# What does D* offer in HD that E* doesn't that you really want?



## gopher_guy

I'm currently with D* but can't get a CSR to spring a deal for me like many have already gotten. I am contemplating going to E*. I have looked and am trying to figure out what I'd be losing out on if I go to E*. I see FX mentioned and USA I never watch those. I don't subscribe to NFL Ticket anymore due to the high cost. 

Is D* coming out with more stuff that E* won't have? Just trying to get as informed as possible.

What stations does D* have that you would like E* to carry?


----------



## davring

Before you jump ship call D* back and at the prompt say "cancel". Explain that you can't afford to upgrade with the current offer and you are exploring alternatives. I'll bet they sharpen their pencil.


----------



## texaswolf

E* says they are adding new HD channels by the end of the year, but not sure how many or what.....so just like I'd say to an E* customer thinking about switching...you should probably stay put until the end of the year and see what E* actually adds.
James has a good comparison here...so you can determine for yourself which channels you will be missing (as of now)
http://jameslong.name/compare5.html for HD
http://jameslong.name/compare6.html for RSN's


----------



## RAD

It's been said that the MPEG4 HD channels are not being downrezzed on D* since they have the capacity now with D10 in operation. IIRC E* has most of their HR channels downrezzed now since they are in the same bandwidth pinch that D* was in until their new sats go up. So if PQ is a concern if your's that might be something you want to take into account.


----------



## mattopia

The biggest right now is SciFi HD, as BSG Razor airs in a few days and I won't get to see it in HD. After that, I think I'm fine until some of the new series on FX air or until the next BSG season on SciFi.

On the flip side, I'm watching David Crosby and Graham Nash on stage with Dave Gilmour right now in HD on Rave, something I wouldn't get on D* or with cable.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Between lots of the cable/satellite channels being in off-season right now (hiatus) and the potentially extended writer's strike... some of the "shine" of all the new DirecTV HD has been taken off. Not their fault, but aside from Battlestar Galactica this weekend, there isn't anything new in HD on SciFi for me until at least January and possibly a while after that. USAHD has lots of HD, but I'm not sure if my favorite shows like Monk or Psych will be starting back in January with the writer's strike.

I honestly don't feel like I have been missing anything, though certainly more new HD channels would be nice for Dish. It's just a weird timing thing where a couple of things collide to create a lack of new HD right now to drive me to feel like I am missing anything.

That said... I also agree that if I was already a DirecTV customer I wouldn't just switch arbitrarily either. If there's no urgency to drive you, waiting never hurts.


----------



## aaronbud

gopher_guy said:


> I'm currently with D* but can't get a CSR to spring a deal for me like many have already gotten. I am contemplating going to E*. I have looked and am trying to figure out what I'd be losing out on if I go to E*. I see FX mentioned and USA I never watch those. I don't subscribe to NFL Ticket anymore due to the high cost.
> 
> Is D* coming out with more stuff that E* won't have? Just trying to get as informed as possible.
> 
> What stations does D* have that you would like E* to carry?


FSN Bay Area HD for one.
FSN Bay Area HD for two.
ETC,ETC..........


----------



## texaswolf

HDMe said:


> Between lots of the cable/satellite channels being in off-season right now (hiatus) and the potentially extended writer's strike... some of the "shine" of all the new DirecTV HD has been taken off. Not their fault, but aside from Battlestar Galactica this weekend, there isn't anything new in HD on SciFi for me until at least January and possibly a while after that. USAHD has lots of HD, but I'm not sure if my favorite shows like Monk or Psych will be starting back in January with the writer's strike.
> 
> I honestly don't feel like I have been missing anything, though certainly more new HD channels would be nice for Dish. It's just a weird timing thing where a couple of things collide to create a lack of new HD right now to drive me to feel like I am missing anything.
> 
> That said... I also agree that if I was already a DirecTV customer I wouldn't just switch arbitrarily either. If there's no urgency to drive you, waiting never hurts.


yeah the writers strike definatly stalls the big HD push right now...for me BSG Razor this weekend, and Tin Man starting Dec. 4th is what i'm currently ticked about not getting in HD.


----------



## Hound

gopher_guy said:


> I'm currently with D* but can't get a CSR to spring a deal for me like many have already gotten. I am contemplating going to E*. I have looked and am trying to figure out what I'd be losing out on if I go to E*. I see FX mentioned and USA I never watch those. I don't subscribe to NFL Ticket anymore due to the high cost.
> 
> Is D* coming out with more stuff that E* won't have? Just trying to get as informed as possible.
> 
> What stations does D* have that you would like E* to carry?


MLB EI


----------



## Stewart Vernon

texaswolf said:


> yeah the writers strike definatly stalls the big HD push right now...for me BSG Razor this weekend, and Tin Man starting Dec. 4th is what i'm currently ticked about not getting in HD.


I forgot about Tin Man... I plan on watching that as well. I recorded the "behind the scenes" thing from last week but haven't watched that yet.


----------



## bonipie

I have been doing a line by line comparison, and the only thing (aside from regionals and ppv, which Dish seems to have lots more of) I see on Direct that is not on Dish HD is MGM. And, there are about 16 channels on Dish that I don't see on Direct. So, what am I missing?


----------



## RAD

bonipie said:


> I have been doing a line by line comparison, and the only thing (aside from regionals and ppv, which Dish seems to have lots more of) I see on Direct that is not on Dish HD is MGM. And, there are about 16 channels on Dish that I don't see on Direct. So, what am I missing?


Off the top of my head, D* has Sci-Fi, USA, FX, Smithsonian, Weather Channel, CNN, HBO West, Cinemax West, Showtime Too, Showtime West, Starz West, Starz Comedy, Starz Edge and Starz Kids & Family, these are all channels that have shown HD programming in addition to MGM. In addition there's CNBS and Fox Busness news which has a "HD" feed that mainly just uses the extra realestate for additional graphics info. Then there are the channels which have a HD channel but it's not clear if D* is just upconvering the SD feed or the content provider is supplying the channel to D*, those are Cartoon Network, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon East, Spike (someone did say they saw one program in HD), and VH1. Don't know what line's you were using for your comparison but I think you need some new ones.


----------



## texaswolf

RAD said:


> Off the top of my head, D* has Sci-Fi, USA, FX, Smithsonian, Weather Channel, CNN, HBO West, Cinemax West, Showtime Too, Showtime West, Starz West, Starz Comedy, Starz Edge and Starz Kids & Family, these are all channels that have shown HD programming in addition to MGM. In addition there's CNBS and Fox Busness news which has a "HD" feed that mainly just uses the extra realestate for additional graphics info. Then there are the channels which have a HD channel but it's not clear if D* is just upconvering the SD feed or the content provider is supplying the channel to D*, those are Cartoon Network, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon East, Spike (someone did say they saw one program in HD), and VH1. Don't know what line's you were using for your comparison but I think you need some new ones.


yep...all the channels he said, would very nice to have


----------



## gopher_guy

RAD said:


> Off the top of my head, D* has Sci-Fi, USA, FX, Smithsonian, Weather Channel, CNN, HBO West, Cinemax West, Showtime Too, Showtime West, Starz West, Starz Comedy, Starz Edge and Starz Kids & Family, these are all channels that have shown HD programming in addition to MGM. In addition there's CNBS and Fox Busness news which has a "HD" feed that mainly just uses the extra realestate for additional graphics info. Then there are the channels which have a HD channel but it's not clear if D* is just upconvering the SD feed or the content provider is supplying the channel to D*, those are Cartoon Network, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon East, Spike (someone did say they saw one program in HD), and VH1. Don't know what line's you were using for your comparison but I think you need some new ones.


Great, thanks this is what I was looking for. I am pretty much a simpleton when it comes to TV watching and outside of the HBO channels I don't watch any of the above mentioned channels. I will still try to see if D* is willing to play ball however.

Someone mentioned MLB EI. I had thought that MLB went back on their exclusive deal with D* and had it available on cable and dish, due to all the customer backlash? Is that not true?


----------



## RAD

gopher_guy said:


> Someone mentioned MLB EI. I had thought that MLB went back on their exclusive deal with D* and had it available on cable and dish, due to all the customer backlash? Is that not true?


IIRC MLB worked out deals with most everyone except E* and since they didn't do a deal last year they were locked out from getting it for the next few years.


----------



## Hound

gopher_guy said:


> Great, thanks this is what I was looking for. I am pretty much a simpleton when it comes to TV watching and outside of the HBO channels I don't watch any of the above mentioned channels. I will still try to see if D* is willing to play ball however.
> 
> Someone mentioned MLB EI. I had thought that MLB went back on their exclusive deal with D* and had it available on cable and dish, due to all the customer backlash? Is that not true?


Only cable got MLB EI. E* did not agree to terms with MLB. An E* executive made a statement that the terms offered to E* were different than the terms offered to D*. This is from E*s web site.

http://www.dishnetwork.com/redirects/promotion/extra_innings/index.shtml


----------



## bonipie

RAD said:


> Don't know what line's you were using for your comparison but I think you need some new ones.


Yep, my bad. I am using the channel listing from Directv, and thought I was using same from E*, but wasn't. It was a listing from some internet dealer (don't buy from them!!)-when I went to E* website, I saw why I didn't use their listing, it's too small to see! So, now it all starts to make sense. That's why I couldn't find Fuel and Speed. http://jameslong.name/compare5.html makes sense now, too. Without really any column headers, it takes a bit of imagination to use the information. Thanks a lot everyone for your help.


----------



## phrelin

gopher_guy said:


> What stations does D* have that you would like E* to carry?


I'm not jumping ship, but I would have liked in HD on Sci Fi for Galactaca Razor tonight and the Tin Man 3 parter beginning 12/02, on USA for Monk and Psych on 12/07.

But I can watch SD daily reruns of Fresh Prince of Bel Air on TBS chewing up band width, with both TBS and E* ludicrously claiming it to be HD in the guide. Yeah, I'm bitter about that decision by E*. What's not a rerun or old movie on TBS for at least 4 months?

But they probably couldn't get TNT without TBS and we will have new episodes of The Closer and Saving Grace on 12/3.


----------



## sdague

Honestly, the only thing that D* has over E* in HD that I care about is SciFi HD.


----------



## Richard King

How about the other way around??? Is there anything on Dish that, if you were a Directv customer, would be enough to make you switch. Myself, if I had Directv and were to be exposed to the programming on Rave I would make the switch in an instant, especially since I can get an SD version of SciFi (if I ever watched it anyway).


----------



## RAD

Richard King said:


> How about the other way around??? Is there anything on Dish that, if you were a Directv customer, would be enough to make you switch. Myself, if I had Directv and were to be exposed to the programming on Rave I would make the switch in an instant, especially since I can get an SD version of SciFi (if I ever watched it anyway).


Maybe that one but even many E* customers say there's only maybe 3 or 4 V* channels worth it. I've seen some recent threads that mention something about the Monstors channel just repeating a couple movies over and over and rumbles that maybe it's time to consolidate some of the channels.


----------



## Hound

phrelin said:


> I'm not jumping ship, but I would have liked in HD on Sci Fi for Galactaca Razor tonight and the Tin Man 3 parter beginning 12/02, on USA for Monk and Psych on 12/07.
> 
> But I can watch SD daily reruns of Fresh Prince of Bel Air on TBS chewing up band width, with both TBS and E* ludicrously claiming it to be HD in the guide. Yeah, I'm bitter about that decision by E*. What's not a rerun or old movie on TBS for at least 4 months?
> 
> But they probably couldn't get TNT without TBS and we will have new episodes of The Closer and Saving Grace on 12/3.


Sci Fi HD and USA HD will probably show up on E* say by the end of March 08 or sooner. Long time E* subs should be confident that many of the HD channels that D* recently added will come to E* in the next six months. MLB EI will probably not come back to E* in 2008.


----------



## Steve Mehs

The deal was 7 years, so E* will have another shot and MLB EI in 2014


----------



## Hound

Steve Mehs said:


> The deal was 7 years, so E* will have another shot and MLB EI in 2014


The deal was 7 years exclusive to D*, but then MLB opened it up to make it non
exclusive. E* could try to reopen negotiations with MLB. Who knows where that would go, and could D* or InDemand veto it? E could be a little proactive and creative. Where E* missed the boat was getting an ownership in the MLB channel. MLB got a future valuation of the MLB Channel from an investment banking firm that it would be worth many millions of dollars to its partners (D* and InDemand) because of the immediate cash flow from carriage agreements when the channel starts in 2009. Both D* and InDemand got ownership and E* was shut out. MLB EI is still open from InDemand to other MVPs like Verizon Fios, and theoretically E*. The MLB HD channel supposedly going to have exclusive doubleheaders on Saturday nights for 26 straight weeks. Maybe D* and InDemand would allow E* back into MLB EI, if E agrees to carry MLB channel in
its basic tier. Its up to E* to reopen the negotiations.


----------



## phrelin

Hound said:


> Sci Fi HD and USA HD will probably show up on E* say by the end of March 08 or sooner. Long time E* subs should be confident that many of the HD channels that D* recently added will come to E* in the next six months.


Never doubted that. Just don't understand not having SciFi which always has *new* specials in November and December. In putting on TBS instead of SciFi, E* ignored its techie audience of which I have been one for 19 years.


----------



## Richard King

RAD said:


> Maybe that one but even many E* customers say there's only maybe 3 or 4 V* channels worth it. I've seen some recent threads that mention something about the Monstors channel just repeating a couple movies over and over and rumbles that maybe it's time to consolidate some of the channels.


Here's the Monster HD schedule: http://www.monstershd.com/content/Adobe/monstershd_schedule.pdf
It seems to disprove the comment that they simply repeat a "couple movies over and over". While there are some spots in the schedule where they do this, reruns seem to be no more common on there than any of the various movie channels. Of course those who have never watched it or looked up the schedule know no better than to say that and believe it when others say it. Any channels that try to present on genre of film will naturally have it's share of repeats though. I don't happen to watch Monsters HD, just as I don't watch SciFi (HD or SD), but, where else can you find Psycho followed by The Birds followed by Frenzy?


----------



## Richard King

phrelin said:


> Never doubted that. Just don't understand not having SciFi which always has *new* specials in November and December. In putting on TBS instead of SciFi, E* ignored its techie audience of which I have been one for 19 years.


And people were screaming like crazy here when Directv added TBS before Dish did. They can't win no matter what they do. By the way, I agree with you, while I dont watch SciFi, I do think it would have a wider appeal than TBS.


----------



## RAD

Richard King said:


> Here's the Monster HD schedule: http://www.monstershd.com/content/Adobe/monstershd_schedule.pdf
> It seems to disprove the comment that they simply repeat a "couple movies over and over". While there are some spots in the schedule where they do this, reruns seem to be no more common on there than any of the various movie channels. Of course those who have never watched it or looked up the schedule know no better than to say that and believe it when others say it. Any channels that try to present on genre of film will naturally have it's share of repeats though. I don't happen to watch Monsters HD, just as I don't watch SciFi (HD or SD), but, where else can you find Psycho followed by The Birds followed by Frenzy?


Sorry, since I don't have V* I was going by what was posted in the thread at http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-hd-discussions/115191-voom-movie-channels-now-complete-joke.html which said:

_Are the VOOM movie channels now a complete Joke?

2 movies per day on

Monsters HD
Kungfu HD
FamilyRoom HD
WorldCinema HD
Filmfest HD_

And the poll that went along with this, 46% of the voters (as of this response) said _They should consolidate all these into one movie channel _

So while not having 1st hand knowledge I was going by what some folks that have the service were saying. Sorry.


----------



## phrelin

Richard King said:


> They can't win no matter what they do.


I guess I'm expressing frustration at Charlie, who in the end is a techie. Not having a contingency plan when the satellite launch was delayed was an indication of lack of "what if" planning. The lack of 4 or 5 new nationals in HD indicates to me a chance of no further "what if" planning going on. What if another rocket blows up?:eek2:


----------



## HobbyTalk

RAD said:


> Sorry, since I don't have V* I was going by what was posted in the thread at http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-hd-discussions/115191-voom-movie-channels-now-complete-joke.html which said:


Guess you now know where to get "real" information from LOL :lol:


----------



## elbodude

gopher_guy said:


> I'm currently with D* but can't get a CSR to spring a deal for me like many have already gotten. I am contemplating going to E*. I have looked and am trying to figure out what I'd be losing out on if I go to E*. I see FX mentioned and USA I never watch those. I don't subscribe to NFL Ticket anymore due to the high cost.
> 
> Is D* coming out with more stuff that E* won't have? Just trying to get as informed as possible.
> 
> What stations does D* have that you would like E* to carry?


FSNBA
FX


----------



## Richard King

RAD said:


> Sorry, since I don't have V* I was going by what was posted in the thread at http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-hd-discussions/115191-voom-movie-channels-now-complete-joke.html which said:
> 
> _Are the VOOM movie channels now a complete Joke?
> 
> 2 movies per day on
> 
> Monsters HD
> Kungfu HD
> FamilyRoom HD
> WorldCinema HD
> Filmfest HD_
> 
> And the poll that went along with this, 46% of the voters (as of this response) said _They should consolidate all these into one movie channel _
> 
> So while not having 1st hand knowledge I was going by what some folks that have the service were saying. Sorry.


Actually, you are quoting the first hand knowledge of those who *CLAIM *to have the service. If 46% say to consolidate the services into one channel they probably never watch the channels. I could pick *46 channels *that I would like to see consolidated into one channel also, all 46 of those channels are ones that I don't watch (SciFi would probably be one of them). One person's garbage can be another person's favorite channel. I consider SciFi to be a garbage channel (even in HD), simply because I never watch it. Consolidate away.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

I think that DISH lacked forethought on the entire HD thing as far back as they go, by having international channels spread out over so many satellites like 61.5, 148,121,118.5. There was never any reason to do this. It took a lot of bandwith off of the market that could of been used long ago for hd. 

THen the 105 /121 super dish was a fiasco because they didn't do the research to see how large the footprint was for 105 and how big the damn dishes were and how hard they were to install . THis was after they publicly said this was the plan for hd. 

Then there is the whole leasing of satellites like 129 from Canada using an old echostar 5 sat, or the leasing of 105 that still goes on and nothing on the sat except a few dmas that are mirrored on 129. The 121 sat which is an echostar satellite is being used for nothing but a few locals , mirrored on 129 and the internationals that will be shipped off to 118.5 by years end. DISH has always had a ton of satellites that they could make use of but instead of doing so they have sat on the space and made poor use of it. 

Now the new relaunch of an mpeg4 version of DISH that will move to 86.5 /97 sats yet to be launched, seems to be the latest in poor planning . It sounded like it was planned out at the last minute before team summit last May to give DISH a big BANG announcement. IF THis takes place it all hinges on the launches of the 3 satellites that DISH plans to do in 2008 starting in February. Who knows if this will take place or not due to the ATT buyout rumors. DISH has seemed to piece meal its hd future together as they go , changing their plans at the last minute, leasing space at weird slots using crappy old satellites , while they have two good ones Echostar 6 & 8 sitting up there as backups doing nothing. Charlie has bluffed his way through up to now surprising us with more hd than anyone up to last October. Now it is time to Put up or shut up Charlie. IT is time to start talking about your plans and make your current subs feel confident that there will be an hd future for DISH. IF not more and more subs will jump based on what DIRECTV has today and in the next 4 months. 

Directv has seemed to learn from DISH's past and now tells their subs what is coming and when. DISH has seemed to follow DIRECTV's past plans of keeping quiet and promising the moon -coming SOON! OF course this could be a plan to get the DISH stocks to drop making the company more affordable to ATT as a buyout target , but that wouldn't seem to be CHarlie's way of thinking. He wants as much as possible for his stock or he won't play, if his past is any indication of his way of dealing with negotiations.

IN the end I think most people would be happy if they added a few hd channels like USA, Sci FI, Fx and maybe the WEather channel in hd . I think they could do this even with bandwith restraints by the end of the year if they wanted to. THis would go a long way into tiding people over till the February launch gets that damn sat up there in 08.


----------



## Richard King

> USA, Sci FI, Fx and maybe the WEather channel


Those are 4 of my 46 channels.


----------



## RAD

Richard King said:


> Actually, you are quoting the first hand knowledge of those who *CLAIM *to have the service. If 46% say to consolidate the services into one channel they probably never watch the channels. I could pick *46 channels *that I would like to see consolidated into one channel also, all 46 of those channels are ones that I don't watch (SciFi would probably be one of them). One person's garbage can be another person's favorite channel. I consider SciFi to be a garbage channel (even in HD), simply because I never watch it. Consolidate away.


That's a problem with all the threads that say what channels do you want or what to get rid of, someone's filet mignon is the other persons hamberger. I guess a lot of the threads where people that 'claim' to have the V* channels and say they could be consolidated down to four or five then are just incorrect then.


----------



## Richard King

Bingo. It's no where near as bad as some people have been claiming. Reality is a night and day difference.


----------



## James Long

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I think that DISH lacked forethought on the entire HD thing as far back as they go, by having international channels spread out over so many satellites like 61.5, 148,121,118.5. There was never any reason to do this. It took a lot of bandwith off of the market that could of been used long ago for hd.


I believe E*'s plans failed. The channels were placed on the satellites they are on for a reason - but E* didn't follow through with the moves. 105° and/or 121° would have made a nice home for HD but the channels were not available, then 121° made a nice home for all the internationals (freeing 61.5° and 148°) but the SuperDish was not that super. A new satellite was put up at 105° but by then 129° was coming in to play and E* apparently went with high power DBS satellites over Ku FSS (with a nicer dish). With 129° in play the challenge became how to get it all on one physical dish. 110-119-129 isn't hard, but getting 105° or 121° to work in there isn't easy. 118° seemed to be a good investment (especially with the plus dish catching all) but has not lived up to our (customer's) expectations.

Now it appears that E* is making some hard choices ... moving international services to 118° to free up space. They probably should have kicked the internationals off of 61.5° a while ago but it really won't make that much difference. E* needs matching space on 129°. Erasing internationals from 61.5° may free up to 9 transponders there (and SkyAngel's demise frees up two more) ... which is a lot of space ... but I don't see 11 free transponders at 129° (until Ciel launches their own satellite).


> THen the 105 /121 super dish was a fiasco because they didn't do the research to see how large the footprint was for 105 and how big the damn dishes were and how hard they were to install . THis was after they publicly said this was the plan for hd.


And they are looking at the competition and shaking their heads. E* is trying to get away from the monster dishes, yet D* seems to be following E* down the road of bigger dishes.



> Now the new relaunch of an mpeg4 version of DISH that will move to 86.5 /97 sats yet to be launched, seems to be the latest in poor planning . It sounded like it was planned out at the last minute before team summit last May to give DISH a big BANG announcement.


It sounded like Charlie opened his mouth prematurely and his staff were crawling inside of their skin. Take a look back at that "announcement" and see how it matches up with reality.

Mr. Ergen said that there were two satellite launches planned for the end of the year. There were. E11 (replacement/upgrade for E8) and an AMC satellite were scheduled for launch.

Mr. Ergen said that E* was launching an MPEG4 service. They did. But it is intended for small cable systems and communities as a "headend in the sky" type services ... not as a direct sell to residential customers type service.

Yet people hearing these two true statements mixed them together, added their own speculation about satellite slots and are now holding E*'s feet to the fire based on something E* NEVER PROMISED.


> Now it is time to Put up or shut up Charlie. IT is time to start talking about your plans and make your current subs feel confident that there will be an hd future for DISH.


And it is time for the vocal minority to put up or shut up. If people don't like the way E* is run they can start their own satellite businesses. Go for it!


> OF course this could be a plan to get the DISH stocks to drop making the company more affordable to ATT as a buyout target


And now you are accusing him of the crime of stock manipulation? If you can't beat him, slander him?


> IN the end I think most people would be happy if they added a few hd channels like USA, Sci FI, Fx and maybe the WEather channel in hd . I think they could do this even with bandwith restraints by the end of the year if they wanted to. THis would go a long way into tiding people over till the February launch gets that damn sat up there in 08.


I believe that E* will add more HD by the end of the year ... but I believe they are looking at it intelligently with a view to how much HD is on each channel added as well as within the constraints of contracts.



RAD said:


> That's a problem with all the threads that say what channels do you want or what to get rid of, someone's filet mignon is the other persons hamberger. I guess a lot of the threads where people that 'claim' to have the V* channels and say they could be consolidated down to four or five then are just incorrect then.


There are 15 Voom channels ... theme channels ... there are bound to be a couple that even Voom channel supporters would not like. That's why there are 15 of them - so people don't have to suffer through hours of stuff they don't like waiting for their favorite theme to come up on the channel.

I could consolidate the 189 video channels in AEP down to about 50 ... and tick off millions of fellow customers who would not agree with the way that I consolidated them. Seems so much like pointless whining to me. If people believe they could manage E* better than those who have that job they should stop the whining and start their own satellite service.


