# Espn Classic, gone from TOP 250



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

So when was Dish Network going to let its customers know that ESPN Classic is now dropped from the Top 250 Base pack.
Its been in the top 250 pack for the past 33 months that I've had the service, and Now they put it in the Multi Sports pack.

So Whats up , Why no mention of this at all?
Let me guess another Free Preview thats lasted for 2+years.
First the Phone connect fee, now ESPN Classic.


----------



## max1 (Aug 12, 2005)

My guess is their probably losing viewers. ESPN Classic has really gotten worse over the years. It's not the great channel it used to be. ESPN should just dump the channel as far I am concerned. I cant remember the last time i watched ESPN Classic my guess maybe 2 years ago.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

max1 said:


> My guess is their probably losing viewers. ESPN Classic has really gotten worse over the years. It's not the great channel it used to be. ESPN should just dump the channel as far I am concerned. I cant remember the last time i watched ESPN Classic my guess maybe 2 years ago.


Notice would have been nice.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

This sounds like what the local cable company is doing to it's analog only subscribers. One by one they are removing channels form the analog tier and putting them on the digital. You don't know the channel is gone unless you were one of the viewers of that channel (or see snow on the channel in the case of analog cable).

I did not miss ESPN Classic myself. Did it disappear from the "all channel" EPG if you don't subscribe (as opposed to seeing it in red or green)? I'm not at home to check at the moment.

Wasn't classic originally in AT 200? I recall seeing it there when I was an AT 200 sub (I'm currently AT250).


----------



## ThunderRoad (May 13, 2006)

Last night about midnight (Central time) I was going through the EPG to see what ESPN & ESPN2 had scheduled for today. As I was scrolling, for midnight to 3a.m., ESPN Classic was showing in blue, and then for 3a.m. and onwards, ESPN Classic was showing in green. I was using the "all sub" menu. I have AT200. As of now, it's still green in the "all channels" menu.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

damondlt said:


> So when was Dish Network going to let its customers know that ESPN Classic is now dropped from the Top 250 Base pack.
> Its been in the top 250 pack for the past 33 months that I've had the service, and Now they put it in the Multi Sports pack.
> 
> So Whats up , Why no mention of this at all?
> ...


I never watched it anyway. It wasn't very good before ESPN purchased it.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I like what I thought ESPN Classic was going to be, especially if they ever made it HD so they could show replays of "instant classics" in HD...

but somehow ESPN Classic has gone downhill and isn't always showing "classic" sporting events.


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

I have AT250 and it's displayed as green.


----------



## wbowery (Jul 18, 2007)

While I didn't watch ESPN Classic much, I did watch it occasionally and it has been part of my package for years. It is especially helpful during college football season (and bowl time) when ESPN would show the start of a scheduled ESPN or ESPN2 game on Classic if the earlier game ran late or went into overtime.


----------



## slickshoes (Sep 20, 2009)

Looks like its completely gone from every package except the top everything pack according to their website...very lame indeed, I was eagerly awaiting this one to turn HD as well.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

I am not even a Dish sub and I knew they were going to move ESPN classic to a higher package


----------



## coldsteel (Mar 29, 2007)

Um, the Multi-Sports Pack is not part of the Everything package.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

coldsteel said:


> Um, the Multi-Sports Pack is not part of the Everything package.


Never said it was


----------



## coldsteel (Mar 29, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


> Never said it was


Sorry, was responding to slickshoes.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

Damon (I originally typed a different name :lol,

This wasn't the only place I read this either. I do agree that Dish itself should have informed their subs of this move in someway, instead of just removing the channel. Currently on their website, they still have ESPN classic listed in the 200 and 250 package.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

damondlt said:


> You guys are funny.
> Taking a channel out of the top 250 and putting it into a higher package, can't be made public?
> 
> So your saying its OK to drop and move channels out of packages without notice?
> ...


