage is one of my favorite shows, but I cannot justify continuing with
Dish HD, because of changes in the marketplace of available HD programming over the last three years, and more choice of providers available to subs.

When I started with Dish HD in August 2004, HD programming was in its infancy.
I ordered Dish HD in June 2004, but there was a shortage of receivers and I waited two months for an 811. I had purchased an HD set in February which
was hooked up to OTA Philadelphia locals and cable HD. Cable HD gave me NY
locals, YES HD and the same five HD channels that Dish provided (ESPN, HDnet,
HDnet Movies, Discovery HD and TNT HD). However, Dish gave me the opportunity
to sub to NBA League Pass and MLB Extra Innings. Dish provided NBA HD. 
In April or May of 2005, Dish broadcast on NBA TV HD a Sixers/Pistons playoff
game that was exclusively on NBA HD and not available to me on cable. In 2006, Dish began providing nightly MLB EI games in HD. Also in 2005, Dish allowed me
to sign up for 10 Voom channels for $5 a month including Equator HD and Guy TV
which I thought were really great. I splurged and bought a 921 which in retrospect was a waste of money.

But alas, for the past two basketball seasons, Dish no longer provided NBA TV
HD, but cable did. Dish added five more Voom channels but dropped Guy TV and
increased the price to effectively $10 a month. When I first started out with
Dish, Dish provided me with NY Mets baseball broadcasts on MSG and FSNY. But in
2006, the Mets changed to SNY. While Dish picked up SNY, Dish did not provide
it to me presumably because Dish wanted to limit the number of subs that it
had to pay the $1.75 per month subscriber fee. So in 2007, Dish did not pick up
MLB EI and Dish subs in my area were left with no baseball.

Dish was going to charge me $137 a month and not allow me
to watch any baseball at all except what was on Fox or ESPN. But on a competitive
basis, a lot happened in 2006 and 2007. Verizon began offering TV in NJ in early
2007 and cable companies were unable to raise rates. Furthermore cable
companies vastly increased their HD offerings. Verizon began providing as many
HD channels as Dish in my area and provided three HD baseball channels for
a lot less than what Dish was charging. Dish became the most expensive HD
provider. More than Directv, cable and Verizon. And the only thing that distinguished Dish HD was 15 Voom channels of which many Dish subs generally
only have two to four that they watch. Verizon and cable in my area, for less money, provide 15 different HD channels that Dish does not. So now subs have
a real choice of HD providers and can exercise personal preferences.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

Its like saying is it worth it for me to upgrade from black and white to color.

To me what isn't worth it is paying all that I do for SD channels which I don't watch.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

jrb531 said:


> I think you have some fuzzy math here.
> 
> You pay $6 a month to rent the 622 no matter what
> You only pay an additional $6 if you do not take the $20 HD package
> ...


 First of all, I OWN my receivers and do not lease them. So if I decide to stop taking hd pack I will get hit by a $6.00 HD ENABELING fee PER receiver and I have two 622 dvrs so that would mean 12.00 a month in fees instead of paying $20.00 for hd pack. So what do you want 12.00 in fees or 20.00 in programming? IT is only $8.00 difference for me and no real savings of any consequence.

ON my second account for my parents I have a 622 with NO HD and yes is it $6.00 for the HD ENABELING fee. They get sd and hd locals and the use of their ota digital tuner as well as the regional sports network in hd. They have the top 250 with locals.


----------



## ls7dude (Jan 31, 2007)

Honestly, I have to sit here and laugh a bit. All of this discussion of $14.00 per month. 

Do any of you realize that we're really talking about 47 cents per day based upon a 30 day month? I bet most of you, if not all, have that much in change laying around the house, in your car, etc. 

If you're at the point where you have to decide where you can afford another $14.00 per month or not or trying to come up with ways to save $14.00 per month then I would think a budget check is in order. 

I am even willing to bet that most of you spend more than that per day on your lunch or take-out with the family per month. You may even spend that much on unnecessary items at the grocery store in a month. 

Stop buying the chips, cookies and ice cream, save a little weight and enjoy your HD programming.

I know that there is so much of a difference in HD vs SD that I am perfectly willing to pay the $20 per month and enjoy it every day.

Good luck with trying to fix your budgets.


----------



## motts (Apr 11, 2006)

ls7dude said:


> Honestly, I have to sit here and laugh a bit. All of this discussion of $14.00 per month.
> 
> Do any of you realize that we're really talking about 47 cents per day based upon a 30 day month? I bet most of you, if not all, have that much in change laying around the house, in your car, etc.
> 
> ...


It isn't really the 14 dollars that is bothering me. It is the fact that if I don't need to give ot to them, then I won't. Would you have any objection to writing out a check for 14 dollars to Dish out of the kindness of your heart? The same reasoning is behind saving the 14 dollars and why you wouldn't voluntarily hand over a 14 dollar check per month for nothing.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

ls7dude said:


> Honestly, I have to sit here and laugh a bit. All of this discussion of $14.00 per month.
> 
> Do any of you realize that we're really talking about 47 cents per day based upon a 30 day month? I bet most of you, if not all, have that much in change laying around the house, in your car, etc.
> 
> ...


So because the amount is small it makes it right?

How about this situation:

1. You pay 100% for your own 622 reciever
2. You subscribe to the SD package only (no HD)

Dish now charges you $6 per month for no other reason than you have a 622 connected to your account.

- They do not send you ANY HD
- It does not cost them one penny over a SD reciever (you paid 100% for the 622 - no discounts)

$6 is not alot of $$$ and they charge it to you for ZERO reasons... just greed and that they figure they can get away with it. So you have no problem with this?

How about $10, or $20... at what point does it make it right or wrong?

IMHO 1 penny is "just" as wrong as $100 per month. They are charging an unfair fee for no other reason that they figure they can get away with it.

Having said all of this I do know full well that those that did not pay 100% for the 622 have to somehow pay for this which is what I thought they charged an upfront cost of $200 (which I paid and they since removed!) - it can be said that they shoudl charge a "real" monthly rental fee based on the equipment and not some arbitrary number. IE the 522 costs $300 and the 622 costs $600 (numbers just an example and not real) then the monthly rental fee for a 522 should be half and not the same.

I can go out and buy a 522 and 622 full price and never connect them if I so desire but "if" I call Dish and connect the 522 with only SD service I do not pay extra, if I connect the 622 with only SD service they charge me $6 more.

Can anyone tell me why?

-JB

P.S. But's it's "only" 6 bucks


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> First of all, I OWN my receivers and do not lease them. So if I decide to stop taking hd pack I will get hit by a $6.00 HD ENABELING fee PER receiver and I have two 622 dvrs so that would mean 12.00 a month in fees instead of paying $20.00 for hd pack. So what do you want 12.00 in fees or 20.00 in programming? IT is only $8.00 difference for me and no real savings of any consequence.
> 
> ON my second account for my parents I have a 622 with NO HD and yes is it $6.00 for the HD ENABELING fee. They get sd and hd locals and the use of their ota digital tuner as well as the regional sports network in hd. They have the top 250 with locals.


Did you buy the 622 for your parents and if yes then why should you pay this $6 fee for something you own that costs Dish zero over the 522 or not SD DVR.

What is it about the 622 and non-HD service that costs Dish more $$$ to send a SD signal to?

Last time I checked *smiles* the very same SD signal was being transmitted to everyone. That 522 and 622 get the very same SD signal but somehow Dish feels they can charge $6 a month to people.

When I called them and asked...

Me: On 622 rentals, once you obtain enough monthly fees to cover the cost of the unit, then the $6 fee stops?

Dish: No

Me: So I have to pay this $6 fee forever and ever even after the unit is paid for?

Dish Yes

Me: Why?

Dish: Silence

Me: If I buy my 622 outright then I do not have to pay the fee?

Dish: You always have to pay the fee. This fee goes to cover the cost of sending you HD content that is not in the HD Package

Me: What channels do I currently get in HD that are not in the HD package?

Dish: Well we currently have none but if we ever do you will get them and for this ability you pay $6 a month

I'm not joking... this is what they told me!

If it was not so sad I would be ROTFLMAO

I seem to remember the phone companies getting in big trouble for renting phones to people for 20+ years with people ending up paying 100 times the phones worth without offering the option to just buy your own phone.

How is this any differnet? You pay 100% for your own equipment and they drop the "rental" fee but add another fee that they make up. On top of this they add another $6 unless you get HD from them.

I smell a lawsuit... not that I like them, mind you, but this defies all logic.

-JB


----------



## isuzudave (Sep 29, 2006)

At $6 a month it would take me about 5.5 years to pay for the 622. Hopefully I will have upgraded my leased 622s to something better by then. From what I understand, if you have the 622 and Dish-locals and/or premium movie packages you will also get the HD locals and/or premium movie packages as well as the HD FSN, even if you don’t have the HD package. I guess this is what the $6 HD enabling fee is for. Now, if you don’t have Dish-locals, movie package, or FSN, then I don’t think they should make you pay the $6. But, then why would you have a 622 anyway. I guess you could still be using the HD OTA tuner.


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

The $6.00 is to enable the OTA turner??? tuner??? gizmo thing 

Point is that if you sue Dish over the $6.00 fee you would lose as the post above stated a reason for the $6.00 fee and also the above reason spoof i gave.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

tomcrown1 said:


> The $6.00 is to enable the OTA turner??? tuner??? gizmo thing
> 
> Point is that if you sueDish over the $6.00 fee you would lose as the post above stated a reason for the $6.00 fee and also the above reason spoof i gave.


And if you got the 622 to try HD programming and it was not worth the expense to you?

Now I have a 622 and even if I do not have pay channels or locals Dish tells me I still have to pay the $6 a month fee.

If I dropped the 622 and added a 522 I would not have this fee.

So once again...

No HD content at all

522 no fee
622 $6 fee

Why?

I am sick and tired of all these silly little fees. They add these fees because then you know exactly what you are paying extra for and some semblence of being fair but in this case it backfires because this is an unfair charge that cannot be justified aside from "Dish wants certain customers to pay $6 more than others"

Now the day Dish adds "any" free HD content then yes I would agree that this $6 means that you are paying for HD content that is not a part of the HD package. Until this happens, however, you are paying $6 for NOTHING!

-JB

P.S. It could be argued that even if you had the locals and HD via a pay package that you are paying extra for those channels. If this is not the case then why do I not get those channels if I took the $20 HD pack?


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

jrb531 said:


> Did you buy the 622 for your parents and if yes then why should you pay this $6 fee for something you own that costs Dish zero over the 522 or not SD DVR.
> 
> -JB


 Yes I bought all 3 of the 622 dvrs. I got them at dishdepot.com by trading in all of my old receivers . I pay the $6.00 hd enableing fee to be able to get the hd locals from Dish and to be able to use the ota digital tuner giving you 3 tuners you can record off of. Do I agree that the $6.00 enabeling fee bites? YES, but I have no choice in the matter and I don't set the fees at DISH.


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

dclaryjr said:


> I'm a sports fanatic so it's worth it to me. I watch ESPN and ESPN2 all the time, plus my wife and I both watch Equator and Rave a lot. My alternative is Time Warner which doesn't carry ESPN2 or the NFL Network (at least not here). So it's a no brainer for me.


How about DirecTV? I, too, am a sports fanatic and after over ten years with Dish am contemplating the move to the competition due to their superior sports programming. It has become quite disappointing to see Charlie consistently allow DirecTV to garner any new sports package which comes along. While non-sports fan don't (and shouldn't) care, it is clear that sports enthusiasts don't rank very hight with Dish.


----------



## ls7dude (Jan 31, 2007)

You guys read way too far into my post. 

I'll put it simpler for you. I wanted HD. I spent a few thousand dollars for a plasma. I lease my receivers because I upgrade them all the time and am not going to waste my money purchasing them. You can, but I won't. 