----------



## Richard King

Or make an offer for Dish. Maybe we should take up a collection here. The problem is, once we bought the company who is head of programming going to be?


----------



## Mike D-CO5

James Long said:


> I believe E*'s plans failed. The channels were placed on the satellites they are on for a reason - but E* didn't follow through with the moves. 105° and/or 121° would have made a nice home for HD but the channels were not available, then 121° made a nice home for all the internationals (freeing 61.5° and 148°) but the SuperDish was not that super. A new satellite was put up at 105° but by then 129° was coming in to play and E* apparently went with high power DBS satellites over Ku FSS (with a nicer dish). With 129° in play the challenge became how to get it all on one physical dish. 110-119-129 isn't hard, but getting 105° or 121° to work in there isn't easy. 118° seemed to be a good investment (especially with the plus dish catching all) but has not lived up to our (customer's) expectations.
> 
> Now it appears that E* is making some hard choices ... moving international services to 118° to free up space. They probably should have kicked the internationals off of 61.5° a while ago but it really won't make that much difference. E* needs matching space on 129°. Erasing internationals from 61.5° may free up to 9 transponders there (and SkyAngel's demise frees up two more) ... which is a lot of space ... but I don't see 11 free transponders at 129° (until Ciel launches their own satellite).
> And they are looking at the competition and shaking their heads. E* is trying to get away from the monster dishes, yet D* seems to be following E* down the road of bigger dishes.
> 
> It sounded like Charlie opened his mouth prematurely and his staff were crawling inside of their skin. Take a look back at that "announcement" and see how it matches up with reality.
> 
> Mr. Ergen said that there were two satellite launches planned for the end of the year. There were. E11 (replacement/upgrade for E8) and an AMC satellite were scheduled for launch.
> 
> Mr. Ergen said that E* was launching an MPEG4 service. They did. But it is intended for small cable systems and communities as a "headend in the sky" type services ... not as a direct sell to residential customers type service.
> 
> Yet people hearing these two true statements mixed them together, added their own speculation about satellite slots and are now holding E*'s feet to the fire based on something E* NEVER PROMISED.
> And it is time for the vocal minority to put up or shut up. If people don't like the way E* is run they can start their own satellite businesses. Go for it!
> And now you are accusing him of the crime of stock manipulation? If you can't beat him, slander him?
> I believe that E* will add more HD by the end of the year ... but I believe they are looking at it intelligently with a view to how much HD is on each channel added as well as within the constraints of contracts.
> 
> There are 15 Voom channels ... theme channels ... there are bound to be a couple that even Voom channel supporters would not like. That's why there are 15 of them - so people don't have to suffer through hours of stuff they don't like waiting for their favorite theme to come up on the channel.
> 
> I could consolidate the 189 video channels in AEP down to about 50 ... and tick off millions of fellow customers who would not agree with the way that I consolidated them. Seems so much like pointless whining to me. If people believe they could manage E* better than those who have that job they should stop the whining and start their own satellite service.


 James if you don't want any criticism of DISH than why not just post that in your rules so we can only post nice things about them?

I am not slandering DISH only speculating on what the hold up is on more hd. I'm also talking about some of the history of what led us to this point. As to Echostar never promising an all mpeg 4 service for the relaunch of DISH , they did at team summit. CHARLIE ERGEN runs DISH and owns them and had the most stock in them. HE IS DISH for all intensive purposes and represents them to the public. Unless his word means nothing to you.

IF you are perfectly happy with DISH then good for you. I am not 100% happy with them and I will post it if I feel like it. I also post good things about them too. LOVE , LOVE ,LOVE their hd dvrs and would really think hard about leaving them because of the 622/722 alone. I have been with DISH for over 10 years, soon to be 11 on 1/18/07, and as such I feel I have more than Paid my dues to talk about them. Having 3 accounts with them for me and my parents , aunt seems to entitle me to that. IT is still a free country right? Or has the government taken to wire tapping this website too? When you stifle all criticism of a provider for what ever reason , you are stifling free thinking of your members, and discouraging any debate of the merits or faults of said sat service. If that is your intention then just say so and we will all know how to post from this point on. :nono:


----------



## saltrek

I just enjoyed reading both points of view. Seems to me free speech is working just fine over here...


----------



## RealityCheck

Why should subs that feel that things aren't right lose the right to comment on them to the fanboys that can see no wrong?


----------



## James Long

Mike D-CO5 said:


> James if you don't want any criticism of DISH than why not just post that in your rules so we can only post nice things about them?


Charming. Now you claim censorship? Or is that what you desire? I am responding as a E* customer to your diatribe. Yet it seems you want to stop my "free speech". (Which, by the way has nothing to do with privately owned and operated websites. That constitutional rights is a restriction on the government.)

They are not "my rules" anyways ... they are site rules. And all should be familiar with them. But that is another topic.



> I am not slandering DISH only speculating on what the hold up is on more hd.


In my opinion, you were accusing Mr Charles Ergen of manipulating stock prices. If you didn't understand that, perhaps you should re-read my post.



> As to Echostar never promising an all mpeg 4 service for the relaunch of DISH , they did at team summit. CHARLIE ERGEN runs DISH and owns them and had the most stock in them. HE IS DISH for all intensive purposes and represents them to the public. Unless his word means nothing to you.


His word means plenty. But he did not say what you claim he said. Once again, read what I wrote. It detailed what he said and how it was twisted by the false rumors and speculation.



> Or has the government taken to wire tapping this website too?


The government does not control this website. Perhaps you would like to complete the trifecta and call us Nazis?

This is a free speaking forum but not a free for all.


----------



## harsh

Mike D-CO5 said:


> CHARLIE ERGEN runs DISH and owns them and had the most stock in them.


What does this mean?

DISH Network is a publicly traded company. It is not "owned" by any one party. The same kind of misinformation is often applied to DIRECTV when they say that Murdoch or Malone "owns" DIRECTV. If the Liberty deal ever closes, they will own approximately a 38% share which isn't even a simple majority.


----------



## GeorgeLV

James Long said:


> E* is trying to get away from the monster dishes, yet D* seems to be following E* down the road of bigger dishes.


Huh?

E* is the undisputed leader of monster dishes and/or dish farm confusion for HD customers.

Yes they have the Dish 1000, a decently sized one-dish solution that unfortunately doesn't work very well in many parts of the country because of footprint and "drifting" issues.

They also have the following receiving hardware which can be classified as monster dishes or dish farms:

Dish 1000.2
Dish 1000+
Dish 500 + 24" dish for 129
Dish 500 + 30" dish for 129
Dish 500 + Dish 300 for 61.5
Dish 500+ + Dish 300 for 61.5

I'm not even sure if a caught them all. Also, until recently, there were a few HD channels available on 148.


----------



## James Long

With D* you get the five LNB dish. 

You can't classify a 1000 varient as a monster dish without including DirecTV's Phase III.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

harsh said:


> What does this mean?
> 
> DISH Network is a publicly traded company. It is not "owned" by any one party. The same kind of misinformation is often applied to DIRECTV when they say that Murdoch or Malone "owns" DIRECTV. If the Liberty deal ever closes, they will own approximately a 38% share which isn't even a simple majority.


 Charlie Ergen and his Wife and partner Jim Defranco own most of the public stock in DISH or a majority . This entitles them to control the company and remain in the majority on any voting decisions by any board members too. This has been stated before in other threads.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

James Long said:


> Charming. Now you claim censorship? Or is that what you desire? I am responding as a E* customer to your diatribe. Yet it seems you want to stop my "free speech". (Which, by the way has nothing to do with privately owned and operated websites. That constitutional rights is a restriction on the government.)
> 
> They are not "my rules" anyways ... they are site rules. And all should be familiar with them. But that is another topic.
> 
> In my opinion, you were accusing Mr Charles Ergen of manipulating stock prices. If you didn't understand that, perhaps you should re-read my post.
> 
> His word means plenty. But he did not say what you claim he said. Once again, read what I wrote. It detailed what he said and how it was twisted by the false rumors and speculation.
> 
> The government does not control this website. Perhaps you would like to complete the trifecta and call us Nazis?
> 
> This is a free speaking forum but not a free for all.


James where you're concerned you are always right and everyone else is wrong. IF that makes you feel good go right ahead. I didn't slander Echostar or anyone else. I speculated when I said could be a plan in regards to stocks dropping for an ATT buyout. I also said in the same sentence it didn't seem to me that Charlie would do this as he wants the most for his stock in DISH. Perhaps you should re-read my origional post or at least quote all of what I said in the same sentence so others can read for themselves. You as usual look for any criticism of DISH as a personal attack that you feel you must defend at all costs. Go right ahead Don Quixote and slay the ANti -Echostar/DISH dragons. I will call it like I see it.

Have a nice day.


----------



## James Long

IMHO you call it wrong. But the posts are here for people to quietly make up their own minds. Some with responses inline where it's easier to see what is being responded to.


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:


> IMHO you call it wrong. But the posts are here for people to quietly make up their own minds. Some with responses inline where it's easier to see what is being responded to.


IMHO....I have a feeling that if E* doesn't deliver some new HD by the end of the year like they are claiming....this and every other sat. site will be overrun by unhappy customers like we have here...and no amount of closing post, warning members or deleting accounts will be enough to quiet the majority. The scary thing for E* is all the customers who don't visit these sites and just simply say "screw this" and switch companies...of course i can only speak of people i know who have E* HD, that are getting fed up with not having channels they like in HD...and none of them go on sat. sites. Hopefully, E* will deliver some new HD by the end of the year like they say, and we can all be happy.


----------



## Jhon69

Richard King said:


> How about the other way around??? Is there anything on Dish that, if you were a Directv customer, would be enough to make you switch. Myself, if I had Directv and were to be exposed to the programming on Rave I would make the switch in an instant, especially since I can get an SD version of SciFi (if I ever watched it anyway).


DirecTV has T101.


----------



## James Long

texaswolf said:


> IMHO....I have a feeling that if E* doesn't deliver some new HD by the end of the year like they are claiming....this and every other sat. site will be overrun by unhappy customers like we have here...and no amount of closing post, warning members or deleting accounts will be enough to quiet the majority.


A false accusation ... moderation is used against abusive members not for what they say but their extreme lack of restraint in saying it. If one makes several vile profanity filled posts it doesn't matter if one hates E* or D* or Comcast for that matter. But enough about moderation. Any more questions can be asked in PMs per the rules.

Perhaps you should look around and figure out who the majority is. There seem to be a few vocal people who should have (or already have) gone to D* and a few people tired of hearing them complain. The majority ignore both you and I and enjoy what they have.



> The scary thing for E* is all the customers who don't visit these sites and just simply say "screw this" and switch companies...


Visiting sites does not make much of a difference. Without the sites they have to rely on the advertising. D*'s "make room" satellite ad and Comcast's "twice the HD of DirecTV" ads help E*. Just like political ads where it's all mudslinging - after a while people get sick of being told what system is best and just stay with their own.

Status Quo is the easy option. People who don't visit the forums have not heard rumors and the rants. For every one that forum participation or reading would influence in their decision to stay or go there is a non-reader making the same choice without that influence.



> Hopefully, E* will deliver some new HD by the end of the year like they say, and we can all be happy.


Or disappointed ... nothing firm has been announced. Be careful not to set yourself up for a fall.

It is much more fun to expect nothing and be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

Jhon69 said:


> DirecTV has T101.


You jest ,but I actually have Directv along with DISH just for this channel so my wife can watch Passions soap opera. I had to buy an international channel and the basic English pack but we get it for about $20.00 a month.


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:


> A false accusation ... moderation is used against abusive members not for what they say but their extreme lack of restraint in saying it. If one makes several vile profanity filled posts it doesn't matter if one hates E* or D* or Comcast for that matter. But enough about moderation. Any more questions can be asked in PMs per the rules.
> 
> Perhaps you should look around and figure out who the majority is. There seem to be a few vocal people who should have (or already have) gone to D* and a few people tired of hearing them complain. The majority ignore both you and I and enjoy what they have.
> 
> Visiting sites does not make much of a difference. Without the sites they have to rely on the advertising. D*'s "make room" satellite ad and Comcast's "twice the HD of DirecTV" ads help E*. Just like political ads where it's all mudslinging - after a while people get sick of being told what system is best and just stay with their own.
> 
> Status Quo is the easy option. People who don't visit the forums have not heard rumors and the rants. For every one that forum participation or reading would influence in their decision to stay or go there is a non-reader making the same choice without that influence.
> 
> Or disappointed ... nothing firm has been announced. Be careful not to set yourself up for a fall.
> 
> It is much more fun to expect nothing and be pleasantly surprised.


I wasn't questioning your "Modhood", I was simply stating that in IMHO (as i stated) that sites will be overrun with upset customer starting threads...call it false all you want, but even you cant deny that we are seeing more and more threads started like this.

if you read what i said.....the people i was referring to don't goto sites, so after watching enough commercials of what the other guy has, they start to get "fed up" with not getting channels they like in HD...you can call this false again....im simply speaking from examples of people i know that have stated this.

and yes...nothing has been "announced" but give E* a call...CSR's have been "authorized" to say they are getting channels by the end of the year...just not how many or which ones....trust me, i checked with 3 of them this last week while needing to get them to fix some other issues...they all state the same...so im not "setting my self up" just going by what Charlie has "authorized" (their words) his CSR's to tell people asking..

I would suggest calling them and checking things out before claiming heresy of others post, or "false accusations" when it's an opinion... just to defend E*'s honor....since I wasn't even bashing them...just simply talking about the trend i see happening.


----------



## ScoBuck

texas - I think you have a very valid point. All you have to do is check ALL of these sites to see that there is indeed a large 'stirrring' and plenty of unrest in the DISH community. And don't get me wrong, part of it is based on rumor and speculation, not fact.

I don't know what it will translate to, but it is there nevertheless.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

For most people who feel that they are not getting all the hd that they want , it will mean CHURN by DISH subs for either Directv or other video services. The lack of information by DISH is killing them in that regards. If they would just address the fact that launch delays have put them behind in regards to adding hd that they wanted to add , would help diffuse some of the anxiety that DISH subs feel. CHarlie built his company on the warm small town feel of his Charlie Chats where he did just that . He communicated to his subs via his own channel on 101 that told their plans and what city was getting locals and any new programming . DISH has always felt like the underdog and that we had a vested interest in seeing them WIN someday. EVeryone loves the underdog in sports and roots for them to win. 

Even if Charlie could outline how that DISH would go about reclaiming bandwith for more hd by moving all internationals to the 118.5 sat & freeing up transponders on 61.5 for more hd. Possibly using newer generation encoders that will allow all mpeg 4 hd to put 6 hd channels on one transponder rather than 4 like today , all would help give DISH subs hope of a future for more hd this next month. IF CHarlie wants to stop the churn he needs to speak now or it will be to late. 

Now I do think that outlining how they will compete and the reasons for the launch failures to the public , along with advertising their great hd dvrs and how superior they are to DIRECTV and cable, would go a long way in helping assuage the fears of current subs who are thinking of ditching DISH. I have seen more advertisements in the paper and in radio adds about the DISH dvr and how great they are in comparison to TIVO . Although they keep saying it will record upto 500 hours of video. I don't know where that number comes from unless they are talking about external hard drives . 

The saddest thing about this whole thing to me is when you compare DISH to DIRECTV subs and "loyalty" to their service. During the 2 years that DISH had more hd than anyone else, Directv subs defended their service and stayed with them no matter what because they knew of a plan for more hd was coming. THis campaign alone kept many Directv subs with them because of the promise of hd outlined in advertisements in paper, radio, tv , internet etc along with a definite date when it would start. Yes, they missed the date deadline by a week . But I doubt that they would care about that now. 

DISH subs who now find themselves behind on hd channels for the last month or two , are suddenly leaving DISH in high numbers. Churn was up significantly this last quarter. CHArlie could stop the bleeding if he would launch a similar advertisment campaign to stop this. OUTLINE your plans and make them more coherent for people to see that the near future means more hd.

HE did outline some outstanding plans at TEAM summit last May , but some people think he meant an all mpeg 4 service for cable delivery instead of a relaunch of DISH in total mpeg 4. WHo knows whose right because DISH has never clarified this one way or another. YES, there is a cable service in mpeg 4 that launched this month but that does nothing for DISH subs . The delays in sat launches have added to the confusion and general unrest of DISH subs. 

I want DISH to not only survive but THRIVE. I love my service with them and my hd dvrs . I want them to have the most hd out there but they won't if they keep quiet about their plans. IF churn keeps up they will have less money for hd expansion and it might be to late to stay in the hd game. CHarlie has an obligation to his stock holders and customers and to do his job as ceo and address this now. Everyday that he waits makes more people on this and other boards doubt their decisions to stay with DISH. And before you think that these people don't have influence remember this: WE talk to our friends and family and we often influence their decisions on who to go to for their video needs. I know I did with my family , parents, aunts, brother & sister and numerous friends. THey all have DISH. They look to me for answers when they talk about any new technology. Multiply that against everyone they know and you have quite a lot of people out there influencing other people. 

In the end I will stay with DISH and give them time to get back in the game. They have worked well for me and my needs. I have loyalty to them for almost 11 years. There hd dvrs are the best in the business and I have three of them on my account alone , one on my second account for my parents and a 501 for my aunt on my third account. BUt if Charlie wants DISH to stay in the hd game and prevent more churn, he needs to talk soon. The slience is deafening.

THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY !


----------



## Jhon69

Mike D-CO5 said:


> You jest ,but I actually have Directv along with DISH just for this channel so my wife can watch Passions soap opera. I had to buy an international channel and the basic English pack but we get it for about $20.00 a month.


Well if you have it you know I 'm not jesting.T101 also shows all types of concerts.
T101 is scheduled to go HD next month.


----------



## tnsprin

Mike D-CO5 said:


> ...
> HE did outline some outstanding plans at TEAM summit last May , but some people think he meant an all mpeg 4 service for cable delivery instead of a relaunch of DISH in total mpeg 4. WHo knows whose right because DISH has never clarified this one way or another. YES, there is a cable service in mpeg 4 that launched this month but that does nothing for DISH subs . The delays in sat launches have added to the confusion and general unrest of DISH subs.
> ...


The June Charlie Chat also mentioned this and did not sound like it was talking about the Mpeg-4 service announced for Cable.


----------



## texaswolf

Mike D-CO5 said:


> For most people who feel that they are not getting all the hd that they want , it will mean CHURN by DISH subs for either Directv or other video services. The lack of information by DISH is killing them in that regards. If they would just address the fact that launch delays have put them behind in regards to adding hd that they wanted to add , would help diffuse some of the anxiety that DISH subs feel. CHarlie built his company on the warm small town feel of his Charlie Chats where he did just that . He communicated to his subs via his own channel on 101 that told their plans and what city was getting locals and any new programming . DISH has always felt like the underdog and that we had a vested interest in seeing them WIN someday. EVeryone loves the underdog in sports and roots for them to win.
> 
> Even if Charlie could outline how that DISH would go about reclaiming bandwith for more hd by moving all internationals to the 118.5 sat & freeing up transponders on 61.5 for more hd. Possibly using newer generation encoders that will allow all mpeg 4 hd to put 6 hd channels on one transponder rather than 4 like today , all would help give DISH subs hope of a future for more hd this next month. IF CHarlie wants to stop the churn he needs to speak now or it will be to late.
> 
> Now I do think that outlining how they will compete and the reasons for the launch failures to the public , along with advertising their great hd dvrs and how superior they are to DIRECTV and cable, would go a long way in helping assuage the fears of current subs who are thinking of ditching DISH. I have seen more advertisements in the paper and in radio adds about the DISH dvr and how great they are in comparison to TIVO . Although they keep saying it will record upto 500 hours of video. I don't know where that number comes from unless they are talking about external hard drives .
> 
> The saddest thing about this whole thing to me is when you compare DISH to DIRECTV subs and "loyalty" to their service. During the 2 years that DISH had more hd than anyone else, Directv subs defended their service and stayed with them no matter what because they knew of a plan for more hd was coming. THis campaign alone kept many Directv subs with them because of the promise of hd outlined in advertisements in paper, radio, tv , internet etc along with a definite date when it would start. Yes, they missed the date deadline by a week . But I doubt that they would care about that now.
> 
> DISH subs who now find themselves behind on hd channels for the last month or two , are suddenly leaving DISH in high numbers. Churn was up significantly this last quarter. CHArlie could stop the bleeding if he would launch a similar advertisment campaign to stop this. OUTLINE your plans and make them more coherent for people to see that the near future means more hd.
> 
> HE did outline some outstanding plans at TEAM summit last May , but some people think he meant an all mpeg 4 service for cable delivery instead of a relaunch of DISH in total mpeg 4. WHo knows whose right because DISH has never clarified this one way or another. YES, there is a cable service in mpeg 4 that launched this month but that does nothing for DISH subs . The delays in sat launches have added to the confusion and general unrest of DISH subs.
> 
> I want DISH to not only survive but THRIVE. I love my service with them and my hd dvrs . I want them to have the most hd out there but they won't if they keep quiet about their plans. IF churn keeps up they will have less money for hd expansion and it might be to late to stay in the hd game. CHarlie has an obligation to his stock holders and customers and to do his job as ceo and address this now. Everyday that he waits makes more people on this and other boards doubt their decisions to stay with DISH. And before you think that these people don't have influence remember this: WE talk to our friends and family and we often influence their decisions on who to go to for their video needs. I know I did with my family , parents, aunts, brother & sister and numerous friends. THey all have DISH. They look to me for answers when they talk about any new technology. Multiply that against everyone they know and you have quite a lot of people out there influencing other people.
> 
> In the end I will stay with DISH and give them time to get back in the game. They have worked well for me and my needs. I have loyalty to them for almost 11 years. There hd dvrs are the best in the business and I have three of them on my account alone , one on my second account for my parents and a 501 for my aunt on my third account. BUt if Charlie wants DISH to stay in the hd game and prevent more churn, he needs to talk soon. The slience is deafening.
> 
> THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY !


YOUR OPINION IS WRONG AND HERESY AGAINST THE KING!!...lol j/k:lol:

I agree with you...communication is the best bet. I understand we are far from majority of subs...but i think your right with the "word of mouth" theory...because in the last couple of weeks we have see E* throw in "more on the way" in a commercial and the authorization for CSR's to say "more by the end of year"....so they must be getting some kind of backlash via the complaint line...or like you said, retention is dropping. But like i said earlier....benefit of doubt for this last month....Charlie chat on the 10th...will he address it?...and maybe more channels by months end. Thats at least what i have been telling people i know that are wavering...give it til years end...see what happens...we could all be happy and this will be put to rest....

but to keep the thread on topic...i also would enjoy FBN HD (forgot they had that too)...and the extra starz in HD


----------



## ScoBuck

There was just a Charlie Retailer Chat conducted - if you want to read about it - here is a link to the info:

http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-network-forum/115809-retailer-chat-recap-november-27-2007-a.html


----------



## texaswolf

ScoBuck said:


> There was just a Charlie Retailer Chat conducted - if you want to read about it - here is a link to the info:
> 
> http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-network-forum/115809-retailer-chat-recap-november-27-2007-a.html


hmmm interesting...wonder if they are holding out info on the retailers for now too. This should be an interesting month.


----------



## HD is Life

I'm new here - and trying to decide which way to go now - I am going to be getting a 52' Sony this weekend.

At the moment I'm leaning towards DIRECTV because it seems they have twice the number of HD channels right now.


----------



## mengel

I'd like it if Dish started carrying CHILLER channel, and I'd like SCIFI channel in HD. It would also be nice if MONSTERSHD started showing a wider variety of horror movies. I'd love to see a lot more of the 50's and 60's cheesy scifi and horror movies. I'll think of more later, but those 3 would keep me busy for a while.