Per the agreement signed between every Dish sub and Dish Network yes they can drop and move channels anywhere they want. I am guessing Direct has the same thing written into their agreement with their subs as well.
Don't like it, don't sign the agreement. But good luck on finding a provider that doesn't have that language in their agreements


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

DodgerKing said:


> Damon (I originally typed a different name :lol,
> 
> This wasn't the only place I read this either. I do agree that Dish itself should have informed their subs of this move in someway, instead of just removing the channel. Currently on their website, they still have ESPN classic listed in the 200 and 250 package.


Exactly, I just want to know why its so hard for Dish Network to give its customers a heads up from time to time.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

DavidMi said:


> It seems as though you are one of the only ones who is upset about it. Looks like most everyone else could care less.
> 
> Why are you trying to start trouble here?


Because he has already lost in his March Madness bracket and has nothing better to do?!?!?


----------



## tommiet (Dec 29, 2005)

With the *HIGH *cost of ESPN and Fox Sports, it's past time to move all of the ESPN channels to a sports premium package.

Found via Google search.....
ESPN's fee per subscriber was about $3.20 per month in 2009. Fox Sports $2.30 (up 43% over the last 3 years.)

Sooner or later, all sports fans will need to take the brunt of this cost and not everyone.

I'll change my name and phone number so the sports GESTAPO won't find me.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

tommiet said:


> With the *HIGH *cost of ESPN and Fox Sports, it's past time to move all of the ESPN channels to a sports premium package.
> 
> Found via Google search.....
> ESPN's fee per subscriber was about $3.20 per month in 2009. Fox Sports $2.30 (up 43% over the last 3 years.)
> ...


Now this is the kind of post that provides information needed.
Thanks.

Someone would much rather look at this , instead of that channel sucks anyway.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

I wonder if this will move Classic into a 4xx number, and free up 143 for ESPN360?
Hoping this means that Dish and ESPN have come to some sort of agreement, and moving forward. Dish and Direct aren't the only ones moving Classic to a Sports Package, Time Warner Cable has done the same thing. Looks like this is a trend for Classic.

I guess between Dish and Direct you should ask 30+ million to see if it pissed them off or not. 
Classic started to die off years ago if you asked me.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Slamminc11 said:


> . I am guessing Direct has the same thing written into their agreement with their subs as well.


They do, your right, But they have respect enough to annouce ahead of time the changes they make.
The bill increase was in writing 60 days before the change.
VS dropping was also 1 week plus advanced notice.
And I would bet anything that D* also gave its customers notice that ESPN Classic was getting moved.

Now My Febuary bill was my Notice my Receivers was going up $5
Smithsonian,GOL, Voom, being dropped was my notice.
No notice of HD Channels only getting put on Satellites that many HD customers didn't have in my area and the north east, at my expense.
Now Espn Channel that I've had for Years, just gets scooped up and snuck into a $6 extra package.

See the difference? Is it so hard to just inform us from time to time?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I don't have too, I'm sure quite a few are not to happy about it.
> 
> Notice from Dish Network would have been nice.


You realize of Course Dish doesn't even send you a Notice when they are adding extra channels and adding New HD channels. If they don't notifiy you in advanced for Positive things, why do you think they would notifiy you about something that in this case is Negative for you?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

GrumpyBear said:


> You realize of Course Dish doesn't even send you a Notice when they are adding extra channels and adding New HD channels. If they don't notifiy you in advanced for Positive things, why do you think they would notifiy you about something that in this case is Negative for you?


 You got me there.:lol:
But they do have press releases for this from time to time.
And there is always the Charlie Chat.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

damondlt said:


> They do, your right, But they have respect enough to annouce ahead of time the changes they make.
> The bill increase was in writing 60 days before the change.
> VS dropping was also 1 week plus advanced notice.
> And I would bet anything that D* also gave its customers notice that ESPN Classic was getting moved.
> ...


I know for Direct, they announced it in the guide and in the TVmail prior to it actually happening. In fact, they moved ESPN Classic to the sports pack and kept it in the original packages for a while as well before they took it down.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

DodgerKing said:


> I know for Direct, they announced it in the guide and in the TVmail prior to it actually happening. In fact, they moved ESPN Classic to the sports pack and kept it in the original packages for a while as well before they took it down.


 I know.
I give D* alot of crap, Mostly because of Equipment cost and the lack of Premium Movie channels for the price.