So, I pay $149 up front for the receiver and install. I turn in my old receiver and get $50 back and $10 per month for 10 months off my HD bill. 

In 10 months, I get all of my money back for the initial investment. 

I love HD and I love the programming that comes with it, so no, I'm not going to sulk over the 6 dollars per month, especially since I'm using it. 

You guys can all continue to purchase your 622's and then complain about an extra $6 and I'll be laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## dclaryjr (Mar 11, 2007)

mhowie said:


> How about DirecTV? I, too, am a sports fanatic and after over ten years with Dish am contemplating the move to the competition due to their superior sports programming. It has become quite disappointing to see Charlie consistently allow DirecTV to garner any new sports package which comes along. While non-sports fan don't (and shouldn't) care, it is clear that sports enthusiasts don't rank very hight with Dish.


Well, I was on the fence. I liked D* for the sports and E* for the HD. What got me off the fence was dropping the $200 up front for the 622! So I'll do my 18 months and re-evaluate. If Dish falls far behind in HD, a switch is possible.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

ls7dude said:


> You guys read way too far into my post.
> 
> I'll put it simpler for you. I wanted HD. I spent a few thousand dollars for a plasma. I lease my receivers because I upgrade them all the time and am not going to waste my money purchasing them. You can, but I won't.
> 
> ...


I'll not speak for others but I am talking more about the principle of the fee and not the cost. If it was only $1 I would be just as mad because the fee is unjust and goes for nothing.

You can laugh all the way to the bank if you want but in my situation (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) I bought into the entire HD revolution and paid the $200 up front and locked into 18 months and after a few months I burned through most all the compelling content and then found myself force watching the HD channels to try and justify to myself the $20 a month cost.

Now others love the $20 HD pack and I respect this but while I fully understadn the $6 a month cost to keep the 622 for my 18 month commitment, I do not understand having to continue to pay the $6 a month after my commitment is up.

The forced 18 month commit is to allow DISH to recover the cost of the expensive 622. Since I paid $200 up front and add $216 ($6 x 18 + $6 x 18 rental) so I have given them $416 in 18 months. Since I will continue to pay the $6 "rental" fee after the 18 months then in my mind they got their $$$ and either will make money on my rental of the 622 or will at least break even.

Once I learned that not only will I have to continue to pay the $6 HD fee but even if I owned the 622 I would still have to pay it... well warning bells went off.

What is funny (or sad) is that all Dish would have to do is to add compelling content to the HD pack and I would have no problem paying the $20. IMHO I think Dish knew that it would take some time to get real content added to the HD pack so they added the 18 month commit to give them time to add real channels to the package. They are banking that by the time the 18 months (this fall) is up for people that they will have enough new content to keep people.

Well the months are counting. If they do not have "real" content that I want to watch by September then I will either drop to a 522, move to DTV or cable or as a last resort cancel some programming to get my costs down.

I do not like to be forced into paying something that is not right no matter how little it is. This $6 is an utter rip off and I cannot see how Dish can justify charging people $216 a year to "rent" the 622.

1. $6 DVR fee
2. $6 rental fee
3. $6 HD fee

If I buy the 622 then they only charge me $144 a year. Whoopee! Thanks Dish!

There will be a lawsuit eventually and Dish will have to refund much of these fees. Mark my words. They will then have to prove to a court the following:

1. Why it costs "exactly" $6 a month to show program guide data for your DVR when the very same data is provided to non-DVR's for free (the DVR fee)
2. Why it costs "exactly" $6 a month to rent "all" types of recievers no matter the hardware expense to Dish. (It should cost more to rent a DVR vs a non-DVR)
3. Why it costs "exactly" $6 a month to rent a HD DVR after your commit perior is over and even if you buy your own unit. (What is the "real" cost of you owning a HD reciever and not getting any HD content from Dish?)

Just like the phone nd cable companies were "forced" to provide "real" numbers on their bills, Dish will be forced to tell us real fees. Anyone rem when the cable companies wanted to charge us $5 a month for a remote control? LOL

Once SD stops and EVERYTHING is HD then HD becomes the standard. People will forget that SD ever existed. Now how to you continue to charge more for the standard even after your equipment startup costs have been paid... now what do you do?

So many questions 

-JB


----------



## snowcat (May 29, 2007)

jrb531 said:


> Once SD stops and EVERYTHING is HD then HD becomes the standard. People will forget that SD ever existed.


SD will never completely stop. As long as there are reruns, there will be SD. Plus, I still remember black and white TVs, TVs without remote controls, and days before cable (and I am only 36).

I just switched from Comcast to Dish (I previously went from Dish to Comcast), mainly because I have 3 HD sets in my house now. The $20 HD fee isn't so bad, since they gave me two 211s and a 622. Comcast charged about $12 per HD box plus the digital TV fees. I am saving a little money with Dish.


----------



## xasx (Mar 19, 2006)

Are their taxes with Verizon? cause with dish you save like 10-15 a month over cable just because of taxes, but I still do believe the HD package is a bit pricey.



Hound said:


> In my opinion, it is not worth it. I was paying Dish $137 a month for AEP with
> HD and Locals, and four receivers (including 2 622s). I have been a Dish HD sub since August 2004. I also have an 18 month commitment that runs out in August 2007. In March 2007, I signed up for Verizon at $110 a month. With Verizon I got more SD channels, the same number of HD channels
> (36) and hooked up six TVs (instead of four) including two HD DVRs and two
> HD boxes. Verizon also has better HD and SD picture quality than Dish.
> ...


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

xasx said:


> Are their taxes with Verizon? cause with dish you save like 10-15 a month over cable just because of taxes, but I still do believe the HD package is a bit pricey.


Yes, there are taxes with Verizon. My last bill with Verizon was $141 plus $9
tax for a total of $150. My basic service was $110 plus $31 for 8 pay per view
movies plus $9 tax. The tax applies to pay per view as well.
I have five kids and they order a lot of movies. Verizon movies are 2.99 or
3.99. Most Dish movies are 4.99. So I did pay $9 in tax, but I saved $8 in pay 
per view charges over Dish.


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

Any company can charge any fees for any reason it is allowed under US Law. Banks charge a teller fee a usage fee on checking accounts etc. Cell companys charge a maintance fee etc. In todays world you have to check all fees involved before one makes a choice on which provider one uses. the only thing that the law states is that all firm have to provide what fees they charged if a counsmer makes a request for the information.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

Hound said:


> Yes, there are taxes with Verizon. My last bill with Verizon was $141 plus $9
> tax for a total of $150. My basic service was $110 plus $31 for 8 pay per view
> movies plus $9 tax. The tax applies to pay per view as well.
> I have five kids and they order a lot of movies. Verizon movies are 2.99 or
> ...


I see that Dish also has $3.99 movies in the 500 channels if you order with
your phone line. The Dish On Demand section has movies at $4.99. Maybe they
are HD. I do not order movies anyway. Only my kids.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

tomcrown1 said:


> Any company can charge any fees for any reason it is allowed under US Law. Banks charge a teller fee a usage fee on checking accounts etc. Cell companys charge a maintance fee etc. In todays world you have to check all fees involved before one makes a choice on which provider one uses. the only thing that the law states is that all firm have to provide what fees they charged if a counsmer makes a request for the information.


But even the banks can "claim" the fee goes to something.

Dish's "official" line is that the $6 HD fee pays for HD programming that is not in the HD package. Since there is currently ZERO HD channels not in the HD packages (locals are in the locals package and the other HD channels are a part of other packages... none that are required) they are basically telling you that you pay $6 a month for NOTHING!

Sure they could add $6 to other pacakages if they need the $$$ but they are doing this to try and force people to pay the full $20 for a HD package that many (not all of course) feel is an utter rip off.

So either they provide a service (or pretend service that makes sence LOL) or they remove the $6 fee... or prepare to refund all the $$$ later after the lawsuit.

To date, after all my posts on this issue, no one has been able to tell me what the $6 pays for.

So once again...

If I buy my 622...
If I do not subscribe to HD
If I do not subscribe to Locals

(In other words I do not get a single channel of HD)

Then what does my $6 go to?

Now as a side note I could also bring up (once again) why we pay a DVR fee if the very same guide data is being provided to non-DVR customers who do not pay. If the $6 DVR fee does not go to the guild data then what does it go to?

-JB


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

One day at a theme park...................................................$75

One day of HD television programming............................$0.33

Watching spectacular HD imagery on TV every day.......Priceless


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Nick said:


> One day at a theme park...................................................$75
> 
> One day of HD television programming............................$0.33
> 
> Watching spectacular HD imagery on TV every day.......Priceless


If it was 33 cents a day I would subscribe to it LOL.

I could add...

One day at a theme park paying for unlimited rides.... $74
One day of using the excellent 622 reciever.... $6 rental + $6 DVR Fee + $6 No HD fee = $18 or 60 cents per day

Paying $6 a month for N-O-T-H-I-N-G .... Priceless

Having people say that this is "only" $6 so it's no big deal.... Amazing!

-JB


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

the $6/mo for nothing is indeed pretty goofy. However, on the more grand scheme, I think really you have to consider the whole price, and then what do you get for that whole price.

The cost of use of a 622 is $6 more per month vs. other receivers, and who cares why? Hardly matters. It is just a known quantity.

What's more troubling for me is the way we are incrementally allowing ourselves to be upcharged for HD programming which is certainly going to become standard fare in a few months. Like, right now we pay $20 for HD. HD what? well, whatever we can get in HD, we get it for $20. Then in a few months when they add some more channels, maybe it will still be $20 but we are already conditioned to think we are getting x number of HD channels for $20, so when we suddenly find ourselves getting 2x that number of channels, why wouldn't we expect to be charged $40 for them?

Forums like this only hinder the effort to contain and simplify the cost of programming. When we all get on here and say "heck, that's four channels I watch, that's worth $20" or "$6 is no big deal..." then we are going to find things like our bill just being jacked up $6 every once in a while since it's no big deal, and whenever four more channels we might watch pop up, expect another $20 to be demanded. 

Here's the rub, though. For most of us, once we have switched to HD, we don't watch a lot of SD anymore. I don't watch ANY. well virtually zero. So I am paying $20 for programming that I ACTUALLY WATCH, and then what, like $60 for programming (SD) that I do not watch. As they add HD "versions" of channels now available in SD, if we allow them to continue up-charging us for them, then there will soon be a time when pretty much every channel will be in HD, and we will end up paying the $60 or $80 or whatever base price for the programming, PLUS like another $100 or so for the HD versions of those channels. We need to quit standing by and letting Dish continue to creep that price upwards on the premise that HD programming is a valid premium charge. One day it will be standard, and we'll be paying a premium for standard fare.

Anyway, it hardly matters. This business is measured along a timeline not very different from dog years. Dish Network is nearing the end, and so is DirecTV and also cable. I could write a dissertation on the evolution and eventual extinction of the media business under its current model vs. the advent of broadband content delivery technology but this is hardly the place or the audience. All I can say is this: another year from now, I doubt an 18 month contract is going to be a wise move.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Mr.72 said:


> the $6/mo for nothing is indeed pretty goofy. However, on the more grand scheme, I think really you have to consider the whole price, and then what do you get for that whole price.
> 
> The cost of use of a 622 is $6 more per month vs. other receivers, and who cares why? Hardly matters. It is just a known quantity.
> 
> ...


Great points.

I'm going to once again bring up the "ala-cart" issue or better yet "themed packages" into the mix.

You can bet your sweet backside that they are conditioning us to pay more. I fully understand that HD requires more birds and large equipment upgrades thus the "temporary" price increase. Once this is paid for then HD should be the standard rate and we should no longer pay a premium for what now is a standard.