----------



## jrb531

Mike D-CO5 said:


> For most people who feel that they are not getting all the hd that they want , it will mean CHURN by DISH subs for either Directv or other video services. The lack of information by DISH is killing them in that regards. If they would just address the fact that launch delays have put them behind in regards to adding hd that they wanted to add , would help diffuse some of the anxiety that DISH subs feel. CHarlie built his company on the warm small town feel of his Charlie Chats where he did just that . He communicated to his subs via his own channel on 101 that told their plans and what city was getting locals and any new programming . DISH has always felt like the underdog and that we had a vested interest in seeing them WIN someday. EVeryone loves the underdog in sports and roots for them to win.
> 
> Even if Charlie could outline how that DISH would go about reclaiming bandwith for more hd by moving all internationals to the 118.5 sat & freeing up transponders on 61.5 for more hd. Possibly using newer generation encoders that will allow all mpeg 4 hd to put 6 hd channels on one transponder rather than 4 like today , all would help give DISH subs hope of a future for more hd this next month. IF CHarlie wants to stop the churn he needs to speak now or it will be to late.
> 
> Now I do think that outlining how they will compete and the reasons for the launch failures to the public , along with advertising their great hd dvrs and how superior they are to DIRECTV and cable, would go a long way in helping assuage the fears of current subs who are thinking of ditching DISH. I have seen more advertisements in the paper and in radio adds about the DISH dvr and how great they are in comparison to TIVO . Although they keep saying it will record upto 500 hours of video. I don't know where that number comes from unless they are talking about external hard drives .
> 
> The saddest thing about this whole thing to me is when you compare DISH to DIRECTV subs and "loyalty" to their service. During the 2 years that DISH had more hd than anyone else, Directv subs defended their service and stayed with them no matter what because they knew of a plan for more hd was coming. THis campaign alone kept many Directv subs with them because of the promise of hd outlined in advertisements in paper, radio, tv , internet etc along with a definite date when it would start. Yes, they missed the date deadline by a week . But I doubt that they would care about that now.
> 
> DISH subs who now find themselves behind on hd channels for the last month or two , are suddenly leaving DISH in high numbers. Churn was up significantly this last quarter. CHArlie could stop the bleeding if he would launch a similar advertisment campaign to stop this. OUTLINE your plans and make them more coherent for people to see that the near future means more hd.
> 
> HE did outline some outstanding plans at TEAM summit last May , but some people think he meant an all mpeg 4 service for cable delivery instead of a relaunch of DISH in total mpeg 4. WHo knows whose right because DISH has never clarified this one way or another. YES, there is a cable service in mpeg 4 that launched this month but that does nothing for DISH subs . The delays in sat launches have added to the confusion and general unrest of DISH subs.
> 
> I want DISH to not only survive but THRIVE. I love my service with them and my hd dvrs . I want them to have the most hd out there but they won't if they keep quiet about their plans. IF churn keeps up they will have less money for hd expansion and it might be to late to stay in the hd game. CHarlie has an obligation to his stock holders and customers and to do his job as ceo and address this now. Everyday that he waits makes more people on this and other boards doubt their decisions to stay with DISH. And before you think that these people don't have influence remember this: WE talk to our friends and family and we often influence their decisions on who to go to for their video needs. I know I did with my family , parents, aunts, brother & sister and numerous friends. THey all have DISH. They look to me for answers when they talk about any new technology. Multiply that against everyone they know and you have quite a lot of people out there influencing other people.
> 
> In the end I will stay with DISH and give them time to get back in the game. They have worked well for me and my needs. I have loyalty to them for almost 11 years. There hd dvrs are the best in the business and I have three of them on my account alone , one on my second account for my parents and a 501 for my aunt on my third account. BUt if Charlie wants DISH to stay in the hd game and prevent more churn, he needs to talk soon. The slience is deafening.
> 
> THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY !


Mike I know we often agree to disagree on some points but I agree 100% with your post. I am loyal to Dish as long as I feel they are loyal to me. As of late I have not felt very loyal to Dish but after all these years I will give Dish a few months to recover before I decide what to do. I too feel that Dish wasted a 2+ year head start. They squandered their lead and it seemed like all they cared about was locals. I guess locals are important if you do not have them but being in a big market and having locals from day one, the past year of local announcements did nothing for me 

Oh well...things should become more clear soon. I hope Dish revamps the entire way they do HD to be more in line with D*. Putting the HD channels in the proper packages with their SD counterparts just makes so much more sense as eventually the SD channels will go bye bye.

Why not be forward thinking now and come up with a plan that you will not need to change once SD is gone.

-JB


----------



## cartrivision

James Long said:


> .......they have to rely on the advertising. D*'s "make room" satellite ad and Comcast's "twice the HD of DirecTV" ads help E*. Just like political ads where it's all mudslinging - after a while people get sick of being told what system is best and just stay with their own.


That's little more than wishful thinking. Even if the consumer thinks that the ads are full of hyperbole, it's easy for them to find out exactly what HD content the competitors actually have, and if they have content that they want but can't get with E*, many of them will switch to the provider that can give them what they want.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

jrb531 said:


> Mike I know we often agree to disagree on some points but I agree 100% with your post. I am loyal to Dish as long as I feel they are loyal to me. As of late I have not felt very loyal to Dish but after all these years I will give Dish a few months to recover before I decide what to do. I too feel that Dish wasted a 2+ year head start. They squandered their lead and it seemed like all they cared about was locals. I guess locals are important if you do not have them but being in a big market and having locals from day one, the past year of local announcements did nothing for me
> 
> Oh well...things should become more clear soon. I hope Dish revamps the entire way they do HD to be more in line with D*. Putting the HD channels in the proper packages with their SD counterparts just makes so much more sense as eventually the SD channels will go bye bye.
> 
> Why not be forward thinking now and come up with a plan that you will not need to change once SD is gone.
> 
> -JB


 I agree , if DISH would eliminate the hd pack and just integrate them into the regular packs that it would be a nice way to package it. Directv is doing that with their tech fee for $9.99 and if you want hd channels not simulcast in sd , you pay $4.99 extra. IF Voom was spun off into a premium pack for $9.99 and they charged a simple tech fee of $9.99 like Directv does they would at lest be more competitive. That $20.00 hd pack is mostly made up by Voom channels . It is time to make hd more of a standard rather than a premium -at least the hd channels that are simulcast in sd .


----------



## jamieh1

Directv offers more basic cable channels in HD than Dish.
USA SCIFI MTV VH1 SPIKE CMT NICK BRAVO ETC...
MORE PREMIUM MOVIES IN HD

STARZ SHOWTIME MAX HBO TMC


----------



## ScoBuck

VOOM as a stand alone package is an interesting idea. I just don't think you would get many people paying $10 bucks a month for it.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

tnsprin said:


> The June Charlie Chat also mentioned this and did not sound like it was talking about the Mpeg-4 service announced for Cable.


 That is why I think we will still see an all mpeg4 service at 86.5 and 97 sats sometime next year -barring any ATT takeover. And if they do buy it out, we may still see an all mpeg 4 service there for a new sat service that Charlie may want to start. Either way I wish Charlie would clarify his plans for all to understand.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

ScoBuck said:


> VOOM as a stand alone package is an interesting idea. I just don't think you would get many people paying $10 bucks a month for it.


Based on what I paid for Voom in 2005 I figured this price. IT was $5.00 for the first 10 hd channels and when they added the other 5 channels we got an increase to $9.99. If this seems to high then maybe they should consolidate the channels back down to about 10 and sell them for $5.00 again. Especially since they have taken to only showing 2 movies at night over and over again on the movie channels.


----------



## ScoBuck

Mike D-CO5 said:


> Based on what I paid for Voom in 2005 I figured this price. IT was $5.00 for the first 10 hd channels and when they added the other 5 channels we got an increase to $9.99. If this seems to high then maybe they should consolidate the channels back down to about 10 and sell them for $5.00 again. Especially since they have taken to only showing 2 movies at night over and over again on the movie channels.


Right now don't they collect that $5 from ALL their HD subs? I wouldn't expect them to reverse what they did only a couple of months ago.


----------



## Lyle_JP

If nothing new is announced by Christmas, I'll be giving myself a nice post-holiday gift: DirecTV HD. I have been a loyal Dish sub for 6 1/2 years. Throughout that time, I have stuck with Dish because they have been (for me) the better deal. But not anymore. It's not just the national HD channels I want but can't get. Or the fact that HD on D* is $10 cheaper for more. There's my local Fox SportsNet channel (FSNBA). In HD on D*, not a word from E*, and I live in a freakin' top 10 market!

Finally, the Voom channels. It's E*'s only big selling point for HD. And I can't watch those channels anymore, because not one of them can handle a 5.1 track without molesting it. Voom has a *policy *of spreading all dialog across _all three front channels_, even for recent films with true 5.1 mixes. Blade Runner was a joke on Monsters HD, but was perfect on HDNet Movies. So long as Voom continues to do this, they are useless to me. Give me the MGM channel instead!

Oh yeah, did I also mention that D* (for the first time since the must-carry fiasco) is positively spanking E* on picture quality lately? So Dish, the clock is ticking. At the end of December, my 622 commitment is over. After that...


----------



## James Long

Mike D-CO5 said:


> For most people who feel that they are not getting all the hd that they want , it will mean CHURN by DISH subs for either Directv or other video services.


D*'s CHURN isn't exactly prize winning. 



> Now I do think that outlining how they will compete and the reasons for the launch failures to the public ,


Have I missed a failure? The current lauches are delayed for reasons entirely outside of E*'s control. There have been disappointments along the way ... the ailing satellite at 129° is ailing more than (IMHO) E* originally expected. I suspect that they are smart enough to expect problems there ... E5 was not designed nor intended to go to 129° when built. There were not many other options ... just make do with what they have.

Mr Ergen has mentioned the problems with 129° on a Charlie Chat and E* was offering a second larger dish for those who needed more help than accurate alignment provides.

Other than that, it is not a good idea when the CEO of a company comes forward and gives the gloom and doom statements you may desire. It is his job to represent the company in a positive light, to be truthful in SEC filings (that's where the real dirt is) and lead the company to a better future. Not wallow in the past.



> DISH subs who now find themselves behind on hd channels for the last month or two , are suddenly leaving DISH in high numbers. Churn was up significantly this last quarter.


Yet E* still added 50k more subscribers in Q3 than Q2. 900k subscribers came to dish ... enough to replace the lost and then some. D*'s churn rose Q2 to Q3 ... but not enough worth noting. Other than to note that D* still lost 772k subscribers in the three months before the balloon popped. I guess they were the disloyal ones. 



> HE did outline some outstanding plans at TEAM summit last May , but some people think he meant an all mpeg 4 service for cable delivery instead of a relaunch of DISH in total mpeg 4. WHo knows whose right because DISH has never clarified this one way or another. YES, there is a cable service in mpeg 4 that launched this month but that does nothing for DISH subs . The delays in sat launches have added to the confusion and general unrest of DISH subs.


Most E* subs are oblivious to the launch delays. Being one of the "some people" you refer to I have stated that the two statements Charlie was quoted as making match up nicely with the actual occurrences. The belief that he intended to announce a customer targeted service does not match up with what has actually happened.

You expected a clarification? He shouldn't have mentioned it at all. Giving a clarification that gives away future plans is one of those things a CEO shouldn't do until the company is ready to announce the product.



> THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY !


Agreed. Anything that is not factual in my statements should also be considered opinion.


----------



## James Long

Mike D-CO5 said:


> Based on what I paid for Voom in 2005 I figured this price. IT was $5.00 for the first 10 hd channels and when they added the other 5 channels we got an increase to $9.99.


Plus more HD channels that were not Voom. It was $9.99 for five channels plus $5 for Voom (ten channels) prior to the introduction of the DishHD metal packages.



ScoBuck said:


> Right now don't they collect that $5 from ALL their HD subs? I wouldn't expect them to reverse what they did only a couple of months ago.


Voom has been part of DishHD since February 2006. Existing subs were grandfathered until a couple of months ago, but that $5 was rolled in nearly two years ago.


----------



## ScoBuck

JL - I think you miss the main message of mike's post. He said:

For most people who feel that they are not getting all the hd that they want , it will mean CHURN by DISH subs for either Directv or other video services. The lack of information by DISH is killing them in that regards. If they would just address the fact that launch delays have put them behind in regards to adding hd that they wanted to add, would help diffuse some of the anxiety that DISH subs feel. CHarlie built his company on the warm small town feel of his Charlie Chats where he did just that . *He communicated to his subs via his own channel on 101 that told their plans and what city was getting locals and any new programming . DISH has always felt like the underdog and that we had a vested interest in seeing them WIN someday. EVeryone loves the underdog in sports and roots for them to win. *

I don't see him asking for Charlie to go on his channel and present gloom and doom statements. I see him asking for Charlie to go on his channel and tell his customers what the future holds for them - to tell them of his vision and so on. I think its a great suggestion myself.


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> Yet E* still added 50k more subscribers in Q3 than Q2. 900k subscribers came to dish ... enough to replace the lost and then some. D*'s churn rose Q2 to Q3 ... but not enough worth noting.
> Agreed.
> 
> Anything that is not factual in my statements should also be considered opinion.


Truth is Echostar had a miserable 3rd quarter - and they admitted it - and they have already prepared us in their forward looking statements for a miserable 4th quarter. I don't have to bring ANY OTHER CARRIER into this - the DISH results speak for themselves. What happens after that - who knows?


----------



## Mike D-CO5

Although the launch failures are out of DISH's control James, they do effect the launch of DISH satellites that would give the DISH subs more hd to compete with DIrectv and cable . THe subs need to know this and know that it isn't DISH dragging their feet on any new hd additions. Unless they want people churning due to a lack of clarification or lack of factual communication about the launch delays. 

If your company is taking hits from the competitors by way of advertisments in print, tv, radio ,internet, you owe it to your customers and your stock holders in your company , to clarify your plans for the future and to give some time frames for the launch of satellite or the reclaiming of your bandwith etc. Otherwise more churn will result due to lack of communication coming out to clarify this. 

Also more negative word of mouth from subs on these boards being spread to everyone they know about the lack of action by DISH will go a long way to hurt DISH. As the ceo you owe it to the public to address this before the damage is done and the tide of churn is out of control. DIsh had a very high churn rate last quarter . If they continue staying mum about the reasons for the lack of hd , this will increase. THis stands to reason. 

DIRECTV is advertising like there is no tommorrow. DISH is not doing an effective job in advertising, anymore than the job of communicating to the public the problems they are having. As I stated before above in my other post, DIRECTV kept many subs during the two years that DISH had more hd, by being upfront about their plans and the time frame for the launch of all their new hd channels. YES they seemed vague to me and others back then and they were a week late in launching the first wave , but in the end they did do what they said they would do. THis kept many subs from Churning to DISH during that time frame. Can't Charlie do the same to maintain his subs also?


----------



## Mike D-CO5

ScoBuck said:


> JL - I think you miss the main message of mike's post. He said:
> 
> For most people who feel that they are not getting all the hd that they want , it will mean CHURN by DISH subs for either Directv or other video services. The lack of information by DISH is killing them in that regards. If they would just address the fact that launch delays have put them behind in regards to adding hd that they wanted to add, would help diffuse some of the anxiety that DISH subs feel. CHarlie built his company on the warm small town feel of his Charlie Chats where he did just that . *He communicated to his subs via his own channel on 101 that told their plans and what city was getting locals and any new programming . DISH has always felt like the underdog and that we had a vested interest in seeing them WIN someday. EVeryone loves the underdog in sports and roots for them to win. *
> 
> I don't see him asking for Charlie to go on his channel and present gloom and doom statements. I see him asking for Charlie to go on his channel and tell his customers what the future holds for them - to tell them of his vision and so on. I think its a great suggestion myself.


Thanks for your support ScoBuck. I am glad to see that you want DISH to win as well as DIRECTV. I want both companies to win also and I think that they should copy each other's strengths when necessary to help accomplish that. DIRECTV has seemed to copy the DISH lease plans and it seems that DISH needs to copy the advertising campaign that DIRECTV has too, along with their communication skills.


----------



## ScoBuck

Mike D-CO5 said:


> Thanks for your support ScoBuck. I am glad to see that you want DISH to win as well as DIRECTV. I want both companies to win also and I think that they should copy each other's strengths when necessary to help accomplish that. DIRECTV has seemed to copy the DISH lease plans and it seems that DISH needs to copy the advertising campaign that DIRECTV has too, along with their communication skills.


I have consistently said that I believe that competition is great, and that by one company taking the lead it will force the others to follow or die (not literally).

I do see some hard times ahead for DISH as a company (they as much as have already said so themselves in the 3rd Q SEC fillings and conference call). But I think they will of course survive just fine - but maybe with a new daddy.

AT&Ts deep pockets may be just what is needed IMHO.


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> I don't see him asking for Charlie to go on his channel and present gloom and doom statements. I see him asking for Charlie to go on his channel and tell his customers what the future holds for them - to tell them of his vision and so on. I think its a great suggestion myself.


Not a bad suggestion ... but results would speak louder than promises. The last public "promise" made was that E* would remain the HD leader. That is a hard one to come back to when two other major companies are claiming the lead. E*'s current advertising is dated but positive.



ScoBuck said:


> Truth is Echostar had a miserable 3rd quarter - and they admitted it - and they have already prepared us in their forward looking statements for a miserable 4th quarter.


I was just pointing out that there were still positives. Still proof that E* is not a sinking ship "blown out of the water" as some may believe. It is a viable profitable company.



Mike D-CO5 said:


> Although the launch failures are out of DISH's control James,


Again, the use of the word "failures" in reference to a delay is not appropriate. A failure would be a satellite not functioning as planned (blowing up on launch or failing in orbit such as E4 and to a lesser extent D10). The periodic failures of existing satellites (generally losing transponders) is expected as they age ... that is the only other "failure" E* has to report. A launch delay is not a failure.



> The subs need to know this and know that it isn't DISH dragging their feet on any new hd additions.


What if E* is dragging their feet?



> Dish had a very high churn rate last quarter.


1.94% instead of 1.68% (Q2), 1.64% (2006), 1.65% (2005), 1.62% (2004), 1.57% (2003) or 1.59% (2002).
And since you mentioned D* ...
1.61% (Q3), 1.58% (Q2), 1.60% (2006), 1.70% (2005), 1.59% (2004), 1.55% (2003) or 1.6% (2002).



> As I stated before above in my other post, DIRECTV kept many subs during the two years that DISH had more hd,


And by that measure E* is keeping many subscribers now. Even with that 1.94% rate E* is keeping more than 98% of it's subs.

_Fun with math time! 1.61% churn represents a loss of 792k D* customers. 1.94% churn represents a loss of 794k E* customers. D* lost 2k - about 0.2% - less subscribers than E* in Q3._

PS: I want BOTH companies to win. Having one lose is a false victory for the other.


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> And by that measure E* is keeping many subscribers now. Even with that 1.94% rate E* is keeping more than 98% of it's subs.
> 
> PS: I want BOTH companies to win. Having one lose is a false victory for the other.


The measure of how successful DISH is keeping its subscribers in THIS competitive environment has yet to be seen - your numbers are from the previous competitive environment.

We don't yet know that answer - was the 3rd Q an aberration or the beginning of a trend?


----------



## James Long

So the competition only started in September when D* stepped up to the plate?


----------



## Mike D-CO5

Agreed on that last one James. I want both companies to win too. Who knows, they may be one company someday and all the squabbeling about who is better or has the most hd etc, won't matter any more. 

As to the failures of the sat launches, I meant the explosion that happened at the launch site of an unrelated satellite that has put all launches behind for both DISH and now DIRECTV as well. It was a failure to launch when the satellite blew up right? I think most people who remember the recent history of this incident knew what I meant. 

Either way if you are the Ceo of a company like DISH and you want to help assuage the fears of your current subs who are thinking of switching, then clarifying what happened at the launch site and the problems getting any new sats launched to your customers and stock holders would be the most prudent thing to do. Unless you enjoy high churn numbers based on the lack of communication. 

For the next several months DIRECTV will be in the lead and don't think they won't advertise that fact in print,tv,radio, internet and stores like BestBuy and Circuit City. DISH only has a few pathetic ,tired advertisements about having more than 70 hd channels and the good word of mouth of subs on these web boards to combat that. How can anyone be positive about the DISH future if they don't know the facts and what is coming straight from the horse's mouth?

Now Charlie doesn't have to tell us the exact date or the amount of money or what exact number of the sat, but it would be nice if he said something general like:

We were in line to launch two sats by December and due to the launch site problems beyond our control, we are now delayed till the possible end of the first quarter of 08. Once the sats are all up and operational we will have a 45 - 60 day testing cycle and you will see more hd channels to compete with the competition by the end of the second quarter or by early in the third quarter. Rest assure we will once again have more national hd channels than anyone in 2008 and we will also compete with more hd locals and finish the sd locals in the country. 

Also rest assured we are reclaiming hd bandwith by consolidation of international channels and we are now using new mpeg 4 encoders that will allow us to do 6 hd channels on one transponder rather than 4 today . So we will have more national hd channels by the end of December of THIS year . He might say in the 4 - 6 channels variety. IF he was really bold he would name them. 

Also be assured that we are working to activate the spotbeams on 61.5 and many new dmas in the eastern U.S. will soon have hd locals sometime starting in early 2008 or sooner if possible. He might even give us a general idea of how many cities they hope to do or even if he wanted to really wow us , name them.

This is the plan barring any unforseen problems . Until then enjoy the best damn hd receiver out there according to CNet magazine, who rated it better than Tivo. Please know that DISH will be the hd leader again in 2008 and we are all determined to make it happen for you our customers. 

Now wouldn't that go over much better with Current DISH subs who are thinking of switching instead of deafening silence?


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> So the competition only started in September when _D* stepped up to the plate?_


Please don't be so naive. The competition CHANGED in September, didn't it?

Your last 6 words show your intent is to entice an argument where none is needed - can't you have a discussion WITHOUT the rhetoric?

Stepped up to the plate as in D* GOT ITS NEW SAT LAUNCHED?


----------



## qsoundrich

Well this thread has gone completely off-topic, but I'll answer. I want Speed, and if they don't add it by Feb, they will be making a huge mistake. For some reason Sci-Fi gets the most play on the forums, but I doubt that represents the general public. Dish needs to add SpeedHD in order to stay ahead of cable and keep racing fans from jumping to DTV in droves. Speed is one of those channels that shows a LOT of niche programming at odd times. With the free DVR on Dish, it makes the channel very appealing.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

qsoundrich said:


> Well this thread has gone completely off-topic, but I'll answer. I want Speed, and if they don't add it by Feb, they will be making a huge mistake. For some reason Sci-Fi gets the most play on the forums, but I doubt that represents the general public. Dish needs to add SpeedHD in order to stay ahead of cable and keep racing fans from jumping to DTV in droves. Speed is one of those channels that shows a LOT of niche programming at odd times. With the free DVR on Dish, it makes the channel very appealing.


 You're right Rich, it has gotten away from the origional thread. I' ll add that channels I would like to have on DISH that Directv has today would be ; Sci-Fi, Usa, Fx, Cnn and any premium movie channels.

Now I will withdraw from anymore posts on this thread as I am sure I am just going around in circles discussing what DISH should do.

Back to thread.


----------



## ScoBuck

And I would add YES-HD and NESN-HD - and that is so I could consider taking the service - without YES-HD (which is why I chose D* in the first place) I wouldn't care how many other HD channels they offered.


----------



## John W

When the smoke clears from all this both systems will have essentially the same HD channels available, packaged differently obviously. Being a long-time E* customer, I will wait for that day to come, bearing in mind if its less than two years it will have been a wash between the two.


----------



## texaswolf

qsoundrich said:


> Well this thread has gone completely off-topic, but I'll answer. I want Speed, and if they don't add it by Feb, they will be making a huge mistake. For some reason Sci-Fi gets the most play on the forums, but I doubt that represents the general public. Dish needs to add SpeedHD in order to stay ahead of cable and keep racing fans from jumping to DTV in droves. Speed is one of those channels that shows a LOT of niche programming at odd times. With the free DVR on Dish, it makes the channel very appealing.


If you mean they would be behind because cable would have it and they don't, then you might as well consider them behind now since some cable companies offer CNN HD and TWC HD...but compared to the rest of the channels E* has over cable, i wouldn't consider them behind. I think the appeal to Sci Fi here and nation wide is due to BSG and it's spin offs, and Stargate...both shows are big hits...not just here but on the national scale...im not a big watcher of SPEED channel, but if it were in HD, i bet i would watch more of it...racing in any style in HD is just sweet.


----------



## vkristof

John W said:


> When the smoke clears from all this both systems will have essentially the same HD channels available, packaged differently obviously. Being a long-time E* customer, I will wait for that day to come, bearing in mind if its less than two years it will have been a wash between the two.


So, it's been interesting reading all this stuff; I haven't paid close attention to what E* has been doing for their HD in quite a while. I've been a E* subscriber for 8 years, having switched from Cablevision in Suffolk County NY. I also still have the original Dishplayer from ALMOST 8 years ago and that's my NEWEST rcvr.

Anyway, courtesy of a couple of acquaintances upgrading (replacing?!) their D* systems to HD I'm interested in sending more of my dsiposable income to a provider in exchange for HD channels.

We are "200+ channel" + HBO + NYC locals subscribers who watch close-to-zero in sports. We DO watch the HBO series, the "home-improvement" shows (HGTV, TLC?, PBS (TOH), whatever it takes), CNN & MSNBC for the idiocy of cable "news", and the late night talk shows. I have a PC based DVR also for the OTA HD late night talk talk shows but I can't receive WNBC-DT, which is a whole separate saga.

Anyway, I can't watch TV w/o a DVR so the testimonials in this thread on the 622 are encouraging.