But D* was Always more informative of the way they run their business.

I like E* , But I don't know if I can take many more of these little things.
The little things add up over time.
Now maybe if they put the Red Zone included with Top 200 and above packs, I might spruce up.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

damondlt said:


> I don't have too, I'm sure quite a few are not to happy about it.
> 
> Notice from Dish Network would have been nice.


So DavidMi has to ask all 14 million subs if they don't care for you believe it, but you don't have to ask anyone because you just automatically know... 
I with DavidMi that most 14 million subs don't give a flying crap that this channel is now in the sports pack! I'm also willing to go as far as to say that the majority of the Dish subs here don't care and the majority of the Dish subs on SatGuys don't give a flying crap either! I would also go as far as to say that If a poll were taken here and or on SatGuys, that upwards of 70+% would say they don't care that it was moved.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> Hey guys, here's a radical thought ...
> 
> How about we discuss ESPN Classic moving to the Sports Package


 Whats your Thoughts James?
I guess some knew it was coming, But was it a dying channel?
Was it ESPNs increasing premium?
Sounds like it wasn't a Choice of E*, But why wouldn't Charlie mention it at the last Charlie chat?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

damondlt said:


> Whats your Thoughts James?
> I guess some knew it was coming, But was it a dying channel?
> Was it ESPNs increasing premium?
> Sounds like it wasn't a Choice of E*, But why wouldn't Charlie mention it at the last Charlie chat?


I don't recall watching ESPN Classic enough for the move to bother me. There have been times NASCAR has been bumped over to Classic because of a late running event. But with timer recordings I miss that content anyways (unless I happen to be watching at the beginning of the coverage).

Also, I have the sports package so I still have the channel. Kind of a shame since I don't watch it.

[Note: Off topic/bickering posts removed. Questions? Send a PM please.]


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Thats mostly why I liked ESPN classic, was the old Nascar races.
Now that will cost me another $6 per month if I want to see them.
Yes ,I'm sure not everyone Likes ESPN Classic, But I'm sure not everyone likes FX, or TNT either.

This will be a letdown for the people who like this channel.
I can't really see this as a good thing.
Unless I'm missing something.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

ESPN Classic's ratings are dismal. This is why practically every provider has moved it to a higher package and/or add on package. The niche subs that watch it are more likely to sign up for add on sports packages anyway. This will only make the sport package more inciting for those few subs, and save the provider money from having to pay more for a channel that few watch in a lower package.


----------



## DavidMi (Aug 24, 2009)

Slamminc11 said:


> Because he has already lost in his March Madness bracket and has nothing better to do?!?!?


He is not the only one, I was out in the first round.


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

DodgerKing said:


> .... This will only make the sport package more inciting for those few subs,....


 Methinks you mean:

enticing - "to attract artfully or adroitly or by arousing hope or desire"

(inciting - "to spur to action. incite stresses a stirring up and urging on, and may or may not imply initiating)


Never watched ESPN Classic myself.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DodgerKing said:


> ESPN Classic's ratings are dismal. This is why practically every provider has moved it to a higher package and/or add on package.


Wouldn't it make more sense to put popular channels that people would pay extra for in the higher packages/add ons as an encouragement to add the channel? If the ratings are dismal it doesn't qualify as a popular channel people will pay extra for.

If ESPN is overcharging for the channel it makes sense for the channel not to be in lower packages. For example, if everything except Classic was $5/sub and with Classic was $6/sub providers would want to save the $1 on an unpopular channel.

But ESPN reduces prices based on the channels added. How about a price schedule where:
ESPN+ESPN2 is $4.80
add ESPNews or ESPN Classic - 3 channels for $4.35
add both ESPNews and ESPN Classic (plus HD versions) - 7 channels for $4.25
add ESPN U - 8 channels for $4.20

Following that price schedule it would cost provider LESS to offer more channels of ESPN. The only benefit to withholding a channel by putting it in a higher package/add on would be if it was a popular enough channel that people would be encouraged to buy the add on.