Do you think they will drop the $20 surcharge once this happens? Of course not! For those of us who watch only SD we pay "only" for SD (aside from the $6 622 ripoff charge LOL) so why can't people subscribe to "only" HD and drop SD?

I do not want to start yet another ala-cart or themed packages debate but eventually, as the average price of pay-tv goes up, the issue will be forced.

Let me ask you this for any who care to answer...

Which is true right now?

1. The $20 HD package fee that Dish charges right now covers the existing HD channels and added channels will force this $20 per month fee to go up

2. The $20 HD package fee that Dish charges right now will cover additional HD channels (no increase as channels are added) and thus Dish is currently OVER-CHARGING for the HD channels right now

It can only be one of the two and, IMHO, I hate the prospect of either being true. So they either are ripping us off for channels now "or" they are going to increase an already too expensive package even more as they add more HD content.

Bonus questions...

1. Once "everyone" is upgraded to HD recievers (no matter what their TV's are) and "all" channels are HD then what will the existing packages be called? How do you add $20 (or much more!) to a stabndard bill and call it the HD pack when "all" channels are HD?

2. What about the people who do not care about HD. Do they eventually just "force" a huge huge price increase on everyone even if all they watch is SD reruns?

3. What does the current $20 a month cover? Is it the cost of hardware to transmit HD? Is it the added programming cost for HD? A little of both? What happens when everything is in HD? Do we continue to pay for "extra" HD programming when "everything" is in HD? How long do we continue to pay for extra HD hardware once everyone has Mpeg4 recievers?

4. When will Dish "force" people to take Mpeg4 recievers? Will they charge us?

Comments:

The vast vast vast majority of programming is still SD. Even when everything is upgraded most content will still be SD upscaled. I suspect that the programmers and distributors have some form of roadmap. I sure wish they would share it with us. It's hard to decide what to do when there are so many questions out there. Right now I have hesitant to commit to large hardware expenditures when I have no idea where this is going.

I am starting to think that long term, the way to go is pure pay per view or rental's of programs. Considering the cost pay-tv is approaching it's almost better to just rent what you want to watch via Netflix or Blockbuster. This way I can pay for what I want, when I want. With the largerst $30 per month fee I can rent like 6 shows at a time and always have stuff to pop into the DVD player. As the programs switch to HD DVD I can get the same.

In other words I'm no longer at the mercy of what the distributors want. I'll continue to pay for the cheapest Pay-tv package with locals but drop everything else.

-JB


----------



## archer75 (Oct 13, 2006)

I'm not a fan of the voom channels. And I hope if they need more HD bandwidth for other channels such as discovery and starz that they start getting rid of the Voom channels.


----------



## hockeyinsd (Aug 29, 2004)

Wow, just read through this thread and many interesting thoughts. I for one love the HD package. Yes, it is $26 more a month now that before, but for me it is worth it. Granted I've only had HD for a week now, but it is amazing! I'm sure I'll eventually come down from my HD high, but for me, $26 is worth it. If I had cable it looks like I would be paying about the same price for less HD channels and the digital channels on one tv (instead of the 4 that I have). With all 4 televisions getting all digital channels (not HD), it would be almost $30 add'l. IMO having the latest and greatest in television will always be expensive. I remember my parents paying lik $50 or $60 a month for 36 cable channels back in the mid-eighties (with a single HBO and Disney channel). Yes, it was a lot of money back then especially when you could get a lot of programming for free OTA, but it was worth it. Thats what it boils down to for me, it is worth it and that is all I care about. Some of the fees are very questionable, and it would be more honest if they just priced the HD package as $26 or $30 or ???? and didn't tack on extra fees, but again, all in all when I get my bill every month it is worth it.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

The only thing that will force HD prices down is competition. More choices from
more multi video providers. In NJ, we now have a choice of four multi video providers. Many areas of the US only have a choice of three and maybe two.

Dish will not reduce prices unless HD subs leave. If HD subs continue to grow,
HD prices will continue to rise. Dish has not publicly announced its number of
HD subs like other multi video providers. Because of the $20 fee and the failure
to announce the numbr of HD subs, I suspect Dish's percentage of HD subs is
less than other multivideo providers.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Just like with the introduction of Compact Disks, HD will follow suit.

To refresh memories:

When CD's came out they were expensive to make and of "much" superior quality that the competition which were records and tapes. Their was a high startup cost building new plants and obtaining new equipment to product and make CD's. This, rightfully so, was passed on to the consumer and at the time records and tapes cost about $8 each with $2 per unit cost (it cost $2 to make and they sold for $8 at the store) while CD's cost $16 and cost $4 to make.

So CD's cost twice as much to make and as such sold for twice as much.

Well as the years went by the cost to make CD's dropped to $1 while records and tapes remained $2.

Guess what CD's sold for? Yep.... the same $16 per CD even though they were now half as cheap to make as records and tapes. Logic would dictate that CD's should now cost half as much as tapes and records or $4 each!

When this information became well known the recording studios and manufacturors told us that the high price was now due to the high quaility ROTFL!

The simple matter of fact is that they charge whatever they can get away with. I see the very same trend in HD.

Like CD's, HD has a high "startup" cost but eventually it will fall to the same level of SD and even get cheaper as technology allows.

Will HD "suddenly" drop to the same price as SD used to be or even cheaper? Not a chance in H--L!

Will public outcry eventually "force" congress into holding some "for show" hearings? Yep and then they will lower rates about 10% and cry how much $$$ they will lose yadda yadda and in the end they will still be making more $$$ then when all this started.

Nothing every changes. Business is business and what they sell means very little as they all work the same way.

As was once said... If we do not learn from history we are bound to repeat our misteaks.

Have we ever learned?

Each time someone here says "it's only $6" or "it's a high price but it's worth it to me" or my favorite... "if we TRY and doing anything it MIGHT be worse so lets leave things alone"

We are doing nothing but playing into their hands. 

Have you ever asked yourself a few simple questions?

1. Once the new HD cameras are paid for then WHY should HD cost more to produce? Why should the Discovery channel charge more for HD programming (for example) than SD? Once all their equipment is bought and paid for and now HD then what justification is there for them to continue to charge more $$$?

2. Once Dish converts everyone to HD boxes and starts using Mpeg4 100% (so HD can fit on the same birds that used to xmit only SD) then why will we continue to pay extra for HD over SD?

3. When everything becomes HD will they drop the $50 SD fee we pay so we will continue to get HD but not SD or will they just add the two costs together and 5 years from now we'll be all paying $150 instead of $75 and have the same people here telling us how "cheap" pay tv is because we have 10,000 channels showing the same content?

I agree that they have zero incentive to make any change at all. We keep feeding the pig and justifying in our minds how great we have it. We will keep comparing the cost to go out to dinner and all sorts of "mental" justifications as to why being raped for pay tv is ok.

Well let me leave you with this fact... when I am short one month I cut out going to dinner. Frills are "temporarily" dropped until I have free cash to burn. Pay TV has become a utility so to speak that is a fixed cost that stays the same each month.

When they raise the price of gas 10% people go nuts...
When they raise the price of electric 10% people go nuts...
When they raise the price of heat or phone or any other utility people go nuts...

Well pay tv goes up about 5% each year so we say nothing even thought utilities may raise fees 10% one year but then go years without a raise. The steady 5% increase each year in pay TV is double or higher than what utilities are doing.

The one time Dish raises prices 10% in one year for select customers people went nuts! 10% people notice... 5% each and every year is ok.

I guess we deserve what we get.

-JB


----------



## bavaria72 (Jun 10, 2004)

hockeyinsd said:


> ... but it is amazing! I'm sure I'll eventually come down from my HD high, but for me, $26 is worth it....


Heck hockeyinsd, I have had HD for over 3 years and I still have not come off my HD high. I have gotten to the point that I really find watching any TV shows in SD just down right painful. "Hi, I'm Art and I'm an HD addict!" Don't feel gulity about enjoying it. I apologize to no one! (Well, except my wife but that goes without saying!)


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

When I got my 1080P 42" HDTV with the dish HD pack, my sister asked me, "so, are you dazzled?"

Truthfully, I didn't feel really dazzled by HD, particularly with the grief in getting dish to do a real HD install - i.e., when the installer left, he left me with composite cables and a 622 set to 480i, until I bought my own HDMI cables and reset the box myself. Even then i wasn't dazzled, until I hooked up an antenna and got a dozen or so HD channels OTA. 

The OTA channels seem much sharper and brighter than the Dish ones on my 1080p set. Some dish channels less so than others. But it was the OTA channels HD channels that really made me sit up and take notice.

Now I'm seriously considering dropping $600 for a high gain long range (whatever you call it) pro installed antenna, so I can get the washington and lancaster HD channels OTA as well as the Baltimore ones. 

As for Dish's Hd package, i've had it about three weeks and the content seems to be very recycled -- already I'm seeing the same HD programs and specials over and over, so how will I feel after six months? I'm not saying I'll dump the Hd package, but I think when my 18 month committment is over (and I've been with Dish 7 years) I will be comparing HD packages. Verizon has a nice Hd package, and a nice channel offering, but doesn't offer FIOS or whatever its called in my area. 

If they or someone else does a better job when my dish committment is up, I might seriously consider switching -- though I do love the dish top 250. OTOH, FIOS seems to have all that and more, just not in my area. 

I'm glad Dish has been around all these years, and I've enjoyed the programming. But they also don't carry a few channels that I want. If someone comes along who does a better job, for a better or equivilent price, then we'll see. 

I do think Dish's HD package is somewhat over priced for what it offers, particularly since a lot of the content doesn't seem HD -- at least not compared to true OTA HD widescreen broadcasts. dish kind of has us by the short hairs, and we don't know how often they repeat the programming until we've seen the guides go by a few weeks. They probably also feel they can charge us an inflated price because HD is still perceived as a luxury product. But eventually that backfires. Bore the customer enough as well as charging an inflated price and they will go looking for greener pastures. I'm not bored yet, but I am seriously considering that antenna...


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

sansha said:


> When I got my 1080P 42" HDTV with the dish HD pack, my sister asked me, "so, are you dazzled?"
> 
> Truthfully, I didn't feel really dazzled by HD, particularly with the grief in getting dish to do a real HD install - i.e., when the installer left, he left me with composite cables and a 622 set to 480i, until I bought my own HDMI cables and reset the box myself. Even then i wasn't dazzled, until I hooked up an antenna and got a dozen or so HD channels OTA.
> 
> ...


The picture quality on all OTA antenna recordings made on my Sony DHG HDD 500 DVR are noticeably much better, sharper and brighter than the same show
recorded on my Dish 622. For example CBS CSI, ABC Brothers and Sisters, NBC Saturday Night Live or Fox Prison Break are noticeably much brighter and sharper OTA than Dish. I have the 622 and Sony HDD 500 hooked up to a Panasonic
1080P Plasma. With a 1080P TV, you can really see the difference. Also, Verizon
Fios HD is noticeably much sharper and brighter than Dish. Verizon Fios HD
is very similar to OTA HD in picture quality. The basic Verizon Fios HD package
is much cheaper than Dish. Where I live in Central NJ, the basic Verizon Fios
package is $43 plus $10 for an HD receiver = $53. With that 31 HD channels are
provided and 5 premium HD channels are optional. The cheapest Dish HD package
with locals is $40 plus $20 for HD and $6 for HD receiver = $66. The cheapest
Dish HD package provides 31 HD channels and 4 optional premium HD channels.
The cheapest HD package by my local cable company, Patriot Media which is
being bought by Comcast is $15 for limited basic and $7 for HD receiver = $22.
This package provides 6 local HD channels, HD PPV, HD On Demand, the option
to subscribe to 5 premium HD channels, the option to subscribe to sports
packages such as Major League Baseball EI (which I do) and for $10 a month the option to subscribe to HD plus which includes 12 HD channels including three HD RSNs. In my area, the Dish HD package is overpriced, is missing some key HD channels and does not provide any HD local sports.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Hound said:


> The picture quality on all OTA antenna recordings made on my Sony DHG HDD 500 DVR are noticeably much better, sharper and brighter than the same show recorded on my Dish 622.