Considering what we do watch and would like to watch in HD, I'd be more than happy to accept advise about upgrading to D* or E* HD. It sounds like virtually everything will get replaced in either case. From my on-line calculations, and conversations with various E* staff, the cost per month are roughly similar.

I am also concerned about the quality of the HD I will receive: I also have a HD-DVD and the aforementioned NYC OTA HD channels.

Thanks ahead of time.


----------



## qsoundrich

I don't have a very big TV (26" Olevia), but from what I have seen, the quality of HD on Dish is outstanding. Compared to cable, it seems that there is more motion blur, but the colors are much much better. I could just be seeing more limitations from my TV with the better signal. (sorry now I'm OT  )


----------



## joebird

Ditto.



aaronbud said:


> FSN Bay Area HD for one.
> FSN Bay Area HD for two.
> ETC,ETC..........


----------



## vkristof

qsoundrich said:


> I don't have a very big TV (26" Olevia), but from what I have seen, the quality of HD on Dish is outstanding. Compared to cable, it seems that there is more motion blur, but the colors are much much better. I could just be seeing more limitations from my TV with the better signal. (sorry now I'm OT  )


I'm assuming that your reply is to my request for feedback. Thanks.

Is that for the MPEG-4 HD (I assume E* has MPEG4 for the newer channels) channels or MPEG-2 HD channels or both?
I assume the Olevia is a LCD, (thought it probably doesn't matter considering that you're comparing cable and E* on the same TV, correct?

I do you have a larger, old 46" CRT RPTV and am considering going to a larger 50" or 52" LCD or plasma in the near future.

And I was just having a conversation with another E* SD customer about how he thinks some of the channels are looking worse recently.


----------



## qsoundrich

It's an LCD... I'm planning to upgrade to 42" plasma in the near future. I wonder if that will help with the blurring I'm noticing. 

I've only had it for a week so I can't compare with past experiences on E*. May want to do a search or open a new topic on PQ.


----------



## gopher_guy

Wow this thread got a lot more traffic than I thought when I posted this question.

I wound up calling D* wanting to cancel. They came up with HR20, another HD regular receiver, dish, install, free HD and HBO/Starz for 6 months. Total cost was $125 shipped. Not the greatest deal by any stretch but it wasn't terrible either. 

I will miss dual buffer DVR.


----------



## texaswolf

how long is the new contract?


----------



## gopher_guy

texaswolf said:


> how long is the new contract?


2 yrs. I really didn't care much about that I have been with them for 5.


----------



## texaswolf

I probably would have taken the same deal if i were in your shoes...good to see they care about retention...E* would have said "sorry to hear that" and let you go. Maybe that will change soon.


----------



## jwjensen356

This is a very informative thread but I believe it is 'true believers' talking to 'true believers', Dishnetwork/DirecTV or DirecTV/Dishnetwork. And it is a vocal minority hashing it out while the non-vocal majority are quite satisfied with what they have. As for me, I have more than enough HD content (via Dishnetwork) to watch. I can only watch one show at a time (well, with my 722's PIP I can watch two). But I am pleased when the big alphabet networks upgrade additional programming to HD and when Dish adds additional channels. I can wait, more will be available.


----------



## vkristof

jwjensen356 said:


> This is a very informative thread but I believe it is 'true believers' talking to 'true believers', Dishnetwork/DirecTV or DirecTV/Dishnetwork. And it is a vocal minority hashing it out while the non-vocal majority are quite satisfied with what they have. As for me, I have more than enough HD content (via Dishnetwork) to watch. I can only watch one show at a time (well, with my 722's PIP I can watch two). But I am pleased when the big alphabet networks upgrade additional programming to HD and when Dish adds additional channels. I can wait, more will be available.


I'm not a true believer in anything other than death and taxes.

So, it sounds like you can be summed up as "happy with Dish HD picture quality", correct?

Do you get any locals in HD?

My Dish install is old and has a dish pointed at the 61.5 slot and a Dish 500 @ the 110/119. Will they have to add the 129 slot that you list in your equipment?


----------



## texaswolf

jwjensen356 said:


> This is a very informative thread but I believe it is 'true believers' talking to 'true believers', Dishnetwork/DirecTV or DirecTV/Dishnetwork. And it is a vocal minority hashing it out while the non-vocal majority are quite satisfied with what they have. As for me, I have more than enough HD content (via Dishnetwork) to watch. I can only watch one show at a time (well, with my 722's PIP I can watch two). But I am pleased when the big alphabet networks upgrade additional programming to HD and when Dish adds additional channels. I can wait, more will be available.


There is really no way to know what the "non-vocal majority" is thinking, unless we work in the E* or D* complaint office. People I know who are "HD watchers" and have E* are having an issue with not hearing anything new, and the D* "HD watchers" i know are happy...however it used to be the other way around before D*'s new launches....Now the "SD watchers" or non HDTV owners i know...could care less of course....so really I think probably a good size (may or may not be a majority) of HD subs have an issue with getting new channels...especially with being pounded with D*s commercials and ad's with the channels they dont have....and of course the SD subs wouldn't care.

While it's true you can only watch one thing (or two) at once....a lot of people have DVR's...where with an OTA, can record 3 HD channels at once. But as mike pointed out...the non majority on these sites, are the people, who friends and relatives get info from, about new things on HD...and word of mouth can go a long way. So without even visiting one of these sites, subs can get enough info to complain to cust. service, or switch if they feel the need.


----------



## vkristof

texaswolf said:


> There is really no way to know what the "non-vocal majority" is thinking, unless we work in the E* or D* complaint office. People I know who are "HD watchers" and have E* are having an issue with not hearing anything new, and the D* "HD watchers" i know are happy...however it used to be the other way around before D*'s new launches....Now the "SD watchers" or non HDTV owners i know...could care less of course....so really I think probably a good size (may or may not be a majority) of HD subs have an issue with getting new channels...especially with being pounded with D*s commercials and ad's with the channels they dont have....and of course the SD subs wouldn't care.
> 
> While it's true you can only watch one thing (or two) at once....a lot of people have DVR's...where with an OTA, can record 3 HD channels at once. But as mike pointed out...the non majority on these sites, are the people, who friends and relatives get info from, about new things on HD...and word of mouth can go a long way. So without even visiting one of these sites, subs can get enough info to complain to cust. service, or switch if they feel the need.


So, are YOU happy with the picture quality on Dish's HD channels?


----------



## ScoBuck

There is some validity to the non-vocal idea - because in most cases people just don't pay that much attention. In this case I wonder - and I wonder because of a couple of things. And both of those go together. This is the busiest time of year for new TV purchases - as witnessed by the huge amount of ads and sales on TVS - mostly HDTV. When a person goes in to the store to buy a new HDTV, they will have questions for sure - there is where the non-vocal thing loses out. The 2 largest retailers are DIRECTV merchants, they offer a $300 savings on the TV if DIRECTV is activated with the purchase, the sales help in the store gets commission for selling the bundle, they will be pushing it for sure.

It just seems as if the time is ripe for HD right now, and the chips SEEM to have fallen in DIRECTVS corner for the moment. Am I 100% certain - NO I am not. Do I really believe that DIRECTV will have a much better quarter than DISH, YES I do. Last year I would have said the opposite, but things HAVE CHANGED.

Right now it is D* offering the most HD - and adding to it almost weekly, and it is E* not offering anything that attractive at the moment. Gosh, they at least need to communicate what's going to be coming for them in the future I think. But, yes they will survive AND PROSPER, let's not get too dramatic.


----------



## texaswolf

vkristof said:


> So, are YOU happy with the picture quality on Dish's HD channels?


Yep Only one I can complain about is TBS...but i believe it looks like that no matter what provider you have. My locals look great without an OTA (wish we had CWHD, though)..but the picture quality is great as far as i'm concerned


----------



## jwjensen356

So, it sounds like you can be summed up as "happy with Dish HD picture quality", correct?

* Yes, picture quality is fine.

Do you get any locals in HD?

* Yes. All my major alphabet channels (Fox, an independent, CBS, ABC, PBS, NBC) are braodcasting HD. The local news, from the studio, are broadcast in HD (the remotes are usually SD). Major programming in prime time is often HD. When HD is being braodcast and I switch between the satellite signal and the OTA signal (through the 722) I really cannot tell the difference (and I have a very critical eye)

My Dish install is old and has a dish pointed at the 61.5 slot and a Dish 500 @ the 110/119. Will they have to add the 129 slot that you list in your equipment

* My installation is similar to yours, a 500 aimed at 110/119 and a dish aimed at the 129. I can't answer your question. As I understand it, the 129 is for the western states and the 61.5 is for the eastern states. I am in the SF Bay area.

*********

Others have commented on satellite capacity. The E*11 is ready to go, waiting to get past the launch bottleneck. E*14 is under contract and will be the most powerful that Loral has ever built for DBS service (but construction time of satellites is lengthy)


----------



## vkristof

jwjensen356 said:


> So, it sounds like you can be summed up as "happy with Dish HD picture quality", correct?
> 
> * Yes, picture quality is fine.
> 
> Do you get any locals in HD?
> 
> * Yes. All my major alphabet channels (Fox, an independent, CBS, ABC, PBS, NBC) are braodcasting HD. The local news, from the studio, are broadcast in HD (the remotes are usually SD). Major programming in prime time is often HD. When HD is being braodcast and I switch between the satellite signal and the OTA signal (through the 722) I really cannot tell the difference (and I have a very critical eye)
> 
> My Dish install is old and has a dish pointed at the 61.5 slot and a Dish 500 @ the 110/119. Will they have to add the 129 slot that you list in your equipment
> 
> * My installation is similar to yours, a 500 aimed at 110/119 and a dish aimed at the 129. I can't answer your question. As I understand it, the 129 is for the western states and the 61.5 is for the eastern states. I am in the SF Bay area.
> 
> *********
> 
> Others have commented on satellite capacity. The E*11 is ready to go, waiting to get past the launch bottleneck. E*14 is under contract and will be the most powerful that Loral has ever built for DBS service (but construction time of satellites is lengthy)


Thanks both for your feedback. Regarding the 61.5 dish, Dish installed that during the implementation of the must-carry-all-locals FCC rule way back when. In the NYC area, it got us some really oddball stations I had never heard of, but it also carried HD at that time. If 61.5 is still for east coast HD I might have to worry about the neighbor's tree growing bigger in the future.

Thanks again.


----------



## vkristof

texaswolf said:


> I probably would have taken the same deal if i were in your shoes...good to see they care about retention...E* would have said "sorry to hear that" and let you go. Maybe that will change soon.


Now that I've had PQ responses I'm intersted if you can deal with E* for the HD DVR. My last call produced a $149 offer for the HD DVR and installation. I did not try the "I can switch back to Cablevision and have their HD DVR for free" to see if I can get the price down..

Does E* have or have not a recent history of retaining long term subscribers by giving Free or nominal charge HD DVRs?


----------



## texaswolf

vkristof said:


> Now that I've had PQ responses I'm intersted if you can deal with E* for the HD DVR. My last call produced a $149 offer for the HD DVR and installation. I did not try the "I can switch back to Cablevision and have their HD DVR for free" to see if I can get the price down..
> 
> Does E* have or have not a recent history of retaining long term subscribers by giving Free or nominal charge HD DVRs?


Well a friend of mine has been with them 10 years, and wanted to go to HD DVR...when they told her $199, she asked about new subs getting it free, they said that is because they are new. She asked if she canceled her husbands (current) account and signed up new under her name would she get it free...they said yes (after turning in the other equipment, only to have it brought out again)...this was with the cancellation dept. She told them that was plain stupid, and that she may just cancel and to D*...they said they are sorry to hear that...but wouldn't budge off price....so after hearing that and some other long term subs issues, i would have to say, that no they don't care to much about retaining long term subs...i had posted this story in another thread, but dont remember which, i think it was one of the DVR price threads...you will find a lot more long term people in those with good and bad experiences.


----------



## vkristof

texaswolf said:


> Well a friend of mine has been with them 10 years, and wanted to go to HD DVR...when they told her $199, she asked about new subs getting it free, they said that is because they are new. She asked if she canceled her husbands (current) account and signed up new under her name would she get it free...they said yes (after turning in the other equipment, only to have it brought out again)...this was with the cancellation dept. She told them that was plain stupid, and that she may just cancel and to D*...they said they are sorry to hear that...but wouldn't budge off price....so after hearing that and some other long term subs issues, i would have to say, that no they don't care to much about retaining long term subs...i had posted this story in another thread, but dont remember which, i think it was one of the DVR price threads...you will find a lot more long term people in those with good and bad experiences.


Thanks. I had not thought of that (wife) angle. We own all the old equipment from 7+ years ago, so there is nothing to turn in. I suppose I could attempt to sell it on Ebay, in either case. Or, more likely. take it to the electronic recycling station at the town dump...


----------



## aloishus27

ScoBuck said:


> VOOM as a stand alone package is an interesting idea. I just don't think you would get many people paying $10 bucks a month for it.


I would


----------



## cartrivision

James Long said:


> 1.94% instead of 1.68% (Q2), 1.64% (2006), 1.65% (2005), 1.62% (2004), 1.57% (2003) or 1.59% (2002).
> And since you mentioned D* ...
> 1.61% (Q3), 1.58% (Q2), 1.60% (2006), 1.70% (2005), 1.59% (2004), 1.55% (2003) or 1.6% (2002).
> 
> And by that measure E* is keeping many subscribers now. Even with that 1.94% rate E* is keeping more than 98% of it's subs.
> 
> _Fun with math time! 1.61% churn represents a loss of 792k D* customers. 1.94% churn represents a loss of 794k E* customers. D* lost 2k - about 0.2% - less subscribers than E* in Q3._.


Sorry to burst your bubble James, but those aren't quarterly churn rates, they are monthly churn rates, so at the current rate (1.94%), E* will lose more than 23% of it's subscribers in one year&#8230;. or about 3.2 million subscribers per year.

Real fun with math time! If E* had DirecTV's churn rate they would only lose about 2.6 million subscribers per year, which would be an improvement of more than half a million subscribers per year. In other words, at the current churn rates, E* will have to add more than half a million more new (gross) subs per year than DirecTV does just to keep even with DirecTV in net sub additions.


----------



## James Long

They are monthly averages as calculated by E* and D* (respectively). The actual number of subscribers lost for the quarter on both systems is given (792k for D* and 794k for E* in Q3).

Compounding hurts both systems. My statement only needs two more words ... "And by that measure E* is keeping many subscribers now. Even with that 1.94% rate E* is keeping more than 98% of it's subs _each month_."

E* started this year with 13.105 million subscribers, lost 2.054m (15.6%).
They now have 13.695m (Sept 30th, a 4.5% gain in 9 months).
D* started this year with 15.953 million subscribers, lost 2.258m (14.2%).
They now have 16.556m (Sept 30th, a 3.8% gain in 9 months).

Are numbers fun, or what!


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:


> They are monthly averages as calculated by E* and D* (respectively). The actual number of subscribers lost for the quarter on both systems is given (792k for D* and 794k for E* in Q3).
> 
> Compounding hurts both systems. My statement only needs two more words ... "And by that measure E* is keeping many subscribers now. Even with that 1.94% rate E* is keeping more than 98% of it's subs _each month_."
> 
> E* started this year with 13.105 million subscribers, lost 2.054m (15.6%).
> They now have 13.695m (Sept 30th, a 4.5% gain in 9 months).
> D* started this year with 15.953 million subscribers, lost 2.258m (14.2%).
> They now have 16.556m (Sept 30th, a 3.8% gain in 9 months).
> 
> Are numbers fun, or what!


it will be interesting to see this quarters numbers and the first quarter next year.... since D*'s new launches and if E* doesn't add anything by years end.


----------



## cartrivision

James Long said:


> They are monthly averages as calculated by E* and D* (respectively). The actual number of subscribers lost for the quarter on both systems is given (792k for D* and 794k for E* in Q3).
> 
> Compounding hurts both systems. My statement only needs two more words ... "And by that measure E* is keeping many subscribers now. Even with that 1.94% rate E* is keeping more than 98% of it's subs _each month_."


Yeah, but that's just a prettier way of saying that they will lose about a 1/4 of their subscribers in a year's time at the current churn rate, (and DirecTV will lose about 1/5 of their's). Of course, the real interesting story will be the numbers for the next couple of quarters which will show if DirecTV's massive HD rollout increases E*'s churn even further or helps DirecTV's.


----------



## James Long

In order for E* to lose 25% of their subscribers this year they will have to lose 1.22 million in the final quarter. Assuming that loss is equal each month and _zero net gain_, churn would have to jump higher than 2.97%.

If the net gain remains higher than zero each month they could still lose 25% of existing subscribers on the year and have a less than 2.9% churn. The only way that E* could lose 25% of existing subs in a year at 1.94% churn is if they ADD 21.6 million net subs.

Even if churn jumps as high as 2.5% E* would have to have a _net gain of 7.658 million_ to "lose" 25% of their January 1st subs in the year. (The magic of churn is that the lower the subscriber count the less people a percentage point reflects and the higher the "churn rate" must be to lose more subs.)

IF E* has ZERO gross additions and loses the 1.22 million needed to lose 25% of January 1st subs in the year their churn rate will be 3.07%.

So what is possible? E* losing 1.222 million subs in a quarter? Not with the churn rate from last quarter.


----------



## cartrivision

James Long said:


> In order for E* to lose 25% of their subscribers this year they will have to lose 1.22 million in the final quarter.


I wasn't talking about where they have been, I was talking about where they are heading, which is towards losing about one quarter of their subscribers over the next year if their churn rate doesn't improve.


----------



## jrb531

I think the HD PQ is pretty bad as is the SD quality but they are stuck between a rock and a hard place right now.

People want more channels "and" better PQ but right now they cannot do both so to add more channels means worse PQ.

Now I would much rather have 10 high quality HD channels over 20 channels compressed to all hell but only if I get to pick the 10 channels. LOL

Since I do not get to pick the channels I understand that they are trying to do the best they can right now with limited resources. Granted they are in this fix due to their own lack of forward thinking. Sure the launch delay is out of their control but had they put these birds up sooner the delay would not be an issue.

Fact is that they squandered their early lead in HD. They had to have some indication what D* was doing and either did not act fast enough or made a poor prediction about how fast HD would jump out of the fringe.

My beef with Dish has little to do with the HD channel count but more (as many of you all know) the lack of forward thinking in regard to HD, Fee and channel structure.

The way Dish does HD just does not make any sense for the future and not having multiple HD box plans that make sense is just crazy and yes I am reffering to the multiple box DVR fee.

It's almost like Dish does not expect people to ever want more than a single 622/722. This is thinking from a few years ago when the average person either had all SD sets or maybe a single HD set at best. The 622 with one HD and one SD output made perfect sense.

Today with many people having multiple HD sets the fee structure just does not make sense and the $20 HD fee is just plain stupid.

How would I do it?

Well stop thinking about SD vs HD. This is silly and a waste of bandwidth to broadcast a SD and HD channel. I would drop all SD channels in which an HD simucast is available and save the bandwidth. All HD channels would be placed in the proper package and the packages would be bumped up in price a few dollars to cover the extra cost.

I would then put the HD channels (ala Voom) in the highest package and this way you will get a ton of people bumping up their packages to the highest one to get all the HD.

It's a win-win for Dish. 

1. Each package would go up $5 so they would collect $15 (instead of $20 now) for people subscribing to all three packages.

2. Dish can claim they do not charge extra for HD

3. This would be a strong incentive for a ton of people (average person only subscribes to package #2) to bump up their subscription to Package #3 to get all the HD channels. This would help offset the lost $5

4. Yes they would take a small hit because they are charging $5 more per package but they can add that not HD is available to "all" subscribers (with new Mpeg4 boxes of course LOL) even if they do not have an HD set.

They could play up the "HD for everyone" big time to offset the $5 bump in packages. HD even on a SD set looks great.

Now take the space saved by no longer sending SD channels downstream if they have a duplicate HD channel could be used to add 1-2 more HD channels.

To me this would be forward thinking. Yes there would be some people who do not care about HD upset about having to pay $5 or $10 more but you could offset this by offering incentives to my giving a discount when you order more than one package.

Example:

$2 off if you order package #1 and #2
$4 off if you order all three packages.

The point is that this would secure the future and stop this stupid HD fee. Why not give HD to everyone with MPeg 4 boxes. You could grandfather in those who only have old Mepg 2 boxes if you want but everyone with a single Mpeg4 box would be moved to the new plan. They would ***** about the extra cost but they will get more channels and of much better quality... even if they only have SD sets.

-JB


----------



## vkristof

jrb531 said:


> The way Dish does HD just does not make any sense for the future and not having multiple HD box plans that make sense is just crazy and yes I am reffering to the multiple box DVR fee.
> 
> It's almost like Dish does not expect people to ever want more than a single 622/722. This is thinking from a few years ago when the average person either had all SD sets or maybe a single HD set at best. The 622 with one HD and one SD output made perfect sense.
> 
> Today with many people having multiple HD sets the fee structure just does not make sense and the $20 HD fee is just plain stupid.
> 
> -JB


I'm planning on upgrading to the VIP 622 and HD. I currently have two old Dish receivers.
What exactly do you mean by "not having multiple HD box plans that make sense is just crazy and yes I am reffering to the multiple box DVR fee"

Thanks.


----------



## James Long

cartrivision said:


> I wasn't talking about where they have been, I was talking about where they are heading, which is towards losing about one quarter of their subscribers over the next year if their churn rate doesn't improve.


But you're missing the math or I am missing the claim you are making.
If you are saying "if E* maintains a churn of 1.94% they will lose 25% of their subs in the next year" then -
That could happen in 15 months if there are ZERO customers added (and the fun part of that math is that it is an actual 25% reduction of customers).

IF E* maintains a churn of 1.94% and ADDS 460k gross customers per month they could also lose 25% of their existing customers in one year (and be very happy as they would be at 15.739 million customers, a 15% net GAIN for the year).

IF E* maintains a churn of 2.1% with a net gain of zero customers they would lose 25% of their existing customers in one year (and replace every single one).

In reality the churn rate is a result of losing customers ... not vice versa ... so IF E* continues to lose customers churn is likely to increase - even if E* replaces every customer lost or continues to grow (net adds in 3Q was 100k).

Is churn an important figure? Net loss and gain are more important. Adding customers is expensive. It would be nice for the company to be able to maintain the net subscriber level without paying for so many new subscribers. Other than that, churn is just a number as long as the customers are replaced.


----------



## James Long

jrb531 said:


> Well stop thinking about SD vs HD. This is silly and a waste of bandwidth to broadcast a SD and HD channel. I would drop all SD channels in which an HD simucast is available and save the bandwidth. All HD channels would be placed in the proper package and the packages would be bumped up in price a few dollars to cover the extra cost.


E* has over 13 million subscribers ... most of them with non-HD capable equipment (plus those who have HD capable in one or two rooms only). Dropping the SD versions would tick off MOST of their customer base. Not the best idea!

The conversion will come over time, but getting millions of receivers to market takes time.



> I would then put the HD channels (ala Voom) in the highest package and this way you will get a ton of people bumping up their packages to the highest one to get all the HD.


I would put Voom in AT100 (where it is). The channels are cheap for E*, not that big of a draw, help add to "channel counts" for the low end package and provide decent content not available elsewhere.

I believe people will buy AEP to get all the movie channels ... I don't see Voom as a reason to bump up to the next level. Voom is much more valuable to E* at AT100.



> They could play up the "HD for everyone" big time to offset the $5 bump in packages. HD even on a SD set looks great.


The last company who tried "HD for all" didn't do so well but they were before the curve.

I suspect the $15-$20 fee for HD will be around for the next few years.


----------



## DCSholtis

As of tomorrow you can add MSG HD and FSN NY HD to the list that D* will have that E* doesnt.


----------



## jrb531

vkristof said:


> I'm planning on upgrading to the VIP 622 and HD. I currently have two old Dish receivers.
> What exactly do you mean by "not having multiple HD box plans that make sense is just crazy and yes I am reffering to the multiple box DVR fee"
> 
> Thanks.


Dish charges a $6 per box rental fee and a $6 DVR fee for "EVERY" 622/722 you have.

D* charges a $5 per box rental fee and a $5 DVR fee "PER ACCOUNT: for every HD DVR you have.

Dish set this policy at a time when few people had HD or if they did they only had one HD set. Now that more people have multiple HD sets Dish wants to charge us $12 for each box while D* only charges $5.

This is very substantial and the more HD sets you have the worse it gets!

The "free" SD feed off a 622/722 is fine for SD sets but when you buy expensive HDTV's you do not want to feed it SD.

-JB


----------



## James Long

E* charges $5 for each receiver (after the first) or $6 if it is a HD receiver. (This is charged as a mirroring fee for owned receivers and a lease fee for leased receivers. Odd that the "lease" includes the mirror fee but it saves a few dollars. The FIRST receiver should not be charged the $5/$6 fee ... although E* has been known to do that when people upgrade from owned to leased via "Dish it Up" promotions.