There is probably a balance somewhere between minimal subscribers - AT120+ plus Sports Pack who will now get ESPN Classic and the AT250 only crowd who will lose it. Some fancy math that providers have agreed that makes it better to bump the channel up.

Either that or ESPN wants to improve the image of the channel by making it less available and turn it into a premium offering. With every provider moving the channel this is likely ESPN's marketing decision - demanding placement in a sports package instead of a regular tier.

While the prices given above are accurate for bulk business customers (and the closest prices available to a la carte pricing) ESPN may be offering a financial incentive to move the channel to a sports pack. ESPN certainly doesn't seem to be complaining about the placement.

I believe ESPN Classic is where it is because that is where ESPN wants it.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> Wouldn't it make more sense to put popular channels that people would pay extra for in the higher packages/add ons as an encouragement to add the channel? If the ratings are dismal it doesn't qualify as a popular channel people will pay extra for.
> .


Thats what I was thinking.

People pay more for channels they like.

If Ratings on this channel were so bad, Why not tell ESPN , well we are putting this channel in the Top 120 pack as well as Top 200 and 250.
Wouldn't that maybe improve ratings.?
Not Everyone has the top 250 pack.
Last time around NFL channel was moved from the Top 100 - the Top 200 base pack. That made the NFL so mad remember. Can't blaim them , they just lost all the TOP 100 customers. 
E* go away with it because the contract stated NFL had to be in the most popular package. Which Turned into the Top 200.

I would Suspect the Top 200 is Still the most popular today.
So if Ratings are Needed for ESPN Classic, Put the channel in a lower package so people can see it.
D* should have done the same. Its Been in Total Choice plus and Choice Extra for as long as I can remember. Atleast 10 years.

I think the Satellite And cable companys are the ones that kill channels.
Not Everyone wants to Spend $80-$100 per month on TV service.

ESPN may set the price, But I can't see why they would let a channel they own get tossed into stand alone $6 package.

Maybe they are hoping there are a lot of Top 120 ,and 200 Customers with Multisports pack.


----------



## inazsully (Oct 3, 2006)

Slamminc11 said:


> So DavidMi has to ask all 14 million subs if they don't care for you believe it, but you don't have to ask anyone because you just automatically know...
> I with DavidMi that most 14 million subs don't give a flying crap that this channel is now in the sports pack! I'm also willing to go as far as to say that the majority of the Dish subs here don't care and the majority of the Dish subs on SatGuys don't give a flying crap either! I would also go as far as to say that If a poll were taken here and or on SatGuys, that upwards of 70+% would say they don't care that it was moved.


The point is, past performance says that if most of 14 million subs DID give a BIG flying crap and upwards of 70 to 96% said they DID care that it was moved, the exact same scenerio would have taken place. It really boils down to a lack of respect. It's rude and it was unnecessary. It's called communicating with your customers.


----------



## tommiet (Dec 29, 2005)

damondlt said:


> Now this is the kind of post that provides information needed.
> Thanks.
> 
> Someone would much rather look at this , instead of that channel sucks anyway.


ESPN CLASSIC SUCKS..... :lol:

I hope this clears up any misconception on how I feel about ESPN.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

If you are ESPN, you want your channel in the lowest tier possible since Dish pays ESPN per subscriber regardless of how many actually watch that channel.

If you are Dish, you want to move channels to the highest tier possible because you don't pay anything for a channel unless a subscriber takes that tier, and the higher the tier the more other money Dish gets.

This is what is at odds with channel placement... and when the ratings indicate not many people watching a particular channel, then ESPN loses some leverage on mandating a lower package.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

inazsully said:


> The point is, past performance says that if most of 14 million subs DID give a BIG flying crap and upwards of 70 to 96% said they DID care that it was moved, the exact same scenerio would have taken place. It really boils down to a lack of respect. It's rude and it was unnecessary. It's called communicating with your customers.


It might be rude to remove it without communication, but then its rude to add without telling as well. At least Dish is consistant 
There is a pattern here as Dish and Direct aren't the only providers to move classic into a multisports package, Time Warner Cable has as well.