The Sony DHG-HDD500 cannot record HD from satellite (and certain fussy cable operators), so comparisons to the ViP622 aren't entirely helpful other than to point out that it could be improved.


> The basic Verizon Fios HD package is much cheaper than Dish.


If it were only available to more than 1/30th of the US population, they might have something going there.


> The cheapest Dish HD package with locals is $40 plus $20 for HD and $6 for HD receiver = $66.


There is no charge for the first receiver.


> The cheapest Dish HD package provides 31 HD channels and 4 optional premium HD channels.


It is actually 32 HD channels and the premiums are included in the count.


> The cheapest HD package by my local cable company, Patriot Media which is being bought by Comcast is $15 for limited basic and $7 for HD receiver = $22.


Your neighbors are going to miss Patriot. Expect the cost to go up by at least 50% along with some new constraints about what you need to get various forms of programming.


> In my area, the Dish HD package is overpriced, is missing some key HD channels and does not provide any HD local sports.


This is meaningful to someone with your tastes, lives in your area and has your options. Other's mileage varies widely.

Some have more HD TV's than some services allow and others require content that is simply not available through local services. With luck, there is something that matches up pretty well to each person's needs, but there is no single solution that hits everything so it is good to have choices.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

Those that have FIOS now are in a very small minority. When it becomes available to the majority of the nation then we will have a "shooting match" between the providers. Then the knock down of prices will start for competition and pq. Right now most of us only have the choice of cable w/ little offerings in HD, E* & D*. "When my present contract w/ E* I will look at D* to see how far they have come. The thing is I have a feeling the D* will continue the lowest standard of HD delivery possible and E* will have some great, some good, & some mediocre pq. I doubt that FIOS will be around where I live for years. Also what harsh said.


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

Hound said:


> The picture quality on all OTA antenna recordings made on my Sony DHG HDD 500 DVR are noticeably much better, sharper and brighter than the same show
> recorded on my Dish 622. For example CBS CSI, ABC Brothers and Sisters, NBC Saturday Night Live or Fox Prison Break are noticeably much brighter and sharper OTA than Dish. I have the 622 and Sony HDD 500 hooked up to a Panasonic
> 1080P Plasma. With a 1080P TV, you can really see the difference. Also, Verizon
> Fios HD is noticeably much sharper and brighter than Dish. Verizon Fios HD
> ...


I understand that OTA would be perceptibly better but it is sad to learn Verizon FIOS is superior quality-wise to what Dish has decided to provide. It's not surprising Dish is attempting to lock everyone into 18-month contracts as the competition offers better HD picture quality at a better price.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

harsh said:


> The Sony DHG-HDD500 cannot record HD from satellite (and certain fussy cable operators), so comparisons to the ViP622 aren't entirely helpful other than to point out that it could be improved.)
> 
> The point is that OTA broadcast HD is a much better picture than Dish HD locals.
> This is not a comparison of 622 vs. Sony HDD 500.
> ...


)

All subs are different. I have six TVs. Four used to be with Dish and six were
with Patriot. Now six are with Verizon, two with Patriot and two with Dish
until August. Many subs are not interested in sports and the Dish channel lineup
suits them well. Many Dish subs now have an HD RSN with Dish and that RSN is enough sports to satisfy their personal needs. Many Dish subs do not have an HD RSN and they are not satisified. Many subs are happy with limited basic cable for $15 a month without a cable box, but have bought a new TV with a QAM tuner and are getting five to seven HD channels for $15 a month. I read a survey that more than 50 percent of all cable subs do not use a set top box. The cable coax is hooked up directly to the TV. This saves money because cable charges for a set top box just like Dish does.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

*My last post did not come out correctly.*

Originally Posted by harsh 

(The Sony DHG-HDD500 cannot record HD from satellite (and certain fussy cable operators), so comparisons to the ViP622 aren't entirely helpful other than to point out that it could be improved.))

The point is that OTA broadcast HD is a much better picture than Dish HD locals.
This is not a comparison of 622 vs. Sony HDD 500.

(If it were only available to more than 1/30th of the US population, they might have something going there.)

Verizon claims that it is now available to about 11 percent of US population or 1/9.
I do not foresee Verizon being available to maybe more than 25% of population
(after Verizon gets statewide franchises in some other big states).

(There is no charge for the first receiver.)

Dish is charging me for my first receiver and I have argued this point many
times with Dish customer service.

(It is actually 32 HD channels and the premiums are included in the count.)

It is 31 HD channels. National Geographic HD is not available in the basic Dish
HD package (100). My count includes four HD locals, not the four HD premium channels. I currently have the cheapest Dish HD package until my 18 month commitment runs out in August. I have negotiated all of these points with Dish customer service. This is the best Dish can do.

(Your neighbors are going to miss Patriot. Expect the cost to go up by at least 50% along with some new constraints about what you need to get various forms of programming.)

Because of Verizon, Comcast was unable to raise rates in NJ. Patriot is actually
more expensive than Comcast and provides less HD channels than Comcast.
My neighbors are looking forward to Comcast and the additional HD programming
not available on Patriot or Dish.

(This is meaningful to someone with your tastes, lives in your area and has your options. Other's mileage varies widely.)

I agree, personal taste is very important. Also, multi video provider options available to subs varies widely across the United States. However, after reviewing
Verizon's offerings in the eleven states where it is available, Verizon's channel lineup is more balanced than Dish. Verizon seems to offer something for
everyone. HD RSNs. Dish is severely lacking in sports programming and HD sports programming in many parts of the United States. When I first signed up for
Dish four years ago, Patriot did not provide sports packages, had a very limited HD sports offering and did not provide my local RSN in SD or HD. Dish gave me
the opportunity to sign up for MLB EI, NBA League Pass, NHL Center Ice and
ESPN Full Court. Dish provided NBA HD. Dish provided one MLB EI game in HD
every night. Dish provided me with Mets baseball on a local RSN. I thought Dish
was really great. But then Dish stopped providing NBA HD in the 2005 06 season
and 2006 07 season over some fee dispute. Cable continued to provide NBA HD.
Last year, the Mets changed to a new RSN and Dish did not give it to me (For baseball, my zip code is in the blackout area for Mets, Phillies and Yankees. 
Verizon, Patriot and Comcast provide the local RSN in HD for all three teams. Dish
does not provide the RSN in SD for any of the three teams in my area). The last straw was Dish did not pick up MLB EI. Pennywise and dollar foolish on Dish's part.
Dish had 55,000 MLB EI subs. I paid Dish $137 a month plus sports subscriptions
plus my kids movies on demand purchases. Now Dish was not going to provide
me with any baseball at all!!!!!!!!! The new MLB Channel in HD is going to be
a must channel for any baseball fan. 26 saturday night HD games. The 2009 
World Baseball Classic in HD and much more. Directv, Comcast, Cox and Time
Warner all own a piece of the new MLB channel that will eventually be monetized when the channel is sold to somebody. Allen and Company estimated the future value of the channel at $1.2 Billion. Dish did not have the vision to get in and
negotiate for rights to the MLB EI package early on.

(Some have more HD TV's than some services allow and others require content that is simply not available through local services. With luck, there is something that matches up pretty well to each person's needs, but there is no single solution that hits everything so it is good to have choices.)

All subs are different. I have six TVs. Four used to be with Dish and six were
with Patriot. Now six are with Verizon, two with Patriot and two with Dish
until August. Many subs are not interested in sports and the Dish channel lineup
suits them well. Many Dish subs now have an HD RSN with Dish and that RSN is enough sports to satisfy their personal needs. Many Dish subs do not have an HD RSN and they are not satisified. Many subs are happy with limited basic cable for $15 a month without a cable box, but have bought a new TV with a QAM tuner and are getting five to seven HD channels for $15 a month. I read a survey that more than 50 percent of all cable subs do not use a set top box. The cable coax is hooked up directly to the TV. This saves money because cable charges for a set top box just like Dish does.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

I agree that Dish should offer the HD premiums as an option. I have no real desire to have the SD premiums, and won't spend the $$ to get all of them when i'm only interested in the HD content -- but I might spring for the HD premiums if they were reasonable -- which based on Dish's current Hd package price, they won't be even if they were offered. Frankly, for the 20$ dish charges for the HD package and considering what it contains, I think they ought to throw in the HD premiums -- then it would be worth the 20$. Particularly since the HD dish offers isn't true HD -- at least not compared to OTA HD.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I think some folks are still confused on necessities vs luxuries... Pay TV is very much a luxury item, and as such the price tends to be whatever the market will bear. If people keep paying, then the cost keeps going up. If a large percentage of folks bailed, then prices would come down to entice them to stay. Simple economics of supply & demand.

One thing that continues to confuse me... Why do folks who don't want HD programming from Dish want the ViP622?

The only answer seems to be they want to use it to DVR HD OTA... so... whether you like it or not, you need Dish to do that... so either you pay the $6 enabling fee or you go look for another option to DVR OTA HD channels.

I like the HD pack.. do I wish it were cheaper? Sure. But it's the best option out there right now for the most HD.

Some folks act like their world is ending because of the fees they are paying to Dish... and to those folks I always ask... if it is so bad and driving you so nuts why not cancel your service and go elsewhere? I am confounded by the folks that seem to want to complain about something they willingly signed up for and continue to pay for when there is an option for them to go elsewhere.

I understand thinking your bill is too much... but if you think that, it seems like you should go elsewhere, right? One definition of insanity is to repeat the same thing over and over but expect different results.


----------



## rocky01 (Mar 20, 2005)

I can hardly wait to give FIOS HDTV a spin when my eighteen months runs out soon.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

The grass is always greener (over the septic tank).


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

Good 1 Jim. I'm laughin now. :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## ls7dude (Jan 31, 2007)

Hound said:


> Yes, there are taxes with Verizon. My last bill with Verizon was $141 plus $9
> tax for a total of $150. My basic service was $110 plus $31 for 8 pay per view
> movies plus $9 tax. The tax applies to pay per view as well.
> I have five kids and they order a lot of movies. Verizon movies are 2.99 or
> ...


Sounds like you need Blockbuster's online service. We pay 17 per month and watch as many movies as we'd like.


----------



## ls7dude (Jan 31, 2007)

I can't help but wonder if this problem with the HD package has to do with people pinching pennies, or needing to pinch pennies. It could end up being all about the budget in the end. 

We all have budgets, not matter what income, but all of our sofas and cars and little knooks in the house have enough cash monthly to pay for the cost of HD.

The price is rather inexpensive and you do get more than you would with cable. Also, cable does not have the extensive HD channels that Dish does.

Maybe some should check their budgets.


----------



## ls7dude (Jan 31, 2007)

jrb531 said:


> If it was 33 cents a day I would subscribe to it LOL.
> 
> I could add...
> 
> ...