The $6 DVR fee applies to most models ... generally the bigger and more current ones (SD 510, 522, 625 - HD 622, 722 among others). This fee was set BEFORE HD was a big thing (actually before HD was noticeable, if you go back to the 510).

A SD customer with multiple TVs and multiple DVRs will run into the same problem as a HD customer. Although there is a greater need for multiple HD DVRs in homes with multiple HD TVs.

The 2nd feed off of a two tuner receiver isn't "free" if you don't connect a phone line (or internet on the ViP DVRs). I'm about to take that away from my wife so I can have both tuners all to myself! It sure is nice having the second satellite tuner and dual buffers/PIP.


----------



## vkristof

JBR531/James Long, thanks.

One of the rcvrs I have is the original Dishplayer, and I think it gets billed as a regular box. Still has to get reset every once a while. I know the Dishplayer kept our bill lower than what it would be if we got a modern DVR from either sat provider.

I had forgotten about the D* multiple DVR price advantage...

Currently we have the house setup so that the second rcvr (RF remote) feeds other TVs via CH3 , so the VIP622 basically would do what we do NOW.

I can imagine that in the future, we might want to feed a second HDTV someplace else in the house, so this price difference is something to think about.

Decisions, decisions.


----------



## harsh

Mike D-CO5 said:


> Charlie Ergen and his Wife and partner Jim Defranco own most of the public stock in DISH or a majority . This entitles them to control the company and remain in the majority on any voting decisions by any board members too. This has been stated before in other threads.


With little to back it up. I believe this should help: http://dish.client.shareholder.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=950134-07-4916

Search for the words "principal stockholder".


----------



## jrb531

vkristof said:


> JBR531/James Long, thanks.
> 
> One of the rcvrs I have is the original Dishplayer, and I think it gets billed as a regular box. Still has to get reset every once a while. I know the Dishplayer kept our bill lower than what it would be if we got a modern DVR from either sat provider.
> 
> I had forgotten about the D* multiple DVR price advantage...
> 
> Currently we have the house setup so that the second rcvr (RF remote) feeds other TVs via CH3 , so the VIP622 basically would do what we do NOW.
> 
> I can imagine that in the future, we might want to feed a second HDTV someplace else in the house, so this price difference is something to think about.
> 
> Decisions, decisions.


This is how I had it setup for awhile when I only had one HDTV. I had the signal split all over the house because SD and PQ was not much of a concern aside from the one HDTV which had it's own 622.

Now that almost every set you buy is an HDTV set you want a box that can do "true" HD and not the shared 622/722 "free" downgraded HD so the issue with the DVR fee for every box is pure BS!

Dish needs to retune thier fees or they will start to bleed cutomers with multiple HD's. It's bad enough that D* charges less (for now LOL) for more HD channels but it really sticks you in the craw when Dish charges you $6 for every HD DVR and D* only charges $5 for as many HD DVR's as you want.

Even the rental fee is less with D* $5 vs $6 for each HD DVR.

I so wish Dish would redo their fees and bring them into the current age of HDTV's instead of thinking that the only people with more than one HDTV are rich people who don't care what their bill is.

What aggravated this to me is that I'm paying $20 a month for HD that I can only see on one HDTV. All the other sets cannot see HD because I will not get ripped off by paying BS DVR fees on multiple boxes.

I'm kind of stuck here... I already feel that the $20 is way too much for what they offer and the only way I can see HD on three of my HDTV's is to pay Dish another $24 a month (2 more 622/722's at $12 each - $6 DVR and $6 rental for each)

So in my eyes:

Dish:

1 HDTV = $20+$6+$6=$32
2 HDTV = $20+$6+$6+$6+$6=$44
3 HDTV = $20+$6+$6+$6+$6+$6+$6=$56

DirecTV

1 HDTV = $15+$5+$5=$25 ($7 savings)
2 HDTV = $15+$5+$5+$5=$30 ($14 savings)
3 HDTV = $15+$5+$5+$5+$5=$35 ($21 savings)

Yes there are a few angles to save a few dollars but it never comes close to filling the large gap.

I'm going to see if Dish will restructure this in the coming months or I will have a decision to make. I'm simple not going to get ripped off by Dish just because I have more than one HDTV. I suspect I'm not the only one with more than one HDTV and as time goes on more and more people are going to be asking Dish not only what does a single DVR fee pay for but why does every HD DVR box get charged a $6 fee and not a $5 fee per account (for as many HD DVR's as you own) like D*

-JB


----------



## texaswolf

harsh said:


> With little to back it up. I believe this should help: http://dish.client.shareholder.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=950134-07-4916
> 
> Search for the words "principal stockholder".


He owns 53.79%

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/12/FXHG.html


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Are we back to talking about fees again?

I thought this was the "what channels does DirecTV have that Dish doesn't that you want" thread?


----------



## msmith198025

HDMe said:


> Are we back to talking about fees again?
> 
> I thought this was the "what channels does DirecTV have that Dish doesn't that you want" thread?


+1


----------



## vkristof

HDMe said:


> Are we back to talking about fees again?
> 
> I thought this was the "what channels does DirecTV have that Dish doesn't that you want" thread?


Yes, but I did get my non-on-topic questions answered.

Thanks again.


----------



## texaswolf

HDMe said:


> Are we back to talking about fees again?
> 
> I thought this was the "what channels does DirecTV have that Dish doesn't that you want" thread?


Right! Here I'll make it easy:

Bravo HD
Cartoon Network HD
Country Music TV HD
MGM HD 
MTV HD 
Nickelodeon East HD 
FX HD 
SciFi HD 
Smithsonian HD 
Spike HD 
USA HD 
VH1 HD 
CNBC HD 
CNN HD 
Fox Business HD 
Weather Channel HD
Cinemax West HD 
HBO West HD 
Movie Channel HD 
Showtime West HD 
SHO Too HD 
Starz Comedy HD
Starz Edge HD 
Starz Kids and Family 
Starz West HD
CSNet New England HD 
FSN Bay Area 
Fuel TV HD 
NESN HD 
Speed Channel HD 
YES HD

That should about sum it up and cover anyone, right?


----------



## James Long

texaswolf said:


> That should about sum it up and cover anyone, right?


Except those who want *The Biography Channel* in HD.


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:


> Except those who want *The Biography Channel* in HD.


Man...D* has that TOO?!?....j/k:lol:


----------



## Richard King

Well done, Mr. Wolf. Now we can close this. :lol:


----------



## projectorguru

how about both need to get us HD, not a couple of channels that show HD sometimes, or crop/converte BS, but actual hd shows, no wonder Comcast is callin Direct out, all these supposed HD Channels, when a few are really only HD


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> how about both need to get us HD, not a couple of channels that show HD sometimes, or crop/converte BS, but actual hd shows, no wonder Comcast is callin Direct out, all these supposed HD Channels, when a few are really only HD


Most of them show HD every single day. And yes i mean "actual HD shows".


----------



## ScoBuck

msmith198025 said:


> Most of them show HD every single day. And yes i mean "actual HD shows".


Amazing how the same falsehood gets perpetrated over and over - while there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD, the rest ARE - and the rest equals a lot of channels and a lot of programming in HD.


----------



## msmith198025

ScoBuck said:


> Amazing how the same falsehood gets perpetrated over and over - while there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD, the rest ARE - and the rest equals a lot of channels and a lot of programming in HD.


i know. Most of it is done just to spread misinformation, and a few people honestly dont know. Not sure what group this particular poster falls into.


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Most of them show HD every single day. And yes i mean "actual HD shows".


Well there is a site about what HD content is on any channel, and it ain't alot


----------



## ScoBuck

To me - a lot is NOT showing the same 2 movies over and over and over and over. Didn't they ever hear of a DVR?


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> ... there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD


THANK YOU!

I'd put that in my signature if I was the type to have a signature with a quote in it. :lol:



ScoBuck said:


> To me - a lot is NOT showing the same 2 movies over and over and over and over. Didn't they ever hear of a DVR?


Spoken like someone who doesn't subscribe to the channels they are speaking about.


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Well there is a site about what HD content is on any channel, and it ain't alot


have you personally seen any of them, or are you going by what some site says?


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> Spoken like someone who doesn't subscribe to the channels they are speaking about.


The same could be said about the people who say there is little or no content on most of the channels D* added James


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> THANK YOU!
> 
> I'd put that in my signature if I was the type to have a signature with a quote in it. :lol:
> 
> .


I fail to see why him saying that would make an E* sub so happy. Its common knowledge that SOME (very few when you consider how many were added) dont have HD on them at THIS POINT.


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> have you personally seen any of them, or are you going by what some site says?


I personally see them everyday, cuz I left Dish and went to Direct, theres alot of channels that look better than SD, but not near the HD quality of shows like Discovery HD, or some of the Voom Channles


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> I personally see them everyday, cuz I left Dish and went to Direct, theres alot of channels that look better than SD, but not near the HD quality of shows like Discovery HD, or some of the Voom Channles


I can honestly think of only a few. Sci-fi, USA, FX, i am assuming these are some you are talking about? Some of the best HD available in terms of PQ on any provider. All of the premiums look great. NFL networks thursday night broadcast was according to many some of the best football they have seen. Big Ten network also puts out some of the best sports in HD out there. CNN, while some is upconverted, the HD portions are darn good also.

The only ones i can actually think of that havent had any HD are MTV, VH1, CMT, ect. about 8 or 9 out of 60-80(depends on how you want to count).


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> THANK YOU!
> 
> I'd put that in my signature if I was the type to have a signature with a quote in it. :lol:
> 
> Spoken like someone who doesn't subscribe to the channels they are speaking about.


Why is that JL - because I am not as BLINDLY loyal to my chosen provider as you? Or because having an honest discussion is impossible for you?

And regarding the not subscribing - you speak often of what you don't have - but let's not forgot - you are the know all, end all, be all. Of course thats when you're just posting, I am NOT questoning you in any official role.


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> I can honestly think of only a few. Sci-fi, USA, FX, i am assuming these are some you are talking about? Some of the best HD available in terms of PQ on any provider. All of the premiums look great. NFL networks thursday night broadcast was according to many some of the best football they have seen. Big Ten network also puts out some of the best sports in HD out there. CNN, while some is upconverted, the HD portions are darn good also.
> 
> The only ones i can actually think of that havent had any HD are MTV, VH1, CMT, ect. about 8 or 9 out of 60-80(depends on how you want to count).


I"m not talkin about channels that have absolutely no HD, I'm talkin about the ones you mentioned that Sometimes have HD, but not all the time, yes the NFL net has the best I've seen so far, but to me, you can't call an HD channel an HD channle if it only has "Some" hd content as you say, thats my deal, to me there is too many like this, I'm happy with the package, but I still wish these so called HD channels were HD 24/7, and thats not the case, so in my switch from Dish Net to Direct, I can honestly say its not much different to me, better? Maybe a little, but not as much as the hype. But I do like havin the locals in hd(primetime and games) so thats a huge advantage to me


----------



## ScoBuck

projectorguru said:


> I"m not talkin about channels that have absolutely no HD, I'm talkin about the ones you mentioned that Sometimes have HD, but not all the time, yes the NFL net has the best I've seen so far, but to me, you can't call an HD channel an HD channle if it only has "Some" hd content as you say, thats my deal, to me there is too many like this, I'm happy with the package, but I still wish these so called HD channels were HD 24/7, and thats not the case, so in my switch from Dish Net to Direct, I can honestly say its not much different to me, better? Maybe a little, but not as much as the hype. But I do like havin the locals in hd(primetime and games) so thats a huge advantage to me


ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX are barely 10 -12 hours of HD every day during the week. But having a large amount of HD channels generally gives a nice choice at almost any time of the day.


----------



## James Long

msmith198025 said:


> James Long said:
> 
> 
> 
> THANK YOU!
> 
> I'd put that in my signature if I was the type to have a signature with a quote in it. :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> I fail to see why him saying that would make an E* sub so happy. Its common knowledge that SOME (very few when you consider how many were added) dont have HD on them at THIS POINT.
Click to expand...

That is why I like the quote ... I assume that ScoBuck knows what he is talking about when he says ...


ScoBuck said:


> there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD


After constant requests for proof the "truth" (I assume) comes from ScoBuck.



ScoBuck said:


> Why is that JL - because I am not as BLINDLY loyal to my chosen provider as you? Or because having an honest discussion is impossible for you?


Try to stay away from the personal jabs ... as noted before, this is not an E* vs D* forum. Please remember where you are.

I'm happy to see it stated that, in your own words, "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD". Hopefully If I choose to mention that again no one will require proof and will just take your word for it ... "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD".


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> After constant requests for proof the "truth" (I assume) comes from ScoBuck.


I'm truly flattered.


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> I"m not talkin about channels that have absolutely no HD, I'm talkin about the ones you mentioned that Sometimes have HD, but not all the time, yes the NFL net has the best I've seen so far, but to me, you can't call an HD channel an HD channle if it only has "Some" hd content as you say, thats my deal, to me there is too many like this, I'm happy with the package, but I still wish these so called HD channels were HD 24/7, and thats not the case, so in my switch from Dish Net to Direct, I can honestly say its not much different to me, better? Maybe a little, but not as much as the hype. But I do like havin the locals in hd(primetime and games) so thats a huge advantage to me


Let me ask you this, in your mind is there a difference in A channel that shows say 6 hours a day of original non repeat programming and one that shows the same few movies over and over again. When you break it down to hours of non repeat shows shown per day it works out to about the same if not better in favor of the "part time" channel. Personally, i dont care if upconverted SD is on while im not home to watch it.

I guess we disagree on what is or is not considered an HD channel. To me, if it shows a few hours a day, or is called HD by the network itself(providing it shows some) then i count it. By your rationale there are very very few actual HD channels available at all.


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> That is why I like the quote ... I assume that ScoBuck knows what he is talking about when he says ...
> After constant requests for proof the "truth" (I assume) comes from ScoBuck.
> 
> Try to stay away from the personal jabs ... as noted before, this is not an E* vs D* forum. Please remember where you are.
> 
> I'm happy to see it stated that, in your own words, "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD". Hopefully If I choose to mention that again no one will require proof and will just take your word for it ... "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD".


you mixed up my quotes james! gosh!!!!!!!!


----------



## James Long

Fixed ... 2nd level QUOTE requires a little more work - I grabbed the wrong post.


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> Fixed ... 2nd level QUOTE requires a little more work - I grabbed the wrong post.


thats much better


----------



## texaswolf

projectorguru said:


> no wonder Comcast is callin Direct out


which has ended them in court for "false advertising"



> I'm talkin about the ones you mentioned that Sometimes have HD, but not all the time


If they didn't count these channels as "HD" channels, both D* and E* would have far less channels, and the cable companies would be in the single digits as far as "true HD" goes. As a matter of fact, your locals wouldn't be considered "HD" either...since all of the content on them isn't HD...there are only of few channels that show all HD...all the time...like the Voom networks...but then you don't get up to date programing either. As far as I'm concerned, as long as the network shows it's "most popular" shows in HD..the shows that bring in most of it's ratings....then it's an "HD channel" since it does in fact....show HD programming.

Counting hours of HD to "qualify" a channel as HD .....is a joke


----------



## GrumpyBear

gopher_guy said:


> I'm currently with D* but can't get a CSR to spring a deal for me like many have already gotten. I am contemplating going to E*. I have looked and am trying to figure out what I'd be losing out on if I go to E*. I see FX mentioned and USA I never watch those. I don't subscribe to NFL Ticket anymore due to the high cost.
> 
> Is D* coming out with more stuff that E* won't have? Just trying to get as informed as possible.
> 
> What stations does D* have that you would like E* to carry?


Myself after much thought and reading the DirectTV forum, I decided D* didn't have anything I wanted. The extra HD channels would be great, but after playing with the HR20, and its interface, what good does it do to have the sports channels when you can't watch them the way you would like to. The Interface, of the D* DVR's going from a ViP was a HUGE let down. Can't believe they can't even include a simple thing like auto tune, and reading over the D* wish list items for their recievers, most of them are all ready included in the ViP Series. Decided that long before D* will address their subpar hardware, E* will have all the HD we can handle and then some.


----------



## texaswolf

GrumpyBear said:


> what good does it do to have the sports channels when you can't watch them the way you would like to.
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> How do you mean?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E* will have all the HD we can handle and then some.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think the issue is more "when"...so that people on the fence can decide if they want some of their favorite shows in HD ..now....or........?
Click to expand...


----------



## GrumpyBear

texaswolf said:


> GrumpyBear said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> How do you mean?
> 
> QUOTE]
> I live in San Diego, but I am from Seattle. Wife is a Charger Fan, and I of Course am a Seattle Fan. Do you know how much of the Seattle vs Phili game I missed, while popping in and watching the Charger game every so often? Zip, Nothing, ZERO. Was able to swap between them, paused the Seahawk game during commercials, and checked the Charger game. Rewind a little bit as lots was happening with the Chargers, but wife was in and out, and I of course wanted to the Hawks. During College season, its even better. Dual Tuner, pip Swap, is the way to go, for people into sports. Why watch a blowout or have to record blowout. When you can swap go to the good game, and keep an eye on the other one, and having an hr buffer incase something happened you want to see.
> E* has in motion already new Sat's to increase HD channels. D* has ignored its hardware, and not addressing any of the wishlist items.
Click to expand...


----------



## texaswolf

GrumpyBear said:


> texaswolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GrumpyBear said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> How do you mean?
> 
> QUOTE]
> I live in San Diego, but I am from Seattle. Wife is a Charger Fan, and I of Course am a Seattle Fan. Do you know how much of the Seattle vs Phili game I missed, while popping in and watching the Charger game every so often? Zip, Nothing, ZERO. Was able to swap between them, paused the Seahawk game during commercials, and checked the Charger game. Rewind a little bit as lots was happening with the Chargers, but wife was in and out, and I of course wanted to the Hawks. During College season, its even better. Dual Tuner, pip Swap, is the way to go, for people into sports. Why watch a blowout or have to record blowout. When you can swap go to the good game, and keep an eye on the other one, and having an hr buffer incase something happened you want to see.
> E* has in motion already new Sat's to increase HD channels. D* has ignored its hardware, and not addressing any of the wishlist items.
> 
> 
> 
> ok...gotcha. I wasn't sure what you meant earlier..yeah i love the pip/pause feature...was able to watch the mavs-bulls game and MNF at the same time. I love the 30 second skip ahead feature....if you time it right, as soon as the guy gets tackled, hit the skip ahead button and you go directly right before the next downs snap....can blow through all the extra stuff nice and easy....of course unless there is a penalty flag
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Stewart Vernon

texaswolf said:


> Counting hours of HD to "qualify" a channel as HD .....is a joke


Which is why it is a slippery slope to start bashing channels that have repeats too... because a repeat is just as unwatchable as SD to someone who only wants to watch new HD.

As for "only recent" stuff... I see lots of old repeated movies on the HD premiums like HBO/SHO and so forth... and some of them aren't even shown in actual HD on the HD channel.

I also mentioned in another thread how I've noticed HDNet Movies in recent months recycling movies that have been repeated on MonstersHD for a few months... and yet somehow HDNet doesn't get lumped into the same "too repetitive" group as the Vooms.

Network TV isn't HD most of the day either... so if we start only counting channels that have new shows/movies in HD without repeats... we will have a very easy count to make. Which is why it seems pointless to argue "my HD channel is better than yours" for most of the reasons thrown around.

About the only valid argument that everyone *should* agree on is that TBSHD is virtually never HD since baseball season ended.


----------



## GrumpyBear

HDMe said:


> Which is why it is a slippery slope to start bashing channels that have repeats too... because a repeat is just as unwatchable as SD to someone who only wants to watch new HD.
> 
> As for "only recent" stuff... I see lots of old repeated movies on the HD premiums like HBO/SHO and so forth... and some of them aren't even shown in actual HD on the HD channel.
> 
> I also mentioned in another thread how I've noticed HDNet Movies in recent months recycling movies that have been repeated on MonstersHD for a few months... and yet somehow HDNet doesn't get lumped into the same "too repetitive" group as the Vooms.
> 
> Network TV isn't HD most of the day either... so if we start only counting channels that have new shows/movies in HD without repeats... we will have a very easy count to make. Which is why it seems pointless to argue "my HD channel is better than yours" for most of the reasons thrown around.
> 
> About the only valid argument that everyone *should* agree on is that TBSHD is virtually never HD since baseball season ended.


I will only agree with that if you through in TNTHD as well.:hurah: :lol: :grin:


----------



## James Long

It would be interesting to figure out just how much of the broadcast day is in HD on the networks. What actually comes from the network seems to be more likely to be in HD than not (morning shows, midday soaps, evening news, prime time and late night). The better affiliates are airing some syndicated programs and local news in HD. If the networks have not reached "half" of the 24 hour day the certainly are close. They certainly have done well at making more than half of network provided content HD.

There is no such thing as 24/7 no repeat HD but there are certainly channels that are doing a lot better than others.


----------



## HobbyTalk

Not sure how accurate this is - http://whereishd.com

CBS 27% 
NBC 38% 
ABC 21% 
FOX 9%


----------



## texaswolf

HDMe said:


> Which is why it is a slippery slope to start bashing channels that have repeats too... because a repeat is just as unwatchable as SD to someone who only wants to watch new HD.
> 
> As for "only recent" stuff... I see lots of old repeated movies on the HD premiums like HBO/SHO and so forth... and some of them aren't even shown in actual HD on the HD channel.
> 
> I also mentioned in another thread how I've noticed HDNet Movies in recent months recycling movies that have been repeated on MonstersHD for a few months... and yet somehow HDNet doesn't get lumped into the same "too repetitive" group as the Vooms.
> 
> Network TV isn't HD most of the day either... so if we start only counting channels that have new shows/movies in HD without repeats... we will have a very easy count to make. Which is why it seems pointless to argue "my HD channel is better than yours" for most of the reasons thrown around.
> 
> About the only valid argument that everyone *should* agree on is that TBSHD is virtually never HD since baseball season ended.


I dont mind that movie channels show repeats (including monster)...that is what there there for...i would enjoy Gameplay more if they weren't showing things from 2004...i quick flip through the week on the other voom channels showed the same...mostly everything was dated...thats what i was talking about...not movie channels. The thing i like about HDNET, is they will take shows that were canceled, that a lot of people seemed to like, and will replay the seasons...i think thats pretty cool


----------



## James Long

HobbyTalk said:


> Not sure how accurate this is - http://whereishd.com
> 
> CBS 27%
> NBC 38%
> ABC 21%
> FOX 9%


Based on some of the other percentages I would not 100% trust that site.


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:


> Based on some of the other percentages I would not 100% trust that site.


maybe NBC? I think they're morning shows, news, and most evening shows are HD...right?


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Let me ask you this, in your mind is there a difference in A channel that shows say 6 hours a day of original non repeat programming and one that shows the same few movies over and over again. When you break it down to hours of non repeat shows shown per day it works out to about the same if not better in favor of the "part time" channel. Personally, i dont care if upconverted SD is on while im not home to watch it.
> 
> I guess we disagree on what is or is not considered an HD channel. To me, if it shows a few hours a day, or is called HD by the network itself(providing it shows some) then i count it. By your rationale there are very very few actual HD channels available at all.


Thats correct, the only thing I can say for watchin HD, is usin the HDDVR to record shows and watch them in the evening, without the DVR theres not a whole lot there full time to watch. I watch more Blue ray movies than tv right now, I've been buyin them up like a mad man. Again, I don't want to sound like I'm not happy with Direct, I am, but as far as HD goes, i like some channels, but not all the ones I have. And one more thing I would rather watch repeat HD shows than upconverts


----------



## projectorguru

.

Counting hours of HD to "qualify" a channel as HD .....is a joke[/QUOTE]

To you it is, to me its not a joke at all, if I go home and turn on Speed expecting that it is Speed HD, and its not in HD, then I do not call it a HD channel, why?

CUZ ITS NOT IN HD!!!!! when I came over to Direct, i was kinda let down, cuz I expected all these HD channels, but after scrolling through, I thought hmmm, there really isn't as much HD as I thought there would be,:eek2:


----------



## msmith198025

texaswolf said:


> Counting hours of HD to "qualify" a channel as HD .....is a joke


I agree


----------



## msmith198025

Project, by your reasoning how many actual HD channels do you count? 4? 5? Or does your count change from day to day when you happen to turn on a channel thats playing HD at 2:45p.m. today that wasnt playing HD at 2:45 p.m. yesterday?


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Project, by your reasoning how many actual HD channels do you count? 4? 5? Or does your count change from day to day when you happen to turn on a channel thats playing HD at 2:45p.m. today that wasnt playing HD at 2:45 p.m. yesterday?