This looks like more new contract levels are going into place and the DBS Carriers, and Cable are willing to pay, the Content providers for highly rated channels and moving low rated stations to levels were the users have to pay for it, and costs the Carriers MUCH less. Just think of how much money Dish and Direct have to pay ESPN for classic, with ratings so low, it diffently wasn't bringing in viewers.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

I believe ESPN made the same deal with all providers. They wanted ESPNU to be in the lower package and to compensate would allow Classic to be moved into a sports package. I believe Dish was one of the last providers to keep Classic in a lower tier.

The people at Disney are very smart and I can see ESPNU picking up schools that don't want to be on a big 12 or mtn type channel to share air time. Only they know the real reason but since there is more money in college sports than what they show on classic it's a smart move for them.


----------



## jerbear4 (Dec 19, 2005)

I noticed that ESPN Classic or 143 was in green yesterday and was really surprised when it said I did not subscribe to the package. Went to dish online and chatted to a person who informed me it is part of the Multi-pack for only 5.99 a month. I had the multi sports for the Red Zone but told her I don't think it is worth to pick up just for ESPN Classic. I will miss the channel but really the only thing I use to watch were some old baseball games and AWA wrestling from the mid eighties. To me the multi pack is not worth the 6 bucks a month just to get Classic, especially since the programming content has gone down hill big time on the channel. I just wish though that they would have gave a notice about this happening. Makes me wonder if I will see any other channels go to green and on some other package deal.


----------



## ehren (Aug 3, 2003)

The whole point is Dish never told us about the change, who cares how people feel about ESPN in general!


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

ehren said:


> The whole point is Dish never told us about the change, who cares how people feel about ESPN in general!


and no where that I know of are they required to...


----------



## inazsully (Oct 3, 2006)

Slamminc11 said:


> and no where that I know of are they required to...


Now that's the kind of attitude Dish loves to see. Baaaaaaa!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

inazsully said:


> Now that's the kind of attitude Dish loves to see. Baaaaaaa!


Tell me about it.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

tommiet said:


> ESPN CLASSIC SUCKS..... :lol:
> 
> I hope this clears up any misconception on how I feel about ESPN.


It also clears up any misconception that someone might have about how mature you are.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> I believe ESPN made the same deal with all providers. They wanted ESPNU to be in the lower package and to compensate would allow Classic to be moved into a sports package. I believe Dish was one of the last providers to keep Classic in a lower tier.
> 
> The people at Disney are very smart and I can see ESPNU picking up schools that don't want to be on a big 12 or mtn type channel to share air time. Only they know the real reason but since there is more money in college sports than what they show on classic it's a smart move for them.


That makes a lot of sense. Letting the carriers move classic to a different level with fewer veiwers and viewers that pay extra for a package, and adding ESPN U to a lower level and make more money off it it. Easier for all to swallow money wise.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

I've been traveling for 3 weeks and only became aware of the loss of ESPN Classic in my Everything Pak due to this forum. So I contacted DISH via chat and was told I could only get it by buying the MultiSport Pak for another $6/month. When I told the CSR I wasn't interested he responded that he would give me free HBO/Showtime for 3 months. Since I already subscribe to both, it comes in the form of a $22 credit for 3 months. Certainly worth my time to inquire about the lost channel. BTW, about the only time was I watched Classics was when an old boxing match was shown so it's not a great loss IMO.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

While now the loss of ESPN Classic is an inconvenience, it may not be in the future. ESPN is in the process of rebranding the channel to be a third full-time ESPN network. It could be used as an outlet for future 3-D broadcasts, marque events, more college football, etc. And if ESPN gets the NCAA Basketball Tournament, expect games on this channel. So, ESPN moving the channel to a higher tier makes sense for more Disney profits. For me, I did not notice the change, because I have the regional SportsPak because of Big Ten Network. Of course, if they have grand plans for ESPN Classic, or whatever it becomes, I hope they uplink an HD version. Also, if they have better plans for ESPNU, the HD version should also be available (This is something DISH could do today to placate those who lost ESPN Classic).