JB may be one of the budget people.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

I think it is more considering how much you want to pay for TV. When TV gets over $100 a month, then I consider what I'm getting for my $$. I don't mind paying for premiums, if they are really "premiums". If they are not worth the premium price, then that makes it harder to justify the premium price. If someone has a huge family and lots of people watching tV, then $100 a month is probably very reasonable. For a single person, it is sort of ridiculous -- do I watch 3-4 dollars of Tv a day? and am i watching the HD channels? Again, I loved the top 250 and thought that was worth the price. But I haven't been impressed with the content of the Hd package, or for that matter, of the "HDness" of some of the content. I realize Dish has no control over that, but what's the point of paying extra for HD content when it doesn't look much better, if at all, than SD? While some of the HD programming looks good, a lot of it looks pretty much the same as the SD channel. For example, having heard so much of Discovery's HD theater, I watched supervolcano on it, and yet the resolution of that movie looked very fuzzy and bad, and I couldn't see any difference than SD. OTOH, some other content on discovery does look good. The HD news channel has good resolution, but practically no news, they recycle the same few minutes throughout the day. How hard it is it to have an HD news channel? that alone might go a long way to making the package worth it to me, if we had one, which it seems we really don't. So we seem to have resolution, but little HD content or a lot of recycled HD content. Or stuff that doesn't seem like it meets the resolution to be on an Hd channel because it looks the same as SD. Right now, HD seems very uneven to me, in content and quality of resolution. That's not all Dish's fault, but then the price of the package ought to reflect that. It's personal taste and some may find the Hd package worth the price. So far, I'm not 'dazzled', though i'm hoping (and expecting as the 18 months go along) that it grows on me.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

sansha said:


> I think it is more considering how much you want to pay for TV. When TV gets over $100 a month, then I consider what I'm getting for my $$. I don't mind paying for premiums, if they are really "premiums". If they are not worth the premium price, then that makes it harder to justify the premium price. If someone has a huge family and lots of people watching tV, then $100 a month is probably very reasonable. For a single person, it is sort of ridiculous -- do I watch 3-4 dollars of Tv a day? and am i watching the HD channels? Again, I loved the top 250 and thought that was worth the price. But I haven't been impressed with the content of the Hd package, or for that matter, of the "HDness" of some of the content. I realize Dish has no control over that, but what's the point of paying extra for HD content when it doesn't look much better, if at all, than SD? While some of the HD programming looks good, a lot of it looks pretty much the same as the SD channel. For example, having heard so much of Discovery's HD theater, I watched supervolcano on it, and yet the resolution of that movie looked very fuzzy and bad, and I couldn't see any difference than SD. OTOH, some other content on discovery does look good. The HD news channel has good resolution, but practically no news, they recycle the same few minutes throughout the day. How hard it is it to have an HD news channel? that alone might go a long way to making the package worth it to me, if we had one, which it seems we really don't. So we seem to have resolution, but little HD content or a lot of recycled HD content. Or stuff that doesn't seem like it meets the resolution to be on an Hd channel because it looks the same as SD. Right now, HD seems very uneven to me, in content and quality of resolution. That's not all Dish's fault, but then the price of the package ought to reflect that. It's personal taste and some may find the Hd package worth the price. So far, I'm not 'dazzled', though i'm hoping (and expecting as the 18 months go along) that it grows on me.


I agree with you. When the price gets over $100 a month, a sub has to see
if he is getting everything that he wants. In my case, Verizon provided me
with three HD regional sports networks that Dish was not providing to me in SD or HD. With Dish, I made up with the lack of regional sports networks by subbing to MLB EI, NBA LP, NHL Center Ice and ESPN Full Court. But Dish stopped providing
NBA HD and MLB EI. MLB EI was the last straw.

The Voom channels are eclectic and designed for surfing. In my case, there is
only one channel that I really liked, Equator HD. My impression from reading
posts is that most subs only watch two to four Voom HD channels.

I view the Dish HD offering as 16 National HD channels, 15 Voom Channels,
1 HD PPV, 4 local HD channels and maybe an HD regional sports network (but no HD RSN in my area).
The Verizon HD offering in my area is 19 National HD channels, 14 local HD
channels and three HD regional sports networks.

I traded Equator HD for three more National HD channels, 3 HD regional sports
networks and 10 additional HD local channels that have content that I actually
watch (PBS HD, local news HD, CW HD baseball, MY HD baseball, NFL football
HD on NY and Phila CBS and FOX). The repetition in content on Equator HD is not
a concern to me, because I watch other non Voom HD content such as sports,
HBO series and broadcast HD series. Equator HD is a nice complement to my
other viewing. But if I was a Dish sub, and expecting 15 Voom channels to fill up the majority of my viewing time, I would be very disappointed because the content
does repeat and there is not enough to keep my interest.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

One nice thing about the verizon FIOS (I think it is called) is that they have most if not all of the top 250 for a very reasonable price plus the showtime and starz movie channels together for i think $12 extra. I think you must rent the boxes, which are expensive, as I bought my dish DVRs years ago, and pay no renting or DVR fee, except for the new 622. If verizon FIOS ever comes to my area, it would be a serious competitor for Dish with me. As for sports, I am a transplanted Pittsburgher, and have never cared to see the Ravens or the Redskins, except when the Steelers are beating them, so that's not a draw for me. Interestingly they charge only 12 for showtime/starz together, but 25 for HBO/cinemax together.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

As for Voom, I watch Family sometimes for UFO and a few other things, and I watch the monster movie channel sometimes, and occasionally a movie on one of the other channels, but I haven't been too impressed with Voom or any of the HD programming.


----------



## motts (Apr 11, 2006)

sansha said:


> One nice thing about the verizon FIOS (I think it is called) is that they have most if not all of the top 250 for a very reasonable price plus the showtime and starz movie channels together for i think $12 extra. I think you must rent the boxes, which are expensive, as I bought my dish DVRs years ago, and pay no renting or DVR fee, except for the new 622. If verizon FIOS ever comes to my area, it would be a serious competitor for Dish with me. As for sports, I am a transplanted Pittsburgher, and have never cared to see the Ravens or the Redskins, except when the Steelers are beating them, so that's not a draw for me. Interestingly *they charge only 12 for showtime/starz together, but 25 for HBO/cinemax together*.


They should allow you to choose any two premiums for one low price, not pre packaged versions. I would like to have HBO/Showtime like I have now with Dish, but I would have to pay for them as two seperate premiums.

Also, their renting/dvr, etc, fees are a little more with Verizon than with Dish. However, they have, in my opinion, a better HD selection that Dish, since anything that I like on Voom I have already watched and there are no new episodes as far as I know (Smart Travels.) So when my contract is up toward the end of the year, I will seriously consider the switch, as it is already available in my area.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

motts said:


> They should allow you to choose any two premiums for one low price, not pre packaged versions. I would like to have HBO/Showtime like I have now with Dish, but I would have to pay for them as two seperate premiums.
> 
> Also, their renting/dvr, etc, fees are a little more with Verizon than with Dish. However, they have, in my opinion, a better HD selection that Dish, since anything that I like on Voom I have already watched and there are no new episodes as far as I know (Smart Travels.) So when my contract is up toward the end of the year, I will seriously consider the switch, as it is already available in my area.


The Verizon renting fee is a little more. My Dish 622 DVR fee and rental is $12. With Verizon I pay $13 for a DVR. I also own a Dish 622, but Dish says I still have to pay $12 for my owned 622 as well. The Verizon HD box is $10 and Dish is $6. But the absence of the $20 HD fee makes up for the difference in set top boxes. Overall Verizon is less than Dish when you add up the cost of the program package and the set top box fees.

I watch smart travels on Equator HD. But Verizon will provide you with
PBS HD channel 13 and it also has smart travels. The exact same smart travels
programs that are on Equator HD.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

So basically you get no benefit from buying as opposed to renting the 622? 

I've always bought my dish receivers. The 622 is the first receiver I've rented from Dish. I had three dishplayers, two have died, and one was replaced by dish with a 508 (because I have the service plan). The third I have replaced with the rented 622 on my HDTV. I like the 622 very much, the guide is as nice as the Dishplayer guide (i.e., you don't have to press info to see the detail while you are channel surfing, like on the 508). And so far the 622 has been trouble free for me. I suppose one advantage to renting the box is that once your committment is up you're free to check out greener pastures, where as if I would buy the 622s I'd consider myself pretty locked in. If you get no advantage for buying the 622, that's another reason not to buy it.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

HDMe said:


> I think some folks are still confused on necessities vs luxuries... Pay TV is very much a luxury item, and as such the price tends to be whatever the market will bear. If people keep paying, then the cost keeps going up. If a large percentage of folks bailed, then prices would come down to entice them to stay. Simple economics of supply & demand.
> 
> One thing that continues to confuse me... Why do folks who don't want HD programming from Dish want the ViP622?
> 
> ...


Hindsight is 20/20.

I like HD... I just feel the $20 HD pack is a ripoff. As I said in many of my posts, I love my Showtime HD and Starz HD that I get for the very same price for both as I do for the HD Pack (and the SD channels they offer to)

So I want HD, love the locals in HD and the movie channels in HD but I hate the "all in one" HD pack.

Once again we are being forced to take all or nothing. I would love to pay $5 a month for Discovery HD but I do not have that option. Rave is great until you see all the shows then it's recycle city. Monster HD is B movie crap for the most part.

A few of the other channels show decent content every so often.

Yes other feel the $20 pack is gold. I do not.

I had really (stupid I admit!) thought that the $6 fee would stop once my 18 month comit was up. I had thought (once again stupid I admit) that the $6 was to pay for the 622 for those people who did not commit to 18 months of $20 HD pack. (I had originially signed up for the $20 HD as they "hinted" that more channels were to come)

Now in my mind I pay extra for locals so I pay for HD locals.
Now in my mind I pay extra for Starz and Showtime HD.

So Dish charges me $6 a month for the HD channels they provide that are not in the HD pack. What channels are those?

Now before you say... why that's the surcharge for Starz/Showtime HD and your local channel HD. Why I asked about that... if I cancelled Starz/Showtime and my locals would I still pay the $6.... Answer - YES!

Cost to downgrade to the 522.... $100

So I pay $200 up front (right before they dropped this LOL!) and an extra $6 a month for the 622 for 18 months then they will charge me another $100 just to swap back to the 522.

I have a few month left on my 18 month contract then I'll shop around. While I might be forced to stay with Dish it most certainly is leaving a bad taste in my mouth which translates into me jumping ship the first chance I get.

How many others may feel the same? Who knows.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

ls7dude said:


> Sounds like you need Blockbuster's online service. We pay 17 per month and watch as many movies as we'd like.


I do this now and I'm about the cancel Starz/Showtime because of it. By the time they show the new movies, I had already watched them LOL.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

ls7dude said:


> I can't help but wonder if this problem with the HD package has to do with people pinching pennies, or needing to pinch pennies. It could end up being all about the budget in the end.
> 
> We all have budgets, not matter what income, but all of our sofas and cars and little knooks in the house have enough cash monthly to pay for the cost of HD.
> 
> ...


Please do not fall for the old channal count. Compare "quality" HD channels and not all the fill-in crap.

How many $20 HD channels would survive if they were offered ala-cart?

Maybe 25% IMHO

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

ls7dude said:


> JB may be one of the budget people.


Not really but I hate being ripped off be it $1 or $6.

To date not a single person (or Dish LOL) has been able to tell me why they are charging $6 a month.

All I keep hearing is that it's not too bad or it's only pennies a day yadda yadda.

Does anyone care to explain where the $6 a month goes?

How about the $6 DVR fee we pay. Where does that go? They "claim" it pays for the guide data but non-DVR's get the very same info and they are not charged.

Tell you what..... Dish can pay me $1 for every DVR and I'll type in the guide data LOL. See you'll save $5 a month for me to type in the data and I'll laugh all the way to the bank 

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

sansha said:


> So basically you get no benefit from buying as opposed to renting the 622?
> 
> I've always bought my dish receivers. The 622 is the first receiver I've rented from Dish. I had three dishplayers, two have died, and one was replaced by dish with a 508 (because I have the service plan). The third I have replaced with the rented 622 on my HDTV. I like the 622 very much, the guide is as nice as the Dishplayer guide (i.e., you don't have to press info to see the detail while you are channel surfing, like on the 508). And so far the 622 has been trouble free for me. I suppose one advantage to renting the box is that once your committment is up you're free to check out greener pastures, where as if I would buy the 622s I'd consider myself pretty locked in. If you get no advantage for buying the 622, that's another reason not to buy it.