By My count 5, my package says I have 42 HD channels(excluding locals), I had 39 with Dish net. with Dishnet, I counted 8(cuz of Voom channels) so yeah there is some content on all channels that I record in somewhat HD, but when I sit down to watch tv, its mostly recorded stuff in HD, I really only watch about 5 channels regularly in HD, and some sports and stuff on weekends on the locals


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> By My count 5, my package says I have 42 HD channels(excluding locals), I had 39 with Dish net. with Dishnet, I counted 8(cuz of Voom channels) so yeah there is some content on all channels that I record in somewhat HD, but when I sit down to watch tv, its mostly recorded stuff in HD, I really only watch about 5 channels regularly in HD, and some sports and stuff on weekends on the locals


which 5 do you count?


----------



## projectorguru

discover hd theatre, HDNET, MHD,Food,NFL, for the most part. and even those are questionable


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> discover hd theatre, HDNET, MHD,Food,NFL, for the most part. and even those are questionable


What about smithsonian? You are getting it right now arent you?
And if you are counting NFL, shouldnt you count NBA?


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> What about smithsonian? You are getting it right now arent you?
> And if you are counting NFL, shouldnt you count NBA?


Smithsonian I saw a few times, but it wasn't HD, NBA I didn't know I had, or if I do


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Smithsonian I saw a few times, but it wasn't HD, NBA I didn't know I had, or if I do


I havent watched smithsonian much, but every time i did it was HD. What makes you think it wasnt?

Not sure about NBA, I have it in the Plus HD DVR package, but see it only offered in premier on the D* webpage. NHL is another one, offered in choice extra and above

A few others, CNBC hd, Fox buisiness HD, Big Ten HD.


----------



## James Long

msmith198025 said:


> What about smithsonian? You are getting it right now arent you?
> And if you are counting NFL, shouldnt you count NBA?


Remember, it is a list of HD that projectorguru cares about ... there are a lot of channels on the system, I don't know anyone who cares about *all* 300+ of them (HD/SD/Audio).


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> Remember, it is a list of HD that projectorguru cares about ... there are a lot of channels on the system, I don't know anyone who cares about *all* 300+ of them (HD/SD/Audio).


THAT I understand, just trying to get a feeling for his qualifications, because some of it doesnt add up to me. He can count one and it wont effect me personally, I just like to know. Im a curious fella


----------



## projectorguru

James Long said:


> Remember, it is a list of HD that projectorguru cares about ... there are a lot of channels on the system, I don't know anyone who cares about *all* 300+ of them (HD/SD/Audio).


Thank You James, thats what I'm talkin about. Smithsonian was listed( no I don't have a link, but it was on EngadgetHD when launched) at several hours of HD a day. Its more noticeable on my 110 inch screen when you see the wavyness on the picture top and bottom, but anyway back to the topic of what gives what in my mind Dish net gave ME more hd as far as how I count HD channels, I was happy with Dish net, and I'm happy now with Direct, Both are about equal in my mind overall, cuz they both give each individual an advantage over the other, for me its watchin football in HD on the locals(I had no locals HD with Dish net)


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Both are about equal in my mind overall, cuz they both give each individual an advantage over the other, for me its watchin football in HD on the locals(I had no locals HD with Dish net)


 On a non HD channel though right?

fair enough


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> On a non HD channel though right?
> 
> fair enough


Yes, the difference here is is sports, which I had none b4, after the game is over, guess what? NO HD


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Yes, the difference here is is sports, which I had none b4, after the game is over, guess what? NO HD


Wait, locals show more HD than just sports.(even though thats mainly why i consider them must haves)


----------



## RealityCheck

Gettng back on topic - you can now add MSG-HD and FSNY-HD to the list of ECHOSTAR HD deficiencies.

Man, they are getting their hi-tech butt kicked.


----------



## James Long

Neither channel's major sports available in my area due to blackout rules ... no loss, no gain.


----------



## RealityCheck

But it means that HD games carried on those channels of the Knicks, Devils, Islanders, and Rangers are now able to be carried with the NHL and NBA packages - those are not available on ECHOSTAR now. 

You could get them if you were a sports package customer and DISH had those networks live on the system. It is indeed a major loss as I see it.

Every week its more and more ECHOSTAR kool-aid excuses.


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Wait, locals show more HD than just sports.(even though thats mainly why i consider them must haves)


Maybe where you live, for me my locals are hd, after 8PM or special events such as sports or a parade or somethin', as soon as an event ends the next show or rerun will be SD


----------



## projectorguru

RealityCheck said:


> Gettng back on topic - you can now add MSG-HD and FSNY-HD to the list of ECHOSTAR HD deficiencies.
> 
> Man, they are getting their hi-tech butt kicked.


yeah except they are balcked out for me


----------



## Hound

RealityCheck said:


> Gettng back on topic - you can now add MSG-HD and FSNY-HD to the list of ECHOSTAR HD deficiencies.
> 
> Man, they are getting their hi-tech butt kicked.


Well these are two channels that I would want, because they are my only RSNs
with E* and I sub to NHL CI and NBA LP. So I would want all RSNs in HD.
Since E* has MSG HD, FSNNY HD, FSNBA HD and CSNNE HD uplinked and mapped
to the SD channel, I suppose it is just a matter of time and bandwidth before E* turns them on. FX, Sci Fi, USA, CNN, etc. will be coming to E* as well. Comcast is starting to add these channels (except FX). I have so much HD now to watch, I have learned to be patient. In April, I will reevalute all four of my available MVPs.


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Maybe where you live, for me my locals are hd, after 8PM or special events such as sports or a parade or somethin', as soon as an event ends the next show or rerun will be SD


Well i didnt mean the whole day was, but generally the morning and evening news(on some channels), most sports and special events, and primetime shows are in HD


----------



## paulman182

I'm pretty sure Smithsonian is showing nothing but real HD.

That was the intent when it was launched.

It also makes it very repetitive, for now.


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Well i didnt mean the whole day was, but generally the morning and evening news(on some channels), most sports and special events, and primetime shows are in HD


??????? where have you been the past numberous posts? thats my point


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Yes, the difference here is is sports, which I had none b4, after the game is over, guess what? NO HD





projectorguru said:


> ??????? where have you been the past numberous posts? thats my point


I thought your point was NO HD other than sports on your locals, as shown in this quote. Sure you cleared it up somewhat after a few posts, i was simply saying that there was more HD than simply sports on the local channels.


----------



## msmith198025

paulman182 said:


> I'm pretty sure Smithsonian is showing nothing but real HD.
> 
> That was the intent when it was launched.
> 
> It also makes it very repetitive, for now.


Thats all ive seen on it, however as i said, i havent watched it 24/7


----------



## texaswolf

> To you it is, to me its not a joke at all, if I go home and turn on Speed expecting that it is Speed HD, and its not in HD, then I do not call it a HD channel, why?
> 
> CUZ ITS NOT IN HD!!!!! when I came over to Direct, i was kinda let down, cuz I expected all these HD channels, but after scrolling through, I thought hmmm, there really isn't as much HD as I thought there would be,:eek2:


ok...so then by your logic....when something is in HD on speed or any channel....is it still...NOT HD? It's pretty simple really...if a channel broadcast shows in HD...guess what...it...is...an...HD channel....because it broadcast HD content. I'm not sure how you can turn to a channel that has HD shows right in front of you, and exclaim it is not HD. Now I can turn to SciFi as an E* sub and claim...it is not an HD channel...because at no time will there be HD broadcasted on it...once they add the HD version, i will be able to call it an HD channel.

I think a more appropriate title for the channels you are talking about are "not 100% HD"...and then continue with the "hour count" and add what ever percentage you want to the title. Because a channel isn't showing you as much HD as you would like, simply doesn't disqualify it from being an HD channel.


----------



## GrumpyBear

I think we are back to the upconverted SD content, and calling it HD. It will still look better than SD, but its NOT HD. I would rather have some more upconverted SD Content, then nothing at all though.


----------



## projectorguru

texaswolf said:


> ok...so then by your logic....when something is in HD on speed or any channel....is it still...NOT HD? It's pretty simple really...if a channel broadcast shows in HD...guess what...it...is...an...HD channel....because it broadcast HD content. I'm not sure how you can turn to a channel that has HD shows right in front of you, and exclaim it is not HD. Now I can turn to SciFi as an E* sub and claim...it is not an HD channel...because at no time will there be HD broadcasted on it...once they add the HD version, i will be able to call it an HD channel.
> 
> I think a more appropriate title for the channels you are talking about are not 100% HD...and then continue with the "hour count" and add what ever percentage you want to the title. Because a channel isn't showing you as much HD as you would like, simply doesn't disqualify it from being an HD channel.


Ok so MTV is a music channel to you even though it hardly ever is about music anymore, thats fine your opinion, NOT MINE. MTV is NOT a music channel to me, as is SPEEDHD is NOT an HD channel to me, yes SOME programs are in HD, but that is called HDCONTENT. The funnything to me is, on these type of boards where everyone is an expert you have the gurus who are so happy with all the butt kickin that Direct is givin Dish in the HD Market, but yet, when I talk to people on the street(normal ave joes) and at the Visual Apex type of places, many people are talkin about this same thing, its an hd channel, yet its stretched, wavey, sometimes fuzzy, that would be like watchin a blueray, and some of the dvds were stretched, fuzzy on the edges, how many people would call them blue rays then? Your opinion is fine, but its not status quo like ya think it is


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> yes SOME programs are in HD, but that is called HDCONTENT.


How do you broadcast HD content if you dont have the HD channel to do it?


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> How do you broadcast HD content if you dont have the HD channel to do it?


I don't know, how do you broadcast sd content on an "HD Channle" ?

Nuff said on this subject, pheeeeeeeeeew!


----------



## tomcrown1

I want FOXHD period and of course all HD channels that are out their---

Welcome to Dish the new AT&T


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> I don't know, how do you broadcast sd content on an "HD Channle" ?
> 
> Nuff said on this subject, pheeeeeeeeeew!


Easy enough to upconvert to an HD resolution, and yes some is.
However there is NO way to broadcast HD on anything other than an HD channel.

Haha, getting tired?


----------



## jgurley

Directv just announced the addition of 11 new local HD markets by mid-2008.

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/2007/12/directv_to_deli.php

Sorry if this info has already been posted.


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Easy enough to upconvert to an HD resolution, and yes some is.
> However there is NO way to broadcast HD on anything other than an HD channel.
> 
> Haha, getting tired?


Not really, just bored, talkin about HD is exciting, but watchin it is a different story unless its blue ray


----------



## jrb531

projectorguru said:


> Not really, just bored, talkin about HD is exciting, but watchin it is a different story unless its blue ray


Forger Blu-Ray... I'm banking on HD DVD. Anything that messes with Sony's proprietary BS is good news to me.

If not for the PS3 then this would be over now.

-JB


----------



## GrumpyBear

jrb531 said:


> Forger Blu-Ray... I'm banking on HD DVD. Anything that messes with Sony's proprietary BS is good news to me.
> 
> If not for the PS3 then this would be over now.
> 
> -JB


There are some good shows, in HD, most of the major Networks, have all their primetime shows in HD. You can ALMOST count on a sports show being in HD, but every so often, its a local HD Channel and the game is 4:3 and SD. A HD channel sending out UPconverted SD content is still going to look a LOT better than a SD Channel. We have no choice, but to just wait for more HD Content, that has nothing to do with HD Channel lineup.

As for the PS3, even with a price drop, xmas around the corner its still in 3rd place, trailing #1 Wii (Getting one this year) and XBox360. They will have to drop the price again, to gain ground. Granted Wii's wont becoming down in price, and they have NO HD ANYTHING.


----------



## projectorguru

GrumpyBear said:


> There are some good shows, in HD, most of the major Networks, have all their primetime shows in HD. You can ALMOST count on a sports show being in HD, but every so often, its a local HD Channel and the game is 4:3 and SD. A HD channel sending out UPconverted SD content is still going to look a LOT better than a SD Channel. We have no choice, but to just wait for more HD Content, that has nothing to do with HD Channel lineup.
> 
> As for the PS3, even with a price drop, xmas around the corner its still in 3rd place, trailing #1 Wii (Getting one this year) and XBox360. They will have to drop the price again, to gain ground. Granted Wii's wont becoming down in price, and they have NO HD ANYTHING.


I'm on the Wii bandwagon myself, this Jan they are goin HD, maybe, but thats the rumors


----------



## Hound

jrb531 said:


> Forger Blu-Ray... I'm banking on HD DVD. Anything that messes with Sony's proprietary BS is good news to me.
> 
> If not for the PS3 then this would be over now.
> 
> -JB


Do not agree, the HD DVD players available can only output 1080i on the majority
of 1080P tv sets. There are Blu Ray players that output 1080P on virtually all
1080P sets. e.g. none of the Toshiba HD DVD players output 1080P on a
Panasonic Plasma.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Hound said:


> Do not agree, the HD DVD players available can only output 1080i on the majority
> of 1080P tv sets. There are Blu Ray players that output 1080P on virtually all
> 1080P sets. e.g. none of the Toshiba HD DVD players output 1080P on a
> Panasonic Plasma.


I guess you need to be made aware of the
Toshiba HD-A35, will output 1080p on your Panasonic plasma. 
Output Resolution 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p

Granted D* nor E* carry it nor care about.

Granted there is lots of Debate about 720p vs1080p, and how big a TV you need to see 
any difference. 1080i? why even use it?(going to get flagged for that one)


----------



## projectorguru

GrumpyBear said:


> Granted D* nor E* carry it nor care about.


Way to throw in the back to topic phrase:lol:

I've had both HDDVD and blue ray, I'll stick with blue ray, much better imho


----------



## tomcrown1

:backtotop Please we have a tread on Blueray VS hddvd we do not need another one


----------



## projectorguru

tomcrown1 said:


> :backtotop Please we have a tread on Blueray VS hddvd we do not need another one


back to topic, ok, dish vs Direct? NAAAAA, they are still about the same, not much HD:lol:


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> back to topic, ok, dish vs Direct? NAAAAA, they are still about the same, not much HD:lol:


I guess it is not possible to please everyone


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> I guess it is not possible to please everyone


I didn't know I wasn't pleased until you just told me, bummer:nono2:


----------



## Hound

GrumpyBear said:


> I guess you need to be made aware of the
> Toshiba HD-A35, will output 1080p on your Panasonic plasma.
> Output Resolution 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
> 
> Granted D* nor E* carry it nor care about.
> 
> Granted there is lots of Debate about 720p vs1080p, and how big a TV you need to see
> any difference. 1080i? why even use it?(going to get flagged for that one)


No it does not. The HD-A35 only outputs 1080P at 24 MH. Panasonic Plasma
reads 1080P at 60MH. There are Blu Ray players that output 1080P at 24/60 MH,
but no HD DVD players. Now back to topic. We can continue on "At the Movies if
you want"


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> I didn't know I wasn't pleased until you just told me, bummer:nono2:


Didnt mean to bum you out, but you had to know:lol:


----------



## Mikey

If you said "SciFi-HD" and "USA-HD", look for them to be up by next week. Dish uplinked both today, and my guess is that Charlie will make them one of his talking points for the Monday night chat.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Hound said:


> No it does not. The HD-A35 only outputs 1080P at 24 MH. Panasonic Plasma
> reads 1080P at 60MH. There are Blu Ray players that output 1080P at 24/60 MH,
> but no HD DVD players. Now back to topic. We can continue on "At the Movies if
> you want"


I will have to find you at the movies.


----------



## James Long

msmith198025 said:


> I thought your point was NO HD other than sports on your locals, as shown in this quote. Sure you cleared it up somewhat after a few posts, i was simply saying that there was more HD than simply sports on the local channels.


There was no HD on that channel that he cares about, other than sports.

Relating that to the other channels ... one sees a "HD" channel in their guide - one sees a program that they want to watch on that HD channel - one tunes to that HD channel to watch and ... is greeted by upconvert/stretchovison/non-HD programming. Does it matter that there is an hour of programming at some other time of day or some other day of the week in HD? No. As far as "one" is concerned there is no HD on that channel.



texaswolf said:


> Because a channel isn't showing you as much HD as you would like, simply doesn't disqualify it from being an HD channel.


In this very personal thread it does. If I don't care if CNN is in HD or not it doesn't matter if CNN is in HD 24/7 or not. It isn't a "channel that D* has and E* doesn't that I really want".

This thread isn't about how deep the ocean is ... it is whether or not that ocean contains the few drops of water that one is interested in having.



Mikey said:


> If you said "SciFi-HD" and "USA-HD", look for them to be up by next week. Dish uplinked both today, and my guess is that Charlie will make them one of his talking points for the Monday night chat.


Good. I hope that they are worth the bandwidth. There are good shows on both channels.


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:
 

> There was no HD on that channel that he cares about, other than sports.
> 
> Relating that to the other channels ... one sees a "HD" channel in their guide - one sees a program that they want to watch on that HD channel - one tunes to that HD channel to watch and ... is greeted by upconvert/stretchovison/non-HD programming. Does it matter that there is an hour of programming at some other time of day or some other day of the week in HD? No. As far as "one" is concerned there is no HD on that channel.
> 
> In this very personal thread it does. If I don't care if CNN is in HD or not it doesn't matter if CNN is in HD 24/7 or not. It isn't a "channel that D* has and E* doesn't that I really want".
> 
> This thread isn't about how deep the ocean is ... it is whether or not that ocean contains the few drops of water that one is interested in having.
> 
> Good. I hope that they are worth the bandwidth. There are good shows on both channels.


which HD channel shows a broad casted HD show in stretch o vision...besides tnt or tbs...which we are all aware of...if the show is not broad casted in HD...it wont be shown in HD...here I'll make it even simpler...thursday night on NBC...Earl, 30 rock, and the Office are in HD, yet Scrubs isn't...is that because NBC is not HD? No. It's because the show wasn't done in HD...it sucks, but that is the reality of it....try looking at the HD label as "shows broad casted in HD, will be presented in HD, on this channel"....the other alternative is to cancel HD service if your bothered by it, and enjoy the great SD quality

As far as the Blue Ray/ HDdvd thing...$ony will be the downfall of it...just ask Disney, who recently voted yes on HDdvd's 51GB...which caused a lot unrest at the BR camp....I dont think they will go HDdvd only as Paramount/Dreamworks did when they dropped Blue ray, but i have a feeling they may look at using both.


----------



## James Long

texaswolf said:


> which HD channel shows a broad casted HD show in stretch o vision...besides tnt or tbs...which we are all aware of...if the show is not broad casted in HD...it wont be shown in HD...


TBS and TNT are the worst offenders and pushers of fake HD ... unfortunately their practice has grown.

My local NBC is one of the local stations that has made the mistake of distorting SD to "fill the screen" on their HD channel when HD isn't available. The rest of my local digitals are purists when it comes to aspect ratios. Yeah, the signal reaching my receiver and TV's tuner is a glorious OTA 1080i ... so in that sense it is HD. But it's not real HD. Just a facade.

On an individual basis (each customer for themselves) the channels might as well be in SD if the programs they want to see are not in HD. Providers are not advertising "higher quality SD for $9.99 / $20 more per month". They are advertising HD. Deliver it.

Get us away from the day where when talking about HD channels one can say "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD".


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:


> TBS and TNT are the worst offenders and pushers of fake HD ... unfortunately their practice has grown.
> 
> My local NBC is one of the local stations that has made the mistake of distorting SD to "fill the screen" on their HD channel when HD isn't available. The rest of my local digitals are purists when it comes to aspect ratios. Yeah, the signal reaching my receiver and TV's tuner is a glorious OTA 1080i ... so in that sense it is HD. But it's not real HD. Just a facade.
> 
> On an individual basis (each customer for themselves) the channels might as well be in SD if the programs they want to see are not in HD. Providers are not advertising "higher quality SD for $9.99 / $20 more per month". They are advertising HD. Deliver it.
> 
> Get us away from the day where when talking about HD channels one can say "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD".


my local channels haven't done that...if it's not done in HD it has bars. I think trying to blame providers for not offering all shows on a "HD" labeled channel in HD is silly. Is it E* or D*s fault that certain show aren't done in HD? Nope. Do they not label it HD and only show the sd version because some shows aren't done in HD...I don't think so...like i said earlier...it means shows available in HD...will be shown in HD..it's not that hard to figure out.

I pay my $20 for my HD...but if a HD channel has a non HD show on it...I don't curse E* for it...i say, damn why didn't they do this in HD.

By the way, why dont we have a E* vs D* warzone area, so threads like this and all the channel count threads can be posted there...then move any that are started here to that area? It only makes sense....keep the arguments out of here...and would save a lot of thread killing time.


----------



## James Long

texaswolf said:


> I pay my $20 for my HD...but if a HD channel has a non HD show on it...I don't curse E* for it...i say, damn why didn't they do this in HD.


That's you ... and perhaps an enlightened opinion. Scroll back a few months (before D*'s carriage was worth comparing) and you'll see all sorts of complaints about A&E. Prior to it's addition you will see complaints about E* not adding it and after it's addition you will see complaints about E* adding it because of the lack of HD. We pay E* for HD ... we don't pay A&E. So they often get the blame for the quality of the channels they choose to charge us for.



> By the way, why dont we have a E* vs D* warzone area, so threads like this and all the channel count threads can be posted there...then move any that are started here to that area? It only makes sense....keep the arguments out of here...and would save a lot of thread killing time.


We don't want a war. My personal preference is to bit bucket most of these threads ... especially when the same posts get made in every thread. No one wins in a war zone ... people just get further entrenched in their own opinion.

Why can't E* customers complain about their service and D* customers complain about their service in their own forums without someone wanting to start a war in nearly every thread? We don't need it.


----------



## phrelin

James Long said:


> We don't want a war. My personal preference is to bit bucket most of these threads ... especially when the same posts get made in every thread. No one wins in a war zone ... people just get further entrenched in their own opinion.
> 
> Why can't E* customers complain about their service and D* customers complain about their service in their own forums without someone wanting to start a war in nearly every thread? We don't need it.


Excellent points. So there's 222 posts on this thread which is a sign....


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> There was no HD on that channel that he cares about, other than sports.
> 
> .


As shown by the quote i used, that isnt what he said


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> On an individual basis (each customer for themselves) the channels might as well be in SD if the programs they want to see are not in HD. Providers are not advertising "higher quality SD for $9.99 / $20 more per month". They are advertising HD. Deliver it.
> 
> ".


Thats just it James, personal opinions aside, they are delivering it. D*/E* has no control over what shows are shot in HD


----------



## projectorguru

texaswolf said:


> my local channels haven't done that...if it's not done in HD it has bars. I think trying to blame providers for not offering all shows on a "HD" labeled channel in HD is silly. Is it E* or D*s fault that certain show aren't done in HD? Nope. Do they not label it HD and only show the sd version because some shows aren't done in HD...I don't think so...like i said earlier...it means shows available in HD...will be shown in HD..it's not that hard to figure out.
> 
> I pay my $20 for my HD...but if a HD channel has a non HD show on it...I don't curse E* for it...i say, damn why didn't they do this in HD.
> 
> By the way, why dont we have a E* vs D* warzone area, so threads like this and all the channel count threads can be posted there...then move any that are started here to that area? It only makes sense....keep the arguments out of here...and would save a lot of thread killing time.


?????? If you are implying me about the war, its not me, I like both Dish and Direct about equal, both have advantages over the other, but to me theres no CLEAR winner. You asked about which channels show stretch/upconvert ect. Discovery is one for sure(not hd theatre), all my locals do it now for some shows, there are many other channels that do it also, not all the time though, James hit the nail on the head, when I see a HD CHANNEL, and a show I like and I turn it on and I see its not exactly HD, I usually turn it off, again I am a big BLUE RAY fan, I have probly 40-50 movies, and its very disappointing goin from that to the supposed HD CHANNELS. No I would not cancel and goto no HD, like I said for the most part I pick what shows I want and record them on the DVR, which is good for me.

JAMES, were not realted are we?:lol:


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Thats just it James, personal opinions aside, they are delivering it. D*/E* has no control over what shows are shot in HD


NO CONTROL? How about when they do a contract to carry the shows, they make sure that it will HD? Just a thought


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> NO CONTROL? How about when they do a contract to carry the shows, they make sure that it will HD? Just a thought


They cant carry JUST the shows, they agree to carry the channel. So yes, as far as whats being put on the channel, they have no control over it.

With your plan there would be few or no HD channels offered and people would really really complain. "My show is shot in HD, but stupid D*/E* wont let me see it because some other shows on the same channel arent in HD."


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> With your plan there would be few or no HD channels offered and people would really really complain. "My show is shot in HD, but stupid D*/E* wont let me see it because some other shows on the same channel arent in HD."


no HD channels yes, people complain no matter what, I however, would rather have, say 10, 24/7 HD programs rather than 40 20% HD Channels


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> no HD channels yes, people complain no matter what, I however, would rather have, say 10, 24/7 HD programs rather than 40 20% HD Channels


If the shows i wanted to watch were on them, i would have no problem with that. However what i watch is so varied and on so many different networks it wouldnt work for me, or 90% of people i would guess.