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

GrumpyBear said:


> I wonder if this will move Classic into a 4xx number, and free up 143 for ESPN360?
> Hoping this means that Dish and ESPN have come to some sort of agreement, and moving forward. Dish and Direct aren't the only ones moving Classic to a Sports Package, Time Warner Cable has done the same thing. Looks like this is a trend for Classic.
> 
> I guess between Dish and Direct you should ask 30+ million to see if it pissed them off or not.
> Classic started to die off years ago if you asked me.


I thought "ESPN360" was an internet service. How can it be put on ch 143 (or any channel for that matter)?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Michael P said:


> I thought "ESPN360" was an internet service. How can it be put on ch 143 (or any channel for that matter)?


ViP 922 Internet tuner


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Slamminc11;2400138]and no where that I know of are they required to...[/QUOTE]

Exactly!


----------



## hawkeye1068 (Mar 24, 2010)

This was all based on a lawsuit between Dish and ESPN in New York. I called CS and they acted like it was their right to do whatever they want to do during the contract. After I politely explained to the rude CSR, I am on a month to month her tone changed. Always nice to know wheree I stand. Talked to a supervisor and she was even more clueless. 

My 6 year old loved the channel and no I have nothing. My question is what's next? I would suggest all of use call dish and explain or displeasure and maybe, just ,aybe a voice will be heard before its your favorite channel next!!


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

hawkeye1068 said:


> This was all based on a lawsuit between Dish and ESPN in New York. I called CS and they acted like it was their right to do whatever they want to do during the contract. After I politely explained to the rude CSR, I am on a month to month her tone changed. Always nice to know wheree I stand. Talked to a supervisor and she was even more clueless.
> 
> My 6 year old loved the channel and no I have nothing. My question is what's next? I would suggest all of use call dish and explain or displeasure and maybe, just ,aybe a voice will be heard before its your favorite channel next!!


Per the contract you signed between you and Dish, it is their right to move, add, drop channels from any and all packages plus to change the price on those packages. 
If you want it badly enough, then you can pay the $5.99 for the sports pack and your son can watch the channel again. If you don't, then you can either find him another channel to get interested in or switch to a different provider that carries the channel in a package that you are comfortable with, but considering Direct did the same exact thing...


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Slamminc11 said:


> , but considering Direct did the same exact thing...


Except they gave their customers notice.


----------



## RWar24 (Mar 7, 2009)

Slamminc11 said:


> Per the contract you signed between you and Dish, it is their right to move, add, drop channels from any and all packages plus to change the price on those packages.
> If you want it badly enough, then you can pay the $5.99 for the sports pack and your son can watch the channel again. If you don't, then you can either find him another channel to get interested in or switch to a different provider that carries the channel in a package that you are comfortable with, but considering Direct did the same exact thing...


Just because a contract says they can do what they want, doesn't mean it's right. How many subscribers to the multi-sport package are they going to gain by moving Classic to the package? No many, if any. It's typical big corp vs. little man B.S.. I like Dish just as much as the next person, but keep doing the little crap like this, and I'll go elsewhere.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

RWar24 said:


> Just because a contract says they can do what they want, doesn't mean it's right. How many subscribers to the multi-sport package are they going to gain by moving Classic to the package? No many, if any. It's typical big corp vs. little man B.S.. I like Dish just as much as the next person, but keep doing the little crap like this, and I'll go elsewhere.


Were are you going to go, to get ESPN Classic in a Non Multisports package? 
Seems like all carriers have made this move, not just Dish and Direct. 
Looks like Dish was one of the last ones to make the move.

Complain to ESPN and ask why everybody has moved Classic from any Base package to a sports only package?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

hawkeye1068 said:


> This was all based on a lawsuit between Dish and ESPN in New York.


There is a thread of truth there. The final disposition of the DISH vs ESPN lawsuit filed in 2008 was on March 15th. DISH had sued ESPN for access to all of ESPNs feeds without additional payment. They had a contract that specified ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNews, ESPN U, ESPN Classic and ESPN Deportes plus ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD. A separate contract specified Disney Channel, Toon Disney and SOAPnet. A third contract specified ABC Family.