Yes and this is my beef. They 'ARE" ripping people off.

$6 DVR fee
$6 HD Fee

A DVR fee for what? what does Dish provide a DVR owner vs a non-DVR owner?

Clearly something must cost Dish each month for every DVR right? I just want to know what this is. They "claim" that they have to provide DVR's guide data for us to record things. How is this data any different than the guide data the non-DVR's get?

The $6 HD fee is for the free HD channels we get that are not a part of the $20 HD pack. Dish does not currently offer and "free" HD channels but if they ever do we'll get them ROTFL!

Pure and utter ripoff.

They get away with charging these fees because they can get away with it. I am counting the days until the first class action.

Just like cable was forced to staop renting their remote controls for a few bucks a month...
Just like the phone companies were forced to stop renting phones for silly amounts

Dish (and others) will be forced to "justify" what they charge.

Let's cut the crap and say what the real reason is....

Dish wants to "advertise" a lowball price and to do this they try to separate all sorts of fees to be able to do this. Surely they could just add these silly fee to the base price but then they could not advertise these low prices.

So every little silly fee they can think of that they can remove from the "base" package they do.

$6 Rental fee
$6 Local Channel fee
$6 DVR fee
$6 HD fee

That's $24 right there! Yes not everyone has a DVR or HD or takes locals so they get away with this.

But how does Dish "justify" these fees?

$6 rental - why does the expensive 622 cost the same as a cheaper unit?
$6 Local Channels - Cable includes them, Dish should also!
$6 DVR fee - This one has me puzzled
$6 HD fee - Ditto!

The only fee listed above that is "somewhat" justified is the rental fee and as I said... why do units costing half as much rent for the same price?

-JB


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I see no reason why Dish has to justify where the $5.98 DVR fee or the $6 "HD enabling" fee goes. They only have to tell me about it, then I decide if I want to pay to have that receiver or not.

Why does most every restaurant now charge about $2 for a Pepsi or for Tea? Neither beverage costs them $2 even if I drink a couple of refills... so why do they charge so much? I am already paying for the food I eat while there, so that can't be it... and I leave a TIP for the waitress, so that can't be it... They are ripping me off! I can't take my own Pepsi to drink while there either... Restaurants are ripping me off! But I think I'll keep eating at them so I can complain 

FYI, don't know if you still can... but DiscoveryHD used to be available a la carte for $7.99. Back when I first got HD with Dish, you could get the HD Pack for $9.99 which had another 5 channels... or just get DiscoveryHD by itself for $7.99. Most folks opted for the HD Pack because it was more bang for the buck.


----------



## patmurphey (Dec 21, 2006)

If you don't like what Dish charges, why don't you just go somewhere else?

BTW, the guide is different on non DVR receivers. There are packages that waive or reduce the DVR fees. Be happy that they offer a discounted HD fee if you don't want the full HD package. You want a moe expensive HD receiver expect to pay something more than for an SD receiver. If you don't want locals (or Dish provide Local Guide) because you can get them free OA, you don't have to pay the Local charge.

Pat


----------



## rcbridge (Oct 31, 2002)

This is a good topic for discussion but, we all have the control of this situation, if you can't justify it or think it is overpriced just don't purchase it!
If you think it is worth it get it!!


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

I'm the one who started it, and I've been interested in everyone's responses, and like to hear why it is/isn't worth it to them. 

I'm still waiting to hear if there is/isn't an advantage to buying a 622 receiver?

Pat


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

HDMe said:


> I see no reason why Dish has to justify where the $5.98 DVR fee or the $6 "HD enabling" fee goes. They only have to tell me about it, then I decide if I want to pay to have that receiver or not.
> 
> Why does most every restaurant now charge about $2 for a Pepsi or for Tea? Neither beverage costs them $2 even if I drink a couple of refills... so why do they charge so much? I am already paying for the food I eat while there, so that can't be it... and I leave a TIP for the waitress, so that can't be it... They are ripping me off! I can't take my own Pepsi to drink while there either... Restaurants are ripping me off! But I think I'll keep eating at them so I can complain
> 
> FYI, don't know if you still can... but DiscoveryHD used to be available a la carte for $7.99. Back when I first got HD with Dish, you could get the HD Pack for $9.99 which had another 5 channels... or just get DiscoveryHD by itself for $7.99. Most folks opted for the HD Pack because it was more bang for the buck.


But at least you get a soda for that $2.... overpriced... for sure but you get "something"

With those two fees you get nothing.

Thanks for the tip on the $7.99 Discovery HD... If they still offer that I may go for it. That is the one channel I really miss.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

patmurphey said:


> If you don't like what Dish charges, why don't you just go somewhere else?
> 
> BTW, the guide is different on non DVR receivers. There are packages that waive or reduce the DVR fees. Be happy that they offer a discounted HD fee if you don't want the full HD package. You want a moe expensive HD receiver expect to pay something more than for an SD receiver. If you don't want locals (or Dish provide Local Guide) because you can get them free OA, you don't have to pay the Local charge.
> 
> Pat


So the guide data that I see on My DVD differs in information than the guide data for non-dvr's? This is a new one on me.

Hmmm I need the name of the show, the start and end time and a description. Last time I checked this same info is being offered on the non-dvr's for free. What "extra" info do us DVR owners get that costs Dish $6 a month?

Go somewhere else? Hmmm I just might when I can but there is the posibility that they all rip us off.

IMHO every time we find excuses for bug business when they are in the wrong we make the situation that much worse next time they are figuring out how to get more $$$.

I ask again (why can't anyone answer?) what does that $6 HD fee pay for if you own your own 622 and do not subscribe to HD.

It matters not "why" I want the 622. It's my $$$ and if I want to buy a 622 and watch SD content on it then that is "my" choice. Their official response is the biggest line of BS I have heard in a long long time.

-JB


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

jrb531 said:


> But at least you get a soda for that $2.... overpriced... for sure but you get "something"
> 
> With those two fees you get nothing.
> 
> ...


If you don't pay the $5.98 DVR fee, I assume they will deactivate your receiver. I haven't tried not paying it to find out!

If you don't pay the $6 enabling fee, then you wouldn't get to view OTA... they might even deactivate your receiver entirely. Again, I haven't tried not paying to find out.

Mind you, I'm not saying I like all the fees... but they don't have to justify them to me. They charge what they charge, and I decide if I enjoy what I watch for the amount I am paying.

Good luck on the DiscoveryHD... I know it used to be in small print right there on the Web site but I haven't looked in a while and long ago opted for the whole package so I am not sure if you can still get it or not.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

jrb531 said:


> So the guide data that I see on My DVD differs in information than the guide data for non-dvr's? This is a new one on me.
> 
> Hmmm I need the name of the show, the start and end time and a description. Last time I checked this same info is being offered on the non-dvr's for free. What "extra" info do us DVR owners get that costs Dish $6 a month?
> 
> ...


The fee is simple to understand It is to keep the HD DVR getting the correct info to stay in the "HD data stream family". I really getting very tired of your whining about a fee that was stated upfront to be charge for the right to get HD. If you don't like it take your marbles and go home and stop B'in about. It really makes no sense to have an HD DVR and not have HD programming. If you only want SD programming get the SD DVR. It is worth it to us so either pay it and get HD programming or go away and gripe to those other past customers that didn't like the rules. When my 18 months is up I will decided if I want to stay w/E* or go to another provider. You can do the same, just stop trying to prove that everyone is wrong for paying what it takes to have at the present, the largest number of HD available nationwide.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

I guess its all a question of how they frame the issue.

Comcast charges $10 more for broadband if I don't also get their cable TV. But they frame it as $10 discount if I also get cable.

Dish has to just increase HD DVR free and give a $6 discount if you subscribe to HD channels.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

whatchel1 said:


> The fee is simple to understand It is to keep the HD DVR getting the correct info to stay in the "HD data stream family". I really getting very tired of your whining about a fee that was stated upfront to be charge for the right to get HD. If you don't like it take your marbles and go home and stop B'in about. It really makes no sense to have an HD DVR and not have HD programming. If you only want SD programming get the SD DVR. It is worth it to us so either pay it and get HD programming or go away and gripe to those other past customers that didn't like the rules. When my 18 months is up I will decided if I want to stay w/E* or go to another provider. You can do the same, just stop trying to prove that everyone is wrong for paying what it takes to have at the present, the largest number of HD available nationwide.


It could also be said, if you don't want to hear his *****ing, or read a thread discussing whether people find the HD package worth the price, go read another thread.

Not every discussion is interesting to every reader, but why should we stop discussing it because you find it tedious?

His discussion of how he's been trying to find out from Dish what the $6 fee is for has been interesting to me, and in some cases amusing, hearing Dish's reported responses.

I don't think he's trying to prove that everyone is wrong for staying with Dish's HD package as you've stated. I'm not trying to prove that either. What is this knee jerk reaction from some people that when the pros and cons of something is discussed, we inevitably get some posters whose response is "if you don't like it go elsewhere"?

Very little is black and white. Why shouldn't we discuss Dish's package vs others, or compare the fees or channels offered among them?

Wanting to hear other's opinions doesn't mean we hate Dish, at least not for me. But I like hearing other points of view and other's experiences. It's not necessarily the "grass is greener on the other side". Often you discover the grass is just as green here. For example FIOS does charge less for their "packages" but more for their set top boxes. Dish has at least one ridiculous (IMHO) fee. Nobody is wrong, and nobody is right --we all choose our providers and make do, the good and the warts, flaws, and foibles too. But there's no reason why we shouldn't discuss them, and it's mysterious to me why some people seem to find this so personally threatening, like we're trying to say someone is wrong for choosing X provider over Y. If you find it so, or just tedious and whining, I'm sure there are other threads more interesting to you. You yourself made a reference to marbles that equally applies. On the other hand, if you want to tell us why you think the package is great and worth it to you, pull up a keyboard and tell us. We're all eyes.


----------



## ls7dude (Jan 31, 2007)

sansha said:


> I realize Dish has no control over that, but what's the point of paying extra for HD content when it doesn't look much better, if at all, than SD? While some of the HD programming looks good, a lot of it looks pretty much the same as the SD channel. For example, having heard so much of Discovery's HD theater, I watched supervolcano on it, and yet the resolution of that movie looked very fuzzy and bad, and I couldn't see any difference than SD. OTOH, some other content on discovery does look good. The HD news channel has good resolution, but practically no news, they recycle the same few minutes throughout the day. How hard it is it to have an HD news channel? that alone might go a long way to making the package worth it to me, if we had one, which it seems we really don't. So we seem to have resolution, but little HD content or a lot of recycled HD content. Or stuff that doesn't seem like it meets the resolution to be on an Hd channel because it looks the same as SD. Right now, HD seems very uneven to me, in content and quality of resolution. That's not all Dish's fault, but then the price of the package ought to reflect that. It's personal taste and some may find the Hd package worth the price. So far, I'm not 'dazzled', though i'm hoping (and expecting as the 18 months go along) that it grows on me.


I only have one thing to say about this post...

If you don't see a serious difference between HD and SD, then you either have a TV that was meant for the garbage can, or you don't have HD working.

On my TV, it is clear as day, the difference between the two.

Sorry.


----------



## ls7dude (Jan 31, 2007)

jrb531 said:


> I do this now and I'm about the cancel Starz/Showtime because of it. By the time they show the new movies, I had already watched them LOL.
> 
> -JB


JB,

You are very correct. With this Blockbuster thing the DISH PPV and all of that is garbage.

With Blockbuster you can add a movie to your que, even before the movie is released. Well, a couple of days before the movie is released we put that movie to the top of our que. Several times now we have gotten movies in the mail on Tuesday when they have just become available for purchase that day.