----------



## James Long

msmith198025 said:


> Thats just it James, personal opinions aside, they are delivering it. D*/E* has no control over what shows are shot in HD


But they do control their advertising of those channels. It is the provider that is telling the customer that the channel is in HD ... with no obscure footnote saying "portions of this channel's programming is upconverted" or similar. The providers have footnote disclaimers for other issues - why not be honest and say "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD".



msmith198025 said:


> With your plan there would be few or no HD channels offered and people would really really complain. "My show is shot in HD, but stupid D*/E* wont let me see it because some other shows on the same channel arent in HD."


D* seems to have pushed forward with channels before there was a show on that channel in HD. Perhaps if D* would have stood firm and said that they would not sell a channel as HD unless there was a threshold amount of HD on that channel the programmer would be encouraged to get more HD programming? Instead D* provided an easy way out ... selling SD as HD and being proud of it.

It comes down to a difference of opinion over which encouragement works best ... A hard line "we won't carry your alleged HD channel until it has 10% or 25% HD content" or a softer "we'll give you a signal path and hope you eventually use it for HD". HD channels without _any_ HD are a sign of a conspiracy to defraud between programmer and provider.

Non-HD HD channels is just another form of HD Lite ... but since that name is taken perhaps we should just drop a letter and call the questionable channels "HD lie".


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I will say something good and bad about DirecTV here...

It was good that they upped their capacity and pressured programmers to provide more HD signals. It was bad, however, that DirecTV didn't use their position to force more HD programming on those channels before they agreed to pick them up. DirecTV could have used their enhanced capacity to "shame" channels into not only providing HD signals but more actual HD programming on them.

The end result, I think, is DirecTV did force a lot of programmers to provide HD source well before they intended to do so otherwise... but if they keep to their back-burner HD-isn't-that-important-yet plan, then we haven't gained as much as we could have.

It is true DirecTV helped launched some good channels too... I just wish the pressure could have been applied to greater results.


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> But they do control their advertising of those channels. It is the provider that is telling the customer that the channel is in HD ... with no obscure footnote saying "portions of this channel's programming is upconverted" or similar. The providers have footnote disclaimers for other issues - why not be honest and say "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD".
> 
> D* seems to have pushed forward with channels before there was a show on that channel in HD. Perhaps if D* would have stood firm and said that they would not sell a channel as HD unless there was a threshold amount of HD on that channel the programmer would be encouraged to get more HD programming? Instead D* provided an easy way out ... selling SD as HD and being proud of it.
> 
> It comes down to a difference of opinion over which encouragement works best ... A hard line "we won't carry your alleged HD channel until it has 10% or 25% HD content" or a softer "we'll give you a signal path and hope you eventually use it for HD". HD channels without _any_ HD are a sign of a conspiracy to defraud between programmer and provider.
> 
> Non-HD HD channels is just another form of HD Lite ... but since that name is taken perhaps we should just drop a letter and call the questionable channels "HD lie".


Again, you are talking about a small minority of the channels in this argument. A part of the argument that myself and Sco already admitted you were right over. Remember? You got so happy! The part we are talking about now is whether to release the channel that has most all of the primetime shows that people watch the channel for anyway, in HD. OR to hold back and wait until EVERYTHING or the majority is in HD. Taking that route they would, IMO, never be released since many of them have to show reruns that werent shot in HD to begin with.

I cant honestly believe that you would think its a conspiracy to defraud. You seem too smart for that.


----------



## msmith198025

HDMe said:


> I will say something good and bad about DirecTV here...
> 
> It was good that they upped their capacity and pressured programmers to provide more HD signals. It was bad, however, that DirecTV didn't use their position to force more HD programming on those channels before they agreed to pick them up. DirecTV could have used their enhanced capacity to "shame" channels into not only providing HD signals but more actual HD programming on them.
> 
> The end result, I think, is DirecTV did force a lot of programmers to provide HD source well before they intended to do so otherwise... but if they keep to their back-burner HD-isn't-that-important-yet plan, then we haven't gained as much as we could have.
> 
> It is true DirecTV helped launched some good channels too... I just wish the pressure could have been applied to greater results.


Its not as simple as it seems though. As has been pointed out in other threads(and possibly here) nearly all HD channels start out with limited HD offerings. It takes a while to produce and shoot all of the content in HD. Not as simple as just flipping the switch.


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> But they do control their advertising of those channels. It is the provider that is telling the customer that the channel is in HD ... with no obscure footnote saying "portions of this channel's programming is upconverted" or similar. The providers have footnote disclaimers for other issues - why not be honest and say "there are a few channels that are not broadcasting any HD".
> 
> D* seems to have pushed forward with channels before there was a show on that channel in HD. Perhaps if D* would have stood firm and said that they would not sell a channel as HD unless there was a threshold amount of HD on that channel the programmer would be encouraged to get more HD programming? Instead D* provided an easy way out ... selling SD as HD and being proud of it.
> 
> It comes down to a difference of opinion over which encouragement works best ... A hard line "we won't carry your alleged HD channel until it has 10% or 25% HD content" or a softer "we'll give you a signal path and hope you eventually use it for HD". HD channels without _any_ HD are a sign of a conspiracy to defraud between programmer and provider.
> 
> Non-HD HD channels is just another form of HD Lite ... but since that name is taken perhaps we should just drop a letter and call the questionable channels "HD lie".


JL, now that you posted about how you believe DirecTV isn't acting properly, I would like to hear what you have to say about DISH marketing of HD right now - such as their claim to the best sports and movies, most HD national channels, and so on. Thanks.


----------



## projectorguru

ScoBuck said:


> JL, now that you posted about how you believe DirecTV isn't acting properly, I would like to hear what you have to say about DISH marketing of HD right now - such as their claim to the best sports and movies, most HD national channels, and so on. Thanks.


I'll even agree to that. they should not say that, but then again both sides do it, and can easily be called out to the carpet on it. So to me it don't matter, they both do it, and will continue to do so. If Dish all of sudden lit up one more channels then Direct has, then Direct would still say they are the leader, just as Dish does now, who cares? really, Who cares? I don't care what they claim, the package I have now, only has about 7 channels I didn't have on Dish, big deal, not a mind blower for me at all


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> JL, now that you posted about how you believe DirecTV isn't acting properly, I would like to hear what you have to say about DISH marketing of HD right now - such as their claim to the best sports and movies, most HD national channels, and so on. Thanks.


Are they still making every one of those claims or are you adding your own?

"The best" is qualitative, not quantitative. Perhaps you are of the opinion that having 55 national channels that could possibly play HD at some mysterious time is better just because of a number? "The best" movies can play on E*'s four HD premium channels just as easily as they can play on D*'s ten HD premiums. "The best" sports can play on E*'s game only HD RSNs just as easily as they play on D*'s "upconvert unless there is a game" RSNs.

E* pushes what they can carry ... they push college football. They push network carried professional football. They push the other sports that are carried. Tell the networks E* and D* carry that they are not carrying "the best" sports. Ever find a successful channel that says "no, we don't have the best" of whatever there theme is? They pick something and go with it.

Here's the latest "about us" blurb from a press release (November 29th):
EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH) has been a leader for more than 27 years in satellite TV equipment sales and support worldwide. The Company's DISH Network(r) is the fastest-growing pay-TV provider in the country since 2000, providing more than 13.695 million satellite TV customers with industry-leading customer satisfaction which has surpassed major cable companies for seven years running. DISH Network customers also enjoy access to a premier line of award-winning Digital Video Recorders (DVRs), hundreds of video and audio channels, the most International channels in the U.S., industry-leading Interactive TV applications, Latino programming, and the best sports and movies in HD. DISH Network offers a variety of package and price options including the lowest all-digital price in America, the DishDVR Advantage Package, high-speed Internet service, a free upgrade to the best HD DVR in the industry, and six months free of DishHD. EchoStar is included in the Nasdaq-100 Index (NDX) and is a Fortune 300 company. Visit www.echostar.com or call 1-800-333-DISH (3474) for more information.​
The last time E* claimed to have "more national HD programming than any pay-TV provider in the United States" in a press releases was October 30th. Before D*'s latests spurts of adding channels.


----------



## HD is Life

Well - I read through most of this, some of it has me dizzy, but I do need to ask this. Since it is obvious that most of the players in the industry are less than honest, why do some take time to bash just one side of it and look past the similar things that the other side does.

Is it so important to protect one side as being less evil? I thought the saying went something like "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

You can't justify what your side does wrong by what another side does wrong.


----------



## msmith198025

James Long;1320969. Perhaps you are of the opinion that having 55 national channels that could possibly play HD at some[B said:


> mysterious time [/B]is better just because of a number?
> 
> D*'s "upconvert unless there is a game" RSNs.
> 
> .


Its usually primetime, there now its not mysterious anymore

Again, many of the RSN's show HD(not upconvert) when there isnt a game.
James this is no better than someone saying Voom sucks when they havent seen it.:nono2:


----------



## James Long

msmith198025 said:


> Its usually primetime, there now its not mysterious anymore


Usually? So they cannot even guarantee that three to six predictable hours a day is in HD?
Sad.



msmith198025 said:


> Again, many of the RSN's show HD(not upconvert) when there isnt a game.


Many? Or a few.

Since you are an "expert" give a solid answer ... how many D* RSNs show non-game related content (pre/post/game) in HD? D* has 34 RSNs on their list (including alternates within a regions). Don't say "more than E*" ... that isn't the question. HOW MANY?


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> Usually? So they cannot even guarantee that three to six predictable hours a day is in HD?
> Sad.
> 
> Many? Or a few.
> 
> Since you are an "expert" give a solid answer ... how many D* RSNs show non-game related content (pre/post/game) in HD? D* has 34 RSNs on their list (including alternates within a regions).
> 
> Don't say "more than E*" ... that isn't the question. HOW many?


Yes I would say usually, since i cant watch each and every one of them each and every day, I can not say beyond a shadow of a doubt that is when HD is on all of them. Call it an educated guess from what i have seen, and feel free to spin it however you wish.

A solid number? Without being home i cant. I would say more than a few and less than many. Alot of what i have seen is sports shows, sports news, and yes actual sports. Heck sometimes they even have HD commercials
For the record, I never claimed to be an "expert" im just going off of what ive seen, and calling it like i see it. As you have done many times when people who havent seen Voom bash it.


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Yes I would say usually, since i cant watch each and every one of them each and every day, I can not say beyond a shadow of a doubt that is when HD is on all of them. Call it an educated guess from what i have seen, and feel free to spin it however you wish.
> 
> A solid number? Without being home i cant. I would say more than a few and less than many. Alot of what i have seen is sports shows, sports news, and yes actual sports. Heck sometimes they even have HD commercials
> For the record, I never claimed to be an "expert" im just going off of what ive seen, and calling it like i see it. As you have done many times when people who havent seen Voom bash it.


Thats what really gets me. I see the HD commercials, and go WOW, looks good, then BAM! SD game reports, I used to watch the rsn's all the time over at Dish net, now I rarely do, you can imagine why


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Thats what really gets me. I see the HD commercials, and go WOW, looks good, then BAM! SD game reports, I used to watch the rsn's all the time over at Dish net, now I rarely do, you can imagine why


Actually I cant. The game content should be roughly the same. Its just that with D* you get some of the extra HD content ion the 24/7 RSNs


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Actually I cant. The game content should be roughly the same. Its just that with D* you get some of the extra HD content ion the 24/7 RSNs


Yeah your right except the difference is, most of it is not HD


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> how many D* RSNs show non-game related content (pre/post/game) in HD? D* has 34 RSNs on their list (including alternates within a regions). Don't say "more than E*" ... that isn't the question. HOW MANY?


Since all but the 11 FULL-TIME RSNS are GAME-ONLY (like DISH) they offer virtually no HD not game related. Those part-time RSNS shouldn't even be in this discussion, they are HD and on only for HD - whatever that amount is.

I am an 'expert' on 3 of the FULL-TIME RSNS (YES, SNY, and NESN). NESN has the most non-game related HD. They have all of their daily sports news studio shows in HD every day (quite a few hours every day), they have RedSox Hot Stove shows in HD almost every day, and some other HD as well. SNY has all of their daily studio shows in HD (every day), they have their additional studio panel type show in HD as well, this is also true of YES, they have their studio shows in HD, they have their hot stove shows in HD, they have their NBA daily show in HD, Mike and the MadDog every day for 5 1/2 hours in HD and so on. These 3 stations have a pretty good offering of HD. And during the 6 months of baseball season (thats half the year remember) there is even more HD on these stations.

Frankly I don't know the answer for the CSN full-time stations or the other FSN full-time stations, but I do know that on the weekend they have some of their college pre-game and post-game shows in HD.


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> Yeah your right except the difference is, most of it is not HD


Well i did say SOME. Brings me back to my point that there is MORE THAN GAME content in HD on them.

I think Sco showed a pretty decent list on a few of them. And yes that is available nationally


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> Are they still making every one of those claims or are you adding your own?


You tell me -
http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/programming/index.shtml

I read "America's largest HD Lineup". Do you?

&

http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/index.shtml

I read "DISH Network has the BEST sports and movies in HD". Do you?

&

http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/learn_about/index.shtml

Click on the middle tab - then

I read "industrys most extensive HD lineup - providing twice as many national HD channels as any other provider". See that as well?

Your comments please.


----------



## msmith198025

ScoBuck said:


> You tell me -
> http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/programming/index.shtml
> 
> I read "America's largest HD Lineup". Do you?
> 
> &
> 
> http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/index.shtml
> 
> I read "DISH Network has the BEST sports and movies in HD". Do you?
> 
> &
> 
> http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/learn_about/index.shtml
> 
> Click on the middle tab - then
> 
> I read "industrys most extensive HD lineup - providing twice as many national HD channels as any other provider". See that as well?
> 
> Your comments please.


Wow, bold claim on the last one


----------



## projectorguru

msmith198025 said:


> Wow, bold claim on the last one


I concur That last statement may be a misprint since the HD package is 20 to Directs 9.99, it should have said the industries most exPensive HD line up, they put a T there instead, yeah misprint:lol:


----------



## James Long

msmith198025 said:


> Again, many of the RSN's show HD(not upconvert) when there isnt a game.





msmith198025 said:


> A solid number? Without being home i cant. I would say more than a few and less than many.





msmith198025 said:


> Well i did say SOME. Brings me back to my point that there is MORE THAN GAME content in HD on them.


"Many" became "less than many" and is now "some"? OK.



> I think Sco showed a pretty decent list on a few of them. And yes that is available nationally


Subject to blackout, of course.


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> "Many" became "less than many" and is now "some"? OK.
> 
> Subject to blackout, of course.


Like i said feel free to spin how you want, which you did. Or at the very least mixed up the posts with the relevant topics.

Many became "more than a few and less than many" of RSN's. SOME had to do with the extra HD content on said channels.


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> Subject to blackout, of course.


The non game related HD content I mentioned is NOT subject to blackout, and there is a lot of it on the 3 full-time RSNS that I generally watch.


----------



## msmith198025

James Long;1321159
Subject to blackout said:


> Games? Yes some of them are like any other RSN. The extra content that we were discussing? Nope, available nationally.


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> You tell me -
> http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/programming/index.shtml
> 
> I read "America's largest HD Lineup". Do you?


I don't see "more HD channels than anyone else". Largest can be defined by more than a count. Just ask Comcast. 


> http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/index.shtml
> 
> I read "DISH Network has the BEST sports and movies in HD". Do you?


Already covered in my previous reply. Most <> Best.


> http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/our_products/dish_hd/learn_about/index.shtml
> 
> Click on the middle tab - then
> 
> I read "industrys most extensive HD lineup - providing twice as many national HD channels as any other provider". See that as well?


Oops. Buried deep in the website there is an error. I'm shocked!


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> The non game related HD content I mentioned is NOT subject to blackout, and there is a lot of it on the 3 full-time RSNS that I generally watch.


Then we are certainly at the "some" level and not the "many" level.


----------



## jacmyoung

HDMe said:


> I will say something good and bad about DirecTV here...
> 
> It was good that they upped their capacity and pressured programmers to provide more HD signals. It was bad, however, that DirecTV didn't use their position to force more HD programming on those channels before they agreed to pick them up. DirecTV could have used their enhanced capacity to "shame" channels into not only providing HD signals but more actual HD programming on them.
> 
> The end result, I think, is DirecTV did force a lot of programmers to provide HD source well before they intended to do so otherwise... but if they keep to their back-burner HD-isn't-that-important-yet plan, then we haven't gained as much as we could have.
> 
> It is true DirecTV helped launched some good channels too... I just wish the pressure could have been applied to greater results.


That is because most the new "HD" channels were not planned by the providers, rather rushed in by D* so they can claim 100 HD's by year end. D* is less concerned about the lack of true HD content on these new channels, and since the most of the content providers had no plan or still no intention to offer true HD, I don't see things change soon, I hope I am wrong.

Regardless D* is brilliant in this move by upcoverting SD content and call it HD channel. They must have studied the survey very well which said most HDTV owners believe they are watching HD even though they are not


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> Oops. Buried deep in the website there is an error. I'm shocked!


As expected and without fail. EVERY time you are incorrect, or we find something like this you excuse it. Right after you execute DirecTV for EVERY move it makes.

Buried 'deep'? It's a page that a good number of people looking at the DISH HD offering WILL land on. That's why they made the page, and why it is where it is.

You need to chill just a 'tad'. Point is - they are every bit as guilty with this stuff as you always claim the other side is.

Can you be fair and balanced just ONCE? DISH Network is NO China Doll.


----------



## ScoBuck

jacmyoung said:


> That is because most the new "HD" channels were not planned by the providers, rather rushed in by D* so they can claim 100 HD's by year end.


Rushed in? DirecTV announced agreements and discussions with a large number of these channels at the beginning of 2007 - 9 months + before they lit them up. Why are you putting all of this blame on DirecTV without knowledge? Is it not possible that the channels themselves made some comittments YOU don't know about regarding their HD launches?
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=127160&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=948332&highlight=

Easy to blame WITHOUT facts. I don't have them either, but I don't assume that this is all on the back of DirecTV either.


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> As expected and without fail. EVERY time you are incorrect, or we find something like this you excuse it. Right after you execute DirecTV for EVERY move it makes.


I have not executed "every" move that DirecTV makes. Perhaps you are oversensitive to any criticism of DirecTV. Perhaps that is why you have made a considerable percentage of your posts in Dish forums and often are found defending DirecTV. Perhaps that's why you use words such as "every" when you know that it does not apply.

I am not responsible for the content of the E* website. Don't make this personal.



> Buried 'deep'? It's a page that a good number of people looking at the DISH HD offering WILL land on. That's why they made the page, and why it is where it is.


When did they make it? I didn't see it on my path through the site to the ordering process. How many clicks did it take to get there from Dish Network's home page? That is what makes it buried.

:backtotop - if it hasn't already been said in full (seems to be looping again)
*What does D* offer in HD that E* doesn't that you really want?*

I can't see how you _want_ YES or other RSNs, ScoBuck --- since you have them why want them? 
Let's hear from some E* customers for a change!


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> I don't see "more HD channels than anyone else".
> 
> Oops. Buried deep in the website there is an error. I'm shocked!


So you didnt see it say more HD channels than anyone else. 
But you did see where it said Twice as many? 
Do those two phrases mean different things to you?
Which was it james?


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> Then we are certainly at the "some" level and not the "many" level.


Which is where we always were when it comes to the extra HD content


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> :backtotop - if it hasn't already been said in full (seems to be looping again)
> *What does D* offer in HD that E* doesn't that you really want?*
> 
> I can't see how you _want_ YES or other RSNs, ScoBuck --- since you have them why want them?
> Let's hear from some E* customers for a change!


On topic, looks like E* MAY get Sci Fi and USA soon


----------



## texaswolf

projectorguru said:


> ?????? If you are implying me about the war, its not me, I like both Dish and Direct about equal, both have advantages over the other, but to me theres no CLEAR winner. You asked about which channels show stretch/upconvert ect. Discovery is one for sure(not hd theatre), all my locals do it now for some shows, there are many other channels that do it also, not all the time though, James hit the nail on the head, when I see a HD CHANNEL, and a show I like and I turn it on and I see its not exactly HD, I usually turn it off, again I am a big BLUE RAY fan, I have probly 40-50 movies, and its very disappointing goin from that to the supposed HD CHANNELS. No I would not cancel and goto no HD, like I said for the most part I pick what shows I want and record them on the DVR, which is good for me.
> 
> JAMES, were not realted are we?:lol:


no no i wasn't taking about you, i was just saying instead of having all the "switching from here to here" or "which is better" or channel count threads...here in the Dish HD forum...they could have their own section. Instead of having threads get off topic 5 different times and then shutdown due to it...people can go there.

James i wasn't saying to start a war, i was meaning there already is one whether we like it or not...so give it a place to go. any threads started here bashing one or the other...gets moved there....then they can carrying on with facts, channel counts, and bashing all they want. You said yourself you dont like people "polluting threads" so give upset people a place to go....and have good ole debates all day long,instead of flowing into these threads...im sure a lot of people here would be happy to weed it out of this forum and put it in it's own area.

As far as expecting E* or D* to pressure networks to shoot shows in HD...good luck...the networks aren't going to give a care if a provider is upset about certain shows not in HD...talk to the studio, producer ect. about shooting the show in HD...a majority of the most popular shows out right now are in HD...if the provider offers an HD feed on that channel...you have to look at it by a show to show basis...a lot of people have wanted Extreme Makeover and Survivor in HD...but the people who shoot it, don't do it in HD. You could write the channels about contact info to get a hold of the shows producers and complain...might be easier than expecting the sat companies who are in negotiations to even carry the HD feed of the channel, to strong arm the channel into an "all or nothing" contract...not gonna happen...within the next 2 years most show will probably be done in HD anyway...trust me, i understand your frustration...just take a look at who is the source of certain shows in not done in HD.....channels are still being added, give it a little while.


----------



## cartrivision

James Long said:


> But you're missing the math or I am missing the claim you are making.
> If you are saying "if E* maintains a churn of 1.94% they will lose 25% of their subs in the next year" then -
> That could happen in 15 months if there are ZERO customers added (and the fun part of that math is that it is an actual 25% reduction of customers).


The churn rate has nothing to do with, and isn't offset by the number of customers added in the same time period.

All that I was saying is that if you take the number of customers that E* has today, and their current churn rate stayed the same for the next year, the number of customers that churn out over the next year would be about one quarter of the number of customers that they have today.

That would mean that the number of new customers that they would have to sign up over the next year just to keep their total number of subscriber from decreasing is about 1/4 of their current number of subscribers.


----------



## James Long

cartrivision said:


> All that I was saying is that if you take the number of customers that E* has today, and their current churn rate stayed the same for the next year, the number of customers that churn out over the next year would be about one quarter of the number of customers that they have today.


I did the math, and that's not correct.

See the post you quoted for the break down.
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=1307027#post1307027



> That would mean that the number of new customers that they would have to sign up over the next year just to keep their total number of subscriber from decreasing is about 1/4 of their current number of subscribers.


The number of customers E* needs to add to maintain the net customer level is the number of customers that leave. On that we can agree ... but 1.94% churn does not lead to a 25% loss of current customers in one year.

Not unless enough customers are *added* so that 1.94% is a bigger number than if no customers are added. That magic number of additions is 460k per month. A 1.94% churn over 12 months only becomes 25% of their current subscriber count IF E* adds 5.5 million customers to replace the ones they lose.

That is why churn is such a silly figure. E* could have a HUGE churn figure and still have a successful year.


----------



## ScoBuck

As a follow up to the earlier posts regarding amount of HD on YES, SNY, and NESN.

from 3:30pm today thru 3:30pm tomorrow:
NESN 10 1/2 hours 
SNY 10 1/2 hours
YES 7 hours

NESN and SNY are providing the same amount of HD as the big 4 networks are during the week it looks like. Those numbers DO NOT include the pro hockey games - just non-game HD content.


----------



## projectorguru

ScoBuck said:


> As a follow up to the earlier posts regarding amount of HD on YES, SNY, and NESN.
> 
> from 3:30pm today thru 3:30pm tomorrow:
> NESN 10 1/2 hours
> SNY 10 1/2 hours
> YES 7 hours
> 
> NESN and SNY are providing the same amount of HD as the big 4 networks are during the week it looks like.


FOR YOU, for me,
Blackedout,
Blackedout
Blackedout


----------



## ScoBuck

projectorguru said:


> FOR YOU, for me,
> Blackedout,
> Blackedout
> Blackedout


Blacked out - or you don't pay for the Sports Pack? Because I do, and I get all of this NESN non-game programming. I am in-market for YES and SNY.