There's no reason to ever purchase a movie again. You want to watch it again? Just put it in your que and it's on it's way to you again.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

sansha said:


> It could also be said, if you don't want to hear his *****ing, or read a thread discussing whether people find the HD package worth the price, go read another thread.
> 
> Not every discussion is interesting to every reader, but why should we stop discussing it because you find it tedious?
> 
> ...


It seems to me that the point has gotten to the point of just saying the same things over & over. One has the choices of E*, D*, cable & in a few places. The amount has been revealed and past that it is personal choice. So why keep beating the point into the ground.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

ls7dude said:


> I only have one thing to say about this post...
> 
> If you don't see a serious difference between HD and SD, then you either have a TV that was meant for the garbage can, or you don't have HD working.
> 
> ...


Try reading the post again. I said some of the content on the HD channels looks very good, and some doesn't look much better than SD. On my 1080p TV it is as clear as day too, from channel to channel. Even within HD channels from program to program, some look good, some you wonder why they're broadcasting that in supposed HD. Either that or Dish's HD lite is really lite.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

whatchel1 said:


> It seems to me that the point has gotten to the point of just saying the same things over & over. One has the choices of E*, D*, cable & in a few places. The amount has been revealed and past that it is personal choice. So why keep beating the point into the ground.


If you feel that way, then leave us masochists to keep beating the point/discussing the various HD offerings if we choose to, and move on to other threads more interesting to you. Why do you care? No one is forced to read anything here.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

sansha said:


> Try reading the post again. I said some of the content on the HD channels looks very good, and some doesn't look much better than SD. On my 1080p TV it is as clear as day too, from channel to channel. Even within HD channels from program to program, some look good, some you wonder why they're broadcasting that in supposed HD. Either that or Dish's HD lite is really lite.


 I have a question for you . Does your 1080p tv upconvert everything it receives from Dish to 1080p or does it only do the 1080i ,that is the maximum setting on a dish hd receiver?


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

whatchel1 said:


> The fee is simple to understand It is to keep the HD DVR getting the correct info to stay in the "HD data stream family". I really getting very tired of your whining about a fee that was stated upfront to be charge for the right to get HD. If you don't like it take your marbles and go home and stop B'in about. It really makes no sense to have an HD DVR and not have HD programming. If you only want SD programming get the SD DVR. It is worth it to us so either pay it and get HD programming or go away and gripe to those other past customers that didn't like the rules. When my 18 months is up I will decided if I want to stay w/E* or go to another provider. You can do the same, just stop trying to prove that everyone is wrong for paying what it takes to have at the present, the largest number of HD available nationwide.


Since when do we just sit back and not question anything?

As far as you being sick of my *****ing... Its not like I am posting all over the place. It often takes people *****ing to get things fixed. I'm glad you want to roll over and take anything they toss at you but, thankfully, other do question things that are unjust!

I already explaied "why" (many times LOL) I have a 622.

There is no separate "DVR" data stream. The same identical info is given to non-dvr's.

The fact is (and I'm sorry you do not care to hear it) is that these two fees are unjust, have ZERO purpose other than to jack up our bills.

So skip over my posts. I will continue to post and follow the forum rules.

And still no one can tell me what the DVR and HD fees pay for.

This baffles me.... no one can tell me what we are paying for aside from the "we pay because they charge" it notion.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Look everyone...

I do not want to beat a dead horse. I take nothing said here personal. We are just talking and it's nice to hear different sides.

Usually when a question is raised many people can at least formulate some form of "guestimation" so to speak.

In this case I am baffled as to these charges that Dish puts on our bill and the responses from Dish made it ever worse.

Before the advent of DVR's we got the very same guide information for free. Non-DVR's are still getting this infor for free.

1. Program Name
2. Start Time
3. End Time
4. Description

This is all "I" need to record shows. This info is free to "some" users and others are being asked to pay $6 a month. Why? I agree that there is "some" cost to Dish to provide said data to "all" the users but why do only DVR users pay for it and everyone else gets it for free? Why $6? What in the world costs them $6 per DVR user to type in guide data? Why not a small $1 for "all" users for example?

Truth be told they did not even start this until other providers got away with thuis stupid silly unjustified fee. It cost the very same to hire someone to type in data for one user vs a zillion users. Perhaps they are paying for this data from another service... who knows, who cares but at the very least tell me two things...

1. What data are DVR users getting that non-DVR users are not?
2. If there is something then why does this cost $6 per month?

For crying out loud, for just another $4 I can add an entire package of channels to my subscription. Something about DVR's must really cost Dish alot of $$$... or, as I propose, it's just a HUGE RIPOFF!

The HD fee is even worse...

The "official"

"We charge you $6 per month for the HD channels that are not in the $20 HD package"

This is utter and complete BS!

There are no channels they give us for free.

But then I'm not saying anything that I have not already stated.

The wya I see it Dish cannot have it both ways...


Either they

1. Present everyone with one bill that covers all the little charges (in tiers of course)
2. Break apart the bill as they do now but then "justifly" all those little charges.

When I look at my phone bill it's a literal mess of little charges but you know what? I see $1.87 tax for this, 2.07 charge for that.

When I see charges from Dish for "whole" dollar amounts it raises a HUGE red flag.

These fees just happen to be rounded to $6? Give me a break!

I'll leave this post along aside from responding to direct questions. My intent was not to piss people off. I had thought that people here would be just as upset as I that they were passing these BS fees and not even thinking of some form of "plausable" reason (thank you Mythbusters LOL)

-JB


----------



## patmurphey (Dec 21, 2006)

MY 211 gets a 2 day guide - you don't need more if your not setting up recordings. My 622s get a 9 day guide.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The two fees stirring up debate in this thread now seem to be the $5.98 DVR fee and the $6.00 HD enabling fee.

I don't know why you would want an HD DVR and not want HD channels from Dish... so while I agree it is a pure-profit $6 fee for them most likely... I don't see where the complaint really is. You know up-front it will either cost $6 for HD enabling fee or $20 for the HD package before you sign up for a ViP622... so I see this as a non-issue. If you don't want HD, and don't want to pay the fee... then get a 625 or something else.

The $5.98 DVR fee bugs me on some levels... I wish I didn't have to pay that. After all, what use is a DVR without DVR functions? You can't not-pay the $5.98 fee (unless you have one of the older DVRs before they instituted this fee)... so it again is a pure-profit fee most likely. But the same logic applies in that I knew about the fee before agreeing to take the receiver... so why complain after the fact?

Complain before you sign, and maybe maybe maybe you can get special treatment (not likely).. but don't sign up for it, knowing about the fees, and then complain all day.

It is fair to ask what the fee is for... but ask that before you sign up! Asking afterwards is a waste of time since you are already committed. It is fine to feel ripped-off if you want, but the time and place to ask for justification for these fees was before taking the receiver.

It isn't like these fees were added later, after you already had the receiver installed... then I could see complaining... but not when you knew beforehand about them and signed up anyway.


----------



## nychgan (Feb 1, 2005)

HDMe said:


> I don't know why you would want an HD DVR and not want HD channels from Dish... so while I agree it is a pure-profit $6 fee for them most likely... I don't see where the complaint really is.


Well, the main reason I got the VIP622 HD DVR is because it has more hour of recording time than the non-HD models, 200 versus 100 hours . Why can't they come up with a non-HD DVR that has the same number of hours?


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

Because HD is the future and Sd is going away. By next year all sd and hd will be in Mpeg4 on Dish's new satellites that they will launch by December. This means potentially better picture quality for both sd and hd , but sd is going away as they replace them with hd channels of the same thing. I for one am looking forward to the new mpeg 4 sats . I can't wait to repoint my dish to them so I can get better picture quality than today. 

As to the dvr fee you can escape them with the dvr advantage pack for top 200 or top 250 or upgrade to AEP. I thought long ago that Dish did add more subs by having no dvr fee at all. In fact they really added more subs than Directv did back then when they started with the 501 /721 series of dvrs. They charged nothing and Directv was charging about 9.99 a month for their dvrs back then. But if they can't do away with the dvr fee they could at least make it a per account fee like Directv does, instead of PER Dvr receiver as they do today.


----------



## sgip2000 (Jun 5, 2007)

What will be interesting is how they handle the whole digital switch over. Since Dish is already all digital, they have pretty much met that requirement.

The rule is that all broadcasts have to be digital, not HD. My bigest issue is the extra charges for "HD content" that is infact, SD content upconverted.

Many providers concider HD as a premimum and we consumers expect that all digital broadcasts should be digital; however, that is not required.

As far as the DVR fee, I remember paying $9.99 for Personal TV on my Dishplayer 7200. $5.98 is a good deal but still unjustified.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I have a question for you . Does your 1080p tv upconvert everything it receives from Dish to 1080p or does it only do the 1080i ,that is the maximum setting on a dish hd receiver?


I think it does it to all signals, based on the description of the "XD engine" as there's no parameter settings that I've come across for tweaking the "engine". I have the 622 set to 1080i output, and the connection I have is HDMI from the 622 to the TV.

LG 42" LCD HDTV (42LB5D)

Display type: Flat-panel LCD

Screen resolution: 1080p (1920 x 1080)

Aspect ratio: 16:9

Contrast ratio: 10,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio

Tuner type: NTSC, ATSC, QAM

Connection options

HDMI inputs: 3, Supports 480i/480p/720p/1080i/1080p.

Component inputs: 2, Supports 480i/480p/720p/1080i.

PC inputs: 1

LG's exclusive XD Engine: Six distinct processes contribute to picture improvement. LG's XD Engine takes the low resolution of analog signals to near HD levels by improving brightness, contrast, detail and enhancing color as well as reducing signal noise. This total solution results in cinema-like high resolution images.

178-degree true wide viewing angle: Enjoy a true 178-degree viewing angle with consistent contrast and color-even while viewing at the most extreme angles

Super IPS Technology: This technology reduces common distortion and blurring caused by fast motion video and also provides one of the industry's widest viewing angles.

LG SimpLink: Conveniently control other LG SimpLink products using the existing HDMI connection.

USB Media Host: Experience your digital music (MP3) and photo (JPEG) library with USB Media Host.

NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuner: The ATSC tuner lets you receive free digital broadcasts, including HD signals, through an over the air antenna. QAM allows you to receive unscrambled HD from your cable provider without a set top box. The NTSC tuner will allow you to tune in to analog signals until the 2009 cutoff.

3 HDMI inputs with HDCP: HDMI is the best digital connection for today's high definition sources. LG gives you three of these inputs so that you can connect all of your HD components, from cable boxes to game consoles to HD video players.

10,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio: LCD panels create a picture by selectively letting light through from a constant source. This produces bright images effectively, but because that light source never turns off, dark images are more difficult to produce. LG technology analyzes each incoming frame and adjusts the panel and light source to produce the best result. This gives you deep, dark scenes without dimming the bright lights.

SRS TruSurround XT: This technology delivers a premium virtual surround sound experience from any multichannel source over just two speakers or headphones, transforming any audio material, including mono, stereo or surround encoded content, into breathtaking virtual surround sound. It transforms your living room into a live concert hall, gaming arcade, or movie house... all while discretely fitting the general aesthetics of your home.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

Re the original tenor of this post -- I have to note that the movies on the HD family channel this week are exactly the same movies that were on the HD family channel when I added HD a couple of weeks ago, i.e., Annie, Huckleberry Finn, etc. Now I can see running the same movies over and over fora few days, to ensure everyone gets a chance to see them, and even for a week. But after you have run them to death for a week for goodness sake it's time to run something new. Otherwise we could buy a copy of Annie and Huckleberry Finn and be done with it, we don't need satellite TV. 