----------



## msmith198025

projectorguru said:


> FOR YOU, for me,
> Blackedout,
> Blackedout
> Blackedout


You sure? If i can get it in mississippi, you should get it there.


----------



## msmith198025

ScoBuck said:


> Blacked out - or you don't pay for the Sports Pack? Because I do, and I get all of this NESN non-game programming. I am in-market for YES and SNY.


Thats what i am wondering. I get it and im OUT OF MARKET


----------



## ScoBuck

msmith198025 said:


> You sure? If i can get it in mississippi, you should get it there.


It's not blacked out (except for pro sports games), I get all of the programming on ALL 11 Full-Time RSNS.


----------



## msmith198025

ScoBuck said:


> It's not blacked out (except for pro sports games), I get all of the programming on ALL 11 Full-Time RSNS.


I know, thats what i get too.


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> It's not blacked out (except for pro sports games), I get all of the programming on ALL 11 Full-Time RSNS.


There's that absolute again ... "all".
Actually: You get all non-blacked out programming on all 11 "full time" RSNs.
W/ subscription to Premier (listed at $108.98) or Sports Pack (minimum $71.98).

And (on topic) how much of that content do *I* really want?
Not much (if anything).


----------



## msmith198025

James Long said:


> There's that absolute again ... "all".
> Actually: You get all non-blacked out programming on all 11 "full time" RSNs.
> W/ subscription to Premier (listed at $108.98) or Sports Pack (minimum $71.98).
> 
> And (on topic) how much of that content do *I* really want?
> Not much (if anything).


Actually James, the blacked out stuff (for out of market)was covered when he said except Blacked out pro sports games.

I guess its beneficial that you dont have them isnt it


----------



## Ron Barry

Going to try this one last time... 

Ok guys I think the OPs questions was answered... The topic is what channels does D* HD channels have that you would want E* to have. It is not about what company is more evil, what marketing group is lying the most, what classifies as an HD channel etc. It is not a channel counting thread... 

Lets try and keep it on topic... If you want to discuss what company is more evil, create thread in the general Sat forum.... Keep things professional and avoid being personal. If you have anything more to add regarding the OPs question.. Please feel free to post here.. If you want to continue the ratholes that have popped out in this thread please do the following. 

1) If it involves both E* and D* post it in the General Sat area.

2) If you are looking for comments from the E* subs... Post it here.. D* subs are ofcourse welcome to respond but lets keep to the topics and avoid creating yet another count thread etc. 

3) If it about D*, then it should go in the D* forum. 

So... Back on topic or move on.....


----------



## msmith198025

Ron Barry said:


> Going to try this one last time...
> 
> Ok guys I think the OPs questions was answered... The topic is what channels does D* HD channels have that you would want E* to have. It is not about what company is more evil, what marketing group is lying the most, what classifies as an HD channel etc. It is not a channel counting thread...
> 
> Lets try and keep it on topic... If you want to discuss what company is more evil, create thread in the general Sat forum.... Keep things professional and avoid being personal. If you have anything more to add regarding the OPs question.. Please feel free to post here.. If you want to continue the ratholes that have popped out in this thread please do the following.
> 
> 1) If it involves both E* and D* post it in the General Sat area.
> 
> 2) If you are looking for comments from the E* subs... Post it here.. D* subs are ofcourse welcome to respond but lets keep to the topics and avoid creating yet another count thread etc.
> 
> 3) If it about D*, then it should go in the D* forum.
> 
> So... Back on topic or move on.....


I apologize ron. As an E*/D* sub, i just hate to see false info on either company posted(especially when its from a mod, although i do enjoy talking and having a good/harmless argument with james). That being said, good info points to Sci fi and USA coming up friday or next week( E* subs will enjoy those two!). Take it for what its worth.


----------



## Ron Barry

Yeah... SciFi is one I am looking forward to and one of the D* I wish I had. I enjoy GHost busters and even though I don't think it is HD yet, I would still welcome the upscaling at the source. Yeck.. given the strike I am pretty sure I am going to give Tin Man a shot. 

As for the others.. FX would be one I might want but that would depend on what HD content was being offered. Also any kids related ones would be cool too.


----------



## msmith198025

Ron Barry said:


> Yeah... SciFi is one I am looking forward to and one of the D* I wish I had. I enjoy GHost busters and even though I don't think it is HD yet, I would still welcome the upscaling at the source. Yeck.. given the strike I am pretty sure I am going to give Tin Man a shot.
> 
> As for the others.. FX would be one I might want but that would depend on what HD content was being offered. Also any kids related ones would be cool too.


FX also has some very very good looking stuff in HD. Nip/Tuck looks great, and the movies they show are impressive in PQ also

Yeah the strike sucks!


----------



## texaswolf

jacmyoung said:


> I remember back in September D* made a call of "giant leap in HD history" and named a few HD channels to be added soon, and when people asked the heads of those channels about what was going on, they had no idea what D* was talking about.
> 
> Your facts actually proved my point, D* rushed those channels into signing the agreements to beef up it's claim as far back as 9 months ago and they went along, even though they had no real plans to go HD any time soon. Let's face it, they had 9 months to get their acts together, had their intention been sincere as D* wanted us to believe, we would be watching real HD content left and right by now.
> 
> I don't know if any of you still remember when many of those pioneer HD channels made their launch announcements, there was always the mentioning of how many hours of HD programming they had in their library for the kick off? We used to laugh at the sometimes meager inventories, but at least they had some. When was the last time you heard those new HD channels said anything about how much HD they had in their library or what are they working on for the near future? Heck when was the last time we even heard words from those new HD channels at all, other than D* making all the noise for them?
> 
> I am all for D* bringing this HD buzz word to the forefront, but I am also not going to stick my head in the sand either. No doubt some are making the effort but quite many of them are just placeholders for now.


Regardless...they lit up the HD channels and shows that were broadcasted in HD were and are shown in HD....i'd take a couple of shows in HD over a crap SD only feed any day, until they added more...at least i would be enjoying some HD on them instead of crossing my fingers and hoping for that channel in HD...any HD.... at some point


----------



## texaswolf

msmith198025 said:


> FX also has some very very good looking stuff in HD. Nip/Tuck looks great, and the movies they show are impressive in PQ also
> 
> Yeah the strike sucks!


Yeah i watch Rescue Me and Its always sunny in Philly...and cant wait for a HD feed on that channel....although Rescue Me wont start it's new season for a while...so i'm not in a huge rush...and I'm well aware that "sunny" is not done in HD, so i wont be crying when it's not when we get the feed


----------



## msmith198025

texaswolf said:


> Yeah i watch Rescue Me and Its always sunny in Philly...and cant wait for a HD feed on that channel....although Rescue Me wont start it's new season for a while...so i'm not in a huge rush...and I'm well aware that "sunny" is not done in HD, so i wont be crying when it's not when we get the feed


Yeah im looking forward to the new season of Rescue Me also. Should loke spectacular!


----------



## paulman182

Ron Barry said:


> Yeah... SciFi is one I am looking forward to and one of the D* I wish I had. I enjoy GHost busters and even though I don't think it is HD yet, I would still welcome the upscaling at the source. Yeck.. given the strike I am pretty sure I am going to give Tin Man a shot.


You will like Ghosthunters a lot on Sci-Fi HD. Although it is 4:3 SD, it shows incredible detail when compared with the SD channel.

Edit: Sorry, I guess this is OT also, although it contains no bashing!


----------



## texaswolf

paulman182 said:


> You will like Ghosthunters a lot on Sci-Fi HD. Although it is 4:3 SD, it shows incredible detail when compared with the SD channel.
> 
> Edit: Sorry, I guess this is OT also, although it contains no bashing!


SWEET...I was hoping it did....drives me nuts watching it in SD...hope they shoot in HD someday..well then again...its mostly black and white, so i guess it wouldn't matter...but maybe look more clear? infrared would look cool.

MGM HD is another i would probably like, how has the content been on that?


----------



## paulman182

texaswolf said:


> SWEET...I was hoping it did....drives me nuts watching it in SD...hope they shoot in HD someday..well then again...its mostly black and white, so i guess it wouldn't matter...but maybe look more clear? infrared would look cool.
> 
> MGM HD is another i would probably like, how has the content been on that?


Most of the really big movies and MGM classics are licensed to other services for the time being.

However, MGMHD is showing a lot of movies that have not been available on the other premium services in a long time, if ever, and some films from the 50s and 60s that I've never seen. In fact, I've never even heard of some of them, and I'm "into" movies. They are showing them in their original aspect ratio, which is a big plus.

If you are a movie fan, you'll enjoy a lot of what is on the channel. Other than sports fans, movie fans have benefited more than anyone else from DirecTV's HD additions.


----------



## texaswolf

paulman182 said:


> Most of the really big movies and MGM classics are licensed to other services for the time being.
> 
> However, MGMHD is showing a lot of movies that have not been available on the other premium services in a long time, if ever, and some films from the 50s and 60s that I've never seen. In fact, I've never even heard of some of them, and I'm "into" movies. They are showing them in their original aspect ratio, which is a big plus.
> 
> If you are a movie fan, you'll enjoy a lot of what is on the channel. Other than sports fans, movie fans have benefited more than anyone else from DirecTV's HD additions.


ok thanks...yeah I'm a big movie fan....hopefully we can get MGM, and the other premium HD channels that D* has soon too.


----------



## kennya

just for the record as the thread title suggests, I would like to have the Tulsa locals in HD...


----------



## Ron Barry

Ok.. I split off the off topic sidebar and place it in general here.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=111930. So go there to discuss the side bar.


----------



## tm22721

I have purposely avoided this thread until my upgrade from a 921 to a 722 was completed so that I could provide an informed evaluation of the MPEG4 HD channel offerings.

I started with the 6000 HD receiver. After 6 years of Dish HD, I am totally underwhelmed by the few available HD channels compared to SD.

I am surprised that HD TV sales are so good given the continued poor HD content.

But I am not surprised that new Dish subscriptions are way down. And I now understand why I was offered such a good deal in return for an 18 month commitment.

I hope that the D* E* rivalry continues, lest satellite customers get an even worse deal.


----------



## Richard King

texaswolf said:


> eh...opinions are opinions...you may happen to like Monster HD and Rave, yet some others may call those a waste of bandwith.
> 
> Some like reality tv and want it in HD...others like the classics, and want them in HD....remember one mans garbage is another mans treasure (HD):lol:


100% correct. Which is why threads such as this are totally worthless.


----------



## Ron Barry

I would not say worthless. They are opinions and if taken as subject opinions about people's personal habits and needs and how they feel about what they want that they currently don't have. Like others have said.. What is one person gold is another person coal.

And to avoid going off topic with the Ghost Hunters posts.. I posted a OT thread to continue the discussion.

Please join in http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=111935


----------



## ScoBuck

Richard King said:


> 100% correct. Which is why threads such as this are totally worthless.


Any thread that gets the membership to have a discussion is not worthless - n today's HD environment, there are SO MANY differing points of view, and there is a lot of uncertainty.

Better to have a place to freely discuss whats on a person's mind, then not to have it IMHO.


----------



## Ron Barry

Ok.. I moved all comments around Ghost Hunters/Reality is crap to OT. Got here to continue the discussion.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=111956


----------



## Paul Secic

gopher_guy said:


> I'm currently with D* but can't get a CSR to spring a deal for me like many have already gotten. I am contemplating going to E*. I have looked and am trying to figure out what I'd be losing out on if I go to E*. I see FX mentioned and USA I never watch those. I don't subscribe to NFL Ticket anymore due to the high cost.
> 
> Is D* coming out with more stuff that E* won't have? Just trying to get as informed as possible.
> 
> What stations does D* have that you would like E* to carry?


All STARZ Channels in HD!!!!


----------



## Schizm

SpeedTV is the one channel I wish we had. Granted it's just an upconvert on D* now.


----------



## DCSholtis

Paul Secic said:


> All STARZ Channels in HD!!!!


Thats funny. According to the E* program guide only ONE Starz channel is in HD, while D* has 5 Starz channels in HD. No who has all Starz in HD?!!! :lol:


----------



## harsh

DCSholtis said:


> No who has all Starz in HD?!!! :lol:


If you read the words carefully, you'll find that's what Paul was saying.

As I recall, there are six Starz SD offerings on DIRECTV and Starz in Black isn't offered in HD. On the E* side, there are the same Starz SD channels plus Starz Cinema and only one HD channel (Starz East).


----------



## tomcrown1

I want StarzHD west CinamaxHD West HBoHD West ShowtimeHD West why does Dish hate the west coast does charlie hate where he lives???


----------



## harsh

Schizm said:


> SpeedTV is the one channel I wish we had. Granted it's just an upconvert on D* now.


It is upconvert on D* because the programming isn't in HD. The same can be said of a few of the D* "HD" channels.

Some of the Speed programming that could have been in HD is played on HD Net. D* Subscribers can thank Mark Cuban for keeping those events in the basic HD lineup.


----------



## texaswolf

harsh said:


> It is upconvert on D* because the programming isn't in HD. The same can be said of a few of the D* "HD" channels.
> 
> Some of the Speed programming that could have been in HD is played on HD Net. D* Subscribers can thank Mark Cuban for keeping those events in the basic HD lineup.


As much as i don't like that guy, i have to say i like what he has done so far with that channel


----------



## msmith198025

tomcrown1 said:


> I want StarzHD west CinamaxHD West HBoHD West ShowtimeHD West why does Dish hate the west coast does charlie hate where he lives???


I dont know. WIth a DVR it may not be as crucial as it once was, but it is still nice to have


----------



## daleles

It would be nice if E* carried additional movie channels such as HBO-W/HD, SHO-W/HD, etc. 

As for MGM/HD, they signed an exclusive agreement with D* and it won't be available to E* ever. 

I would like to see CNN/HD, CNBC/HD, Fox Business/HD, although the Fox Business channel is not even available to E* is SD. 

daleles


----------



## Stewart Vernon

daleles said:


> As for MGM/HD, they signed an exclusive agreement with D* and it won't be available to E* ever.


Really?

I have not heard that. I find that hard to believe as it would be a huge mistake, in my opinion, for such a channel to do that. Why would they cut their potential subscribers in half without cause?

Sunday Ticket is one thing, as a premium service and a historical draw for DirecTV... but any other single channel to be exclusive by design rather than by happenstance makes no sense to me.


----------



## ScoBuck

daleles said:


> As for MGM/HD, they signed an exclusive agreement with D* and it won't be available to E* ever.
> 
> daleles


I haven't heard that either - please post a link to the press releases on those.

Thanks.


----------



## ScoBuck

HDMe said:


> Really?
> 
> but any other single channel to be exclusive by design rather than by happenstance makes no sense to me.


So, VOOM makes no sense to you? Weren't those supposed to be exclusive by design?


----------



## Jim5506

Voom is not exclusive.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

HDMe said:


> Really?
> 
> I have not heard that. I find that hard to believe as it would be a huge mistake, in my opinion, for such a channel to do that. Why would they cut their potential subscribers in half without cause?
> 
> Sunday Ticket is one thing, as a premium service and a historical draw for DirecTV... but any other single channel to be exclusive by design rather than by happenstance makes no sense to me.





ScoBuck said:


> I haven't heard that either - please post a link to the press releases on those.
> 
> Thanks.


It's not exclusive. In this article MGM talks about more carriage aggrements comming in the "_near future_".

http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/mgm/29774/

Mike


----------



## daleles

ScoBuck said:


> I haven't heard that either - please post a link to the press releases on those.
> 
> Thanks.


Source:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117972180.html?categoryid=14&cs=1&nid=2570

It's pretty informative on the whole situation.


----------



## James Long

daleles said:


> Source:
> 
> http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117972180.html?categoryid=14&cs=1&nid=2570
> 
> It's pretty informative on the whole situation.


Nothing in that article states that the channel is exclusive to DirecTV. A close read actually suggests that MGM is trying to get other contracts and NOT be exclusive to one carrier.


----------



## daleles

James Long said:


> Nothing in that article states that the channel is exclusive to DirecTV. A close read actually suggests that MGM is trying to get other contracts and NOT be exclusive to one carrier.


You're right! I haven't read that article since it originally came out in September and since then Dish hasn't even hinted at carrying the channel, I highly doubt they will. But, you never know.


----------



## projectorguru

ScoBuck said:


> Blacked out - or you don't pay for the Sports Pack? Because I do, and I get all of this NESN non-game programming. I am in-market for YES and SNY.


Yes I subscribe, most are blackedout


----------



## ScoBuck

Jim5506 said:


> Voom is not exclusive.


Man - you have missed the whole point.

If you care to remember - VOOM was ORIGINALLY designed to be exclusive - to VOOM itself. The previous poster said he believed that any channel that is *exclusive by design rather than by happenstance makes no sense to me.*

Thus he HAS to believe that the entire ORIGINAL concept of VOOM made no sense.


----------



## ScoBuck

projectorguru said:


> Yes I subscribe, most are blackedout


I would call them - I get the non-game HD content from the 11 full-time RSNS.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

ScoBuck said:


> Man - you have missed the whole point.
> 
> If you care to remember - VOOM was ORIGINALLY designed to be exclusive - to VOOM itself. The previous poster said he believed that any channel that is *exclusive by design rather than by happenstance makes no sense to me.*
> 
> Thus he HAS to believe that the entire ORIGINAL concept of VOOM made no sense.


If you are talking about the current Voom package of channels... then those are not exclusive, just haven't been picked up by DirecTV or others... but could be if they wanted them.

If, as it sounds in this follow-up, you are talking about the original Voom service that was trying to compete with Dish and DirecTV... then I do believe the original Voom was ill-conceived.

At the time it was started, there were simply not enough HD customers to support a new service. Voom tried to add SD channels to improve their package choices, but that didn't help either as their cost-of-service was too high for many people since it meant they had to get Voom + Dish or Voom + DirecTV to get all the channels they wanted.

Originally Voom hoped having some exclusive channels to them at that time would sway the balance and attract more customers... and it might have IF people were ready for HD at that time. I honestly am not sure a Voom-like service could compete today, but especially with the failed experience on the minds of many I doubt anyone would try to compete with the big guys.


----------



## texaswolf

James Long said:


> Nothing in that article states that the channel is exclusive to DirecTV. A close read actually suggests that MGM is trying to get other contracts and NOT be exclusive to one carrier.


Man i hope not...that would REALLY suck....and like HDME said, a bad idea. To me it would make as much sense as certain movie studios backing one HD format...why not get it out there to as many people as possible? More viewers...more money.


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> Man - you have missed the whole point.
> 
> If you care to remember - VOOM was ORIGINALLY designed to be exclusive - to VOOM itself. The previous poster said he believed that any channel that is *exclusive by design rather than by happenstance makes no sense to me.*
> 
> Thus he HAS to believe that the entire ORIGINAL concept of VOOM made no sense.


Are you going back to 2003 when Voom as a brand name of Rainbow DBS had 21 channels of exclusive HD? It made perfect sense.

At a time when there were not 21 other HD channels to easily add Rainbow DBS decided to offer content from their library. They were trying to compete as THE HD provider. In order to give that impression they had to "blow away" the competition with their HD lineup (which they did, even without the Voom 21).

Of course subscribers wanted more content ... Rainbow DBS failed on the SD side of the service and because their niche wasn't big enough to support their expenses. Perhaps they could have bled for another year or two and eventually succeeded ... or at least stayed in business. But the odds were not in their favor.

Times have changed ... four years have passed. Voom is no longer an exclusive and I see no point in complaining about what, in market terms, is ancient history.


----------



## ScoBuck

James Long said:


> Are you going back to 2003 when Voom as a brand name of Rainbow DBS had 21 channels of exclusive HD? It made perfect sense..


Yes it did to a national subscriber base of 48,000 customers.

Pretty poor showing actually for 2 years of offering the service.



James Long said:


> Times have changed ... four years have passed. Voom is no longer an exclusive and I see no point in complaining about what, in market terms, is ancient history.


You need to re-read, I didn't mention a word of complaint, you must have missed my question entirely. I asked a specific member if HE felt that VOOM made sense to HIM (not to me). His answer is it was ill-conceived in his opinion. He is entitled to that opinion IMHO.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Voom as a DBS provider, when they started, made sense to have their own in-house exclusive channels to try and entice people. If they offered those channels to Dish/DirecTV/cable at that time, then it would have been counterproductive to the new DBS business they were trying to grow.

But once that failed... and Voom became just a suite of channels... then it wouldn't make sense for them to want to be exclusive to one carrier. It makes more money for them if they can get on cable and DirecTV to capture more eyes.

Similarly, MGMHD wouldn't make sense to just be on DirecTV if Dish or cable wanted to pay for carriage... unless DirecTV was paying several times the market value for that channel. I think we can assume that is NOT the case, since DirecTV actually has a cheaper HD package price than its competitors.

NFL Sunday Ticket is a different animal... and DirecTV is paying more than market price to have it as an exclusive to promote their company and entice sports fans to go with DirecTV... I daresay Sunday Ticket may or may not get more subscribers if it were available via Dish at this point since most folks who want to pay for it probably are DirecTV customers by now... so in this limited case, it may make sense to be exclusive and get guaranteed up-front money from DirecTV to be exclusive.

I can't imagine the same being true for a channel like MGMHD, though... and suspect the only reason it isn't on other places like Dish is because of bandwidth limitations that force Dish to be much more choosy right now what contracts they lock themselves into.

I've seen speculation as well that Dish *may* be holding some of their "free" slots for HD that is coming next year from places like ESPN where they may already have an agreement to carry those new HD when launched, and with the satellite delays Dish may not be able to fill all their bandwidth holes now because it would leave them unable to fulfill other commitments early next year before the new capacity goes up.


----------



## James Long

ScoBuck said:


> Yes it did to a national subscriber base of 48,000 customers.
> 
> Pretty poor showing actually for 2 years of offering the service.


And when mentioned in January or February of 2005 I got run out of town on a rail by Voom subscribers for that number! 

When Rainbow DBS went away the channels were offered to E*. Exclusive only because no one else picked them up until recently. But (as noted) a lot has changed since 2003. This is a second generation of Voom.


----------



## ScoBuck

HDMe said:


> I've seen speculation as well that Dish *may* be holding some of their "free" slots for HD that is coming next year from places like ESPN where they may already have an agreement to carry those new HD when launched, and with the satellite delays Dish may not be able to fill all their bandwidth holes now because it would leave them unable to fulfill other commitments early next year before the new capacity goes up.


I've seen speculation with lots of different reasons why they aren't adding much new in the way of HD.

1) no available bandwidth (but they are reclaiming some now by moving stuff around and using new encoders).
2) waiting for new sats to launch
3) waiting for AT&T to buy them
and some others as well

Maybe good old Chuck will reveal some of his issues this evening at his chat.


----------



## RAD

ScoBuck said:


> Maybe good old Chuck will reveal some of his issues this evening at his chat.


If Charlie doesn't announce Sci-Fi and USA tonight it should be interesting to see what folks have to say about the lack of news.


----------



## texaswolf

ScoBuck said:


> I've seen speculation with lots of different reasons why they aren't adding much new in the way of HD.
> 
> 1) no available bandwidth (but they are reclaiming some now by moving stuff around and using new encoders).
> 2) waiting for new sats to launch
> 3) waiting for AT&T to buy them
> and some others as well
> 
> Maybe good old Chuck will reveal some of his issues this evening at his chat.


i have a feeling Chuck won't address any of those rumors..hopefully he will mention specific channels and hopeful dates...but i also have a feeling Chuck will tell us of Scifi and USA HD (if they fixed the tech issue), and then go CSR style on us.."we are always working to bring more HD content"


----------



## Henry

So ... Dish now owns Voom, but Voom is not exclusive to Dish - just happens that Dish is the only distributor of Voom at present? 

Voom is on the market to the likes of cable and Direct? 

Well, that's news to me.


----------



## phrelin

There's a closed 170 post thread on this whole Love/Hate VOOM subject at:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=107072&page=5


----------



## James Long

HDG said:


> So ... Dish now owns Voom, but Voom is not exclusive to Dish - just happens that Dish is the only distributor of Voom at present?
> 
> Voom is on the market to the likes of cable and Direct?
> 
> Well, that's news to me.


Technically, E* has invested in Voom. They don't own Voom, just a portion. They bought a satellite, uplink and transponder licenses separate from the deal to invest in Voom - but that deal was done before the deal to continue the Voom programming package on E*.

Cablevision, the majority owner of Voom, is now carrying the channels on their cable system.


----------



## James Long

phrelin said:


> There's a closed 170 post thread on this whole Love/Hate VOOM subject at:
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=107072&page=5


True.

So now that we're done discussing channels that E* has and D* doesn't, can we get back to the topic of THIS thread?


----------



## Ron Barry

Agreed.. I was hoping it would stir back on course itself... As phrelin suggested for Love/Hate Voom topic follow his thread. Enough on the voom and remember the theme of this thread.


----------