Voom sure doesn't seem to have much content to air. While the # of Voom channels sounds very well, if they run the same content for weeks at a time, the value considerable diminishes. 

And you don't know that when you sign up for that 18 months... You're assuming you're getting channels where the content is not the same for weeks on end. And who knows, perhaps next month, they'll still be showing Annie and Huckleberry Finn... Please tell me i'm wrong about that ...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I think it is fair to criticize Voom for the amount of repeats. Sometimes the same movie comes on 2-3 times a day 2-3 different days in the same week... and a couple more weeks that month!

They seem to be drawing on a small pool of movies.

That said... I also notice lots of repeats on HBO, SHO, and the like as well. I don't pay for those premiums because I expect more variety from them for what they charge. I figure I'm paying somewhere between $5-$10 for the entire Voom suite of channels... whereas HBO would cost me $15 and would actually have less HD variety by a mile... and even if I watched some SD movies still not as much variety as I would expect from the vast library they should have.

So while I too am critical of Voom for not expanding their library more quickly... I also recognize I'm not paying an awful lot for those channels. Some of their channels really could be a gold mine (Animania for one) if they could boost the library. There are lots of cartoon movies they could buy to air there and they could pick-up more Anime as well. Could be a must-have channel for lots of folks if they did.

There's also more international films they could get for World... they could be the HD version of IFC if they wanted.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

sgip2000 said:


> What will be interesting is how they handle the whole digital switch over. Since Dish is already all digital, they have pretty much met that requirement.
> 
> The rule is that all broadcasts have to be digital, not HD. My bigest issue is the extra charges for "HD content" that is infact, SD content upconverted.
> 
> ...


The digital change over applies ONLY to OTA broadcasting, not cable not satellite. Cable can remain analog if it wishes to, satellite can still have analog outputs to TV's.

Digital change over has NOTHING to do with satellite or cable.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

sansha said:


> I think it does it to all signals, based on the description of the "XD engine" as there's no parameter settings that I've come across for tweaking the "engine". I have the 622 set to 1080i output, and the connection I have is HDMI from the 622 to the TV.
> 
> LG 42" LCD HDTV (42LB5D)
> 
> ...


Sounds very good and I only hope that Toshiba does something similiar. I am stuck on Toshiba brand, as they seem to make sd look pretty good now using Dish hd receiver on my 57 " hdtv .


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

Jim5506 said:


> The digital change over applies ONLY to OTA broadcasting, not cable not satellite. Cable can remain analog if it wishes to, satellite can still have analog outputs to TV's.
> 
> Digital change over has NOTHING to do with satellite or cable.


Except that both sat companies will have to use a feed from the digital local stations broadcast rather than the sd analog broadcasts come 2/2009. Now they can downconvert them to sd and broadcast them to us ,but they will have to come from the digital feeds.


----------



## sgip2000 (Jun 5, 2007)

Jim5506 said:


> The digital change over applies ONLY to OTA broadcasting, not cable not satellite. Cable can remain analog if it wishes to, satellite can still have analog outputs to TV's.
> 
> Digital change over has NOTHING to do with satellite or cable.


That was my point.

Dish doesn't have to add anything to meet the FCC requirement. They simply add HD content because that's what the customer wants.

HD content is going to be concidered a premimum over SD simply because SD signals only have to be digital, not High Definition.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

sgip2000 said:


> That was my point.
> 
> Dish doesn't have to add anything to meet the FCC requirement. They simply add HD content because that's what the customer wants.
> 
> HD content is going to be concidered a premimum over SD simply because SD signals only have to be digital, not High Definition.


IMHO as long as we continue the age old practice of "channel counting" instead of instisting on quality HD, we will continue to be bogged down with mostly crap.

Speaking only for myself, I would rather have only 25% of the HD channels that Dish offers if they were all of high quality both in programming and PQ.

Dish, DTV and Cable are now in a HD channel count war and trying to sell us on the number of channels and not quality. For sure they mention quality over SD and yes the current HD is "somewhat" better than SD but in no way is it true HD quality. It's very very hit or miss and until they commit to Mpeg4 (and the expense of swapping all the Mpeg2 recievers) there will be little change.

Each addition of another HD channel requires more compression of existing channels. Little by little as more channels are added the existing channels get worse. It's an utter mess out there right now during this transition period.

Right now I see three issues:

1. Programming - this is the #1 issue. They simple do not showcase the very best HD can be. For sure Rave, Discovery and a few others "loop" some quality stuff but most of the channels show some pretty ho-hum programming. Considering that even older movies were shot in 35mm there is a "huge" library of some pretty amazing movies that could be shown in full HD glory. Instead we get mosty b-run crap. Cleary they do not want to pay for the right to show the good stuff. I had thought that at least part of the extra $20 was to cover the programming... or do they think we are so much in awe of HD that we'll watch paint dry as long as it's in HD?

2. Picture Quality (PQ) - I know all about the numerous HD resolutions but the real issue here is bit-rate. You can broadcast at the very highest resolution but if you over compress the picture it looks like crap. Sure this does not show as much on my HD 26" set in the bedroom but ask those who spent a pretty penny for a large screen HD set how that over compressed crap looks blown up to gigantic proportions. So lets stop this silly "which resolution is best" debate and start insisting that whatever resolution Dish does pipe to us is not so over compressed that the resolution does not matter. Yes I too want both the highest resolution "and" bit-rate but if I had to pick one or the other you know what I feel is more important.

3. Channels - What good is having more channels if the channels they add are crap in either programming or quality? I'll not go over all the channels as we have done this before but even the most ardent Dish HD supporter will admit that a large portion of the chanels are filler. If they eliminated these stupid channels then the PQ to the "good stuff" could be dramatically improved. Look... I do not care what the "potential" is for the "cartoon HD channel" the fact is that currently it's almost all crap. Either they pay for real programming or they dump it.

In closing let's be open and honest here. Certain channels do not "need" to be in HD and while eventually everything will be HD it seems silly to me to add HD channels that do not need to be in HD before those that could really showcase the format. Cartoons? Cooking? Kung-Fu? News? Do these need to be in HD?

Sports and movies are perhaps the #1 most impressive possibilities for HD. Once you see a sporting event in HD you will be truely amazed. Same goes for movies that have mostly been shot in at least 35mm for decades.

What does Dish give us? Almost no sports and the movies they do show (aside from the extra cost pay channels) are mostly crap.

Does anyone else aside from me detect that Dish does not want to pay for HD programming? It's a sad day when the basic package movies that dish shows in SD are far superior that the crap they show in HD.

How many of you have been channel surfing and have seen a movie on one of the SD channels and wished it was shown in HD? If they can afford to show it on the basic SD channels then what is stopping them from showing it in HD?

Is there some technical hurdle? The reason I ask is that considering the crap the moster channel shows in HD I keep asking myself the same question... if they have to redo something about a movie shot in 35mm to allow it to be shown in HD then why are they picking some of the very worst movies to convert first? While not all Monster Channel movies are bad, about 75% of them would not make the cut in my book.

*smiles*

-JB

P.S. I know I ***** about cost alot but give me some quality and I will glady pay for it. When I dumped my $20 HD pack I did not do it to save $$$ but because I did not feel it was worth my $$$. I took that saving's and took a few movie packages (Starz and Showtime) and while I only get two HD channels for the same $20, at least the movies they do show in HD look pretty darn good and I find I watch those two channels far more than I did all the $20 HD pack channels combined.


----------



## sansha (Apr 27, 2007)

jrb531 hear, hear. You said what I'd been trying to say. And I do agree with you on your channel choice --except I'd add news to HD.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

jrb531 said:


> IMHO as long as we continue the age old practice of "channel counting" instead of instisting on quality HD, we will continue to be bogged down with mostly crap.
> 
> Speaking only for myself, I would rather have only 25% of the HD channels that Dish offers if they were all of high quality both in programming and PQ.
> 
> ...


Part of your post here is I don't like what is offered so it can't be what the entire public wants. It is 1 person's likes and dislikes. I'm not saying your right or wrong it is just your opinion. E* doesn't chose the programming that is on the channels. It just pays the channels to be on the E* service. E* has absolutely no say what so ever in what is shown on the channels. PQ is an HD lite discussion and is in other threads. As far as the standards for HD for satellite there are 4 not just 2 as in OTA. Those are in the threads related to HD Lite. Bit starving and bit rate discussions are also in the HD Lite threads. Also bit rates are different for MPEG 2 & MPEG 4 the new encoders that are now being used need less bandwidth to produce the same PQ than those that were made just a year ago. I have seen both in action lately. The new units can give as good PQ in 6 mb that the old ones took to do in 10 or 11 mb. As far as the 3 points that you state above. 
1. The 35 mm movies that have been converted to HD are small in number so far. 
2. That's the HD Lite discussion. 
3.That is completely your opinion of what you value that should be in HD. 
So my summary is basically if you don't like the taste of the product then don't drink it. Mostly it seems like you want to obtain justification for your choice. That should come from within your self not what others think of that choice. So now the soap box is open again for the others that are posting in this thread. :lol:


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Maybe we can get them to agree to using hours of HD (not up-converted or stretch-o-vision) programming. That would certainly take the dunnage out of the discussion (and the wind out of one particular provider's claims).

What any one person finds desirable should not be the limit of what is available. That one person doesn't understand or appreciate a genre should not have a significant impact on the availability of said programming to those who do.

There will hopefully always be HD "sampler" channels that run the gamut of programming, but I believe the time has come for channels to focus/differentiate a little bit more.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

whatchel1 said:


> As far as the standards for HD for satellite there are 4 not just 2 as in OTA.


Last I checked, there were seven "HD" DBS formats according to ATSC standard A/81 (page 17).


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

harsh said:


> Last I checked, there were seven "HD" DBS formats according to ATSC standard A/81 (page 17).


Thanx for putting up the white paper that I had put up in the HD Lite discussion months ago. In the rough statement that I made in the thread I wasn't breaking it out into I & P. That does make 7. 4 w/o the breakout of I & P. I was in a hurry on my statement and didn't bother to go back and find the document to insert into the post. I did lump together the I & P so technically I was incorrect by saying 4. I was just referring to the resolution per lines H & V.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

I never assume that my "opinion" is anything other than that. While I agree that points I have brought up have already been threaded to death, they are linked here (at least by me LOL) because this thread has evolved (devolved LOL) into a "value for your $$$" thread.

I always understand that some people think the $20 HS package brings great value while others (myself included) think the $20 is a rip off.

If I had to guess most people would find their opinions somewhere in the middle... the $20 is a bit much but they find some of the programming good.

I introduced PQ into this "value" discussion because I (and I only am speaking for myself) would understand that quality has a price to it. I am troubled that Dish (and other providers) have seemed to play quality second to quantity at least in the number of channels.

Few would dispute that Discovery HD is a quality channel that looks great in HD and is well worth the extra cost (aside from looping content of course) but most of the other HD channels are very hit or miss. Some like these and others like those but my point?

I bet we could come up with a good number of channels that the "vast" majority of people think are utter crap or the nicer term... Filler.

Take those filler channels and do away with them. Not only do we not need them in HD but they prob can be done away with even in SD!

Take that bandwidth and redistribute it to the better HD channels.

Your point about Mpeg4 vs Mpeg2 is a good one and I'm sure they will get a ton of bandwide once they dump those remaining mepg2 receivers. I do, however, question the notion that they are transmitting two different streams, one to mpeg2 and one to mpeg4.

Does anyone have any knowledge of this? It seems like it would a big hassle to have the same programs being transmitted twice for different recievers... or did I read into this wrong?

Well thanks everyone for the continued discussion. I love posting here and have learned alot of good information. If I have in any way come across too strong in my "opinions" then I am sorry. We all can get a little worked up in the heat of a spirited discussion.

Later all... off to start my weekend 

See you in a few days!

-JB


----------