DISH read the contract as requiring ESPN to provide "all feeds" of each network. A clause that (I assume) was intended to make sure DISH had access to the alternate feeds of ESPN and ESPN2 (when used). DISH read that as meaning that their contracts INCLUDED the HD versions of all the networks. Even though the contract only specified ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD. (ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD were defined as separate networks because ESPN claimed that they would not always be mirrors of what was on the SD channels.)

DISH felt that their contracts for the SD channels included the HD feeds. ESPN disagreed and in 2008 DISH sued ESPN. The court disagreed with DISH. The court sided with ESPN on a counter claim where ESPN claimed that DISH was late in payment and owed interest.

Two years later the case is finally final ... and over those two years the HD feeds of the ESPN programming have been added to the DISH network lineup. I can only assume that DISH is paying what ESPN wants and the channel placement (including Classic to the sports package) is acceptable to ESPN - if not dictated by them.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

damondlt said:


> Slamminc11 said:
> 
> 
> > , but considering Direct did the same exact thing...
> ...


Irrelevant. In this case "the same thing" is placing the channel in an extra cost sports pack.
Notice isn't the issue ... DISH's additional ~$6 charge is the issue.
(BTW: DirecTV charges $12.99 for their sports pack.)

Anyone left with ESPN Classic in a regular package?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> Irrelevant. In this case "the same thing" is placing the channel in an extra cost sports pack.
> Notice isn't the issue ... DISH's additional ~$6 charge is the issue.
> (BTW: DirecTV charges $12.99 for their sports pack.)
> 
> Anyone left with ESPN Classic in a regular package?


Notice is one of the issues. Maybe not for you, But if some of us had known in advance the changes, Our DVR's wouldn't be set to record something on a channel I've had for almost 3 years with E*, Then Poof its now gone.
The Fact that it was dropped without notice from the Top 250 and Put into a Higher $6 package are both issues.
Sure Every provider might have done it ,or it very well might be ESPN's doing, But I doubt All 14 million customers knew of this ahead of time.
Directvs 18 million did.
They take this "We can change what ever we want,when ever we want" to a whole new level, and that needs to stop.

As far as them adding channels without notice, Well they also Raise our prices and fees every year without notice too , what they give they take right back.


----------



## coldsteel (Mar 29, 2007)

damondlt said:


> As far as them adding channels without notice, Well they also Raise our prices and fees every year without notice too , what they give they take right back.


Bull, the rate increase notice was passed to EVERY customer via bill messages. If you missed it here, you can blame no-one but yourself. Now, you're just nit-picking.

Yes, it'd have been nice to have the notice, but, nowhere does it say they HAVE TO. Technically, your 250 stayed the same. Didn't you get channel 285?


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

coldsteel said:


> Bull, the rate increase notice was passed to EVERY customer via bill messages. If you missed it here, you can blame no-one but yourself. Now, you're just nit-picking.


Yeah actually Dish is usually very good at notifying customers about rate changes. Changes regarding channels, well I agree that's there's lots of room for improvement.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

This year's "rate increase" was mild compared to years past. Personally I'd rather lose a channel or 2 to a higher tier or a separate "pack" to keep the package price low.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Michael P said:


> This year's "rate increase" was mild compared to years past. Personally I'd rather lose a channel or 2 to a higher tier or a separate "pack" to keep the package price low.


I would agree with the mild rate increase, only for those that are under 4 DVR's. Those over 4 DVR's and who were used to the everything pak's no additional fees for DVR's and the phone/network connection discounts may not feel the same way about the increase.
I only have 2 fulltime and 1 partime DVR and compared to this time last yr, yes I would agree that the price increase was mild.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

coldsteel said:


> Bull, the rate increase notice was passed to EVERY customer via bill messages. If you missed it here, you can blame no-one but yourself. Now, you're just nit-picking.
> 
> ?


 Lets see it?
Febuary 1st is when I got my notice. Lets see the notice you guys got on the Bill increases, Prior to the effective Date.
Post them.
Febuary 19 Bill from Dish, Had a Small section, That said as of Febuary 1st, You might see some billing updates.
So 19 days after the fact is when I got my notice. Januarys Bill said Nothing.


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

Let's try to stay on topic, please.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Kent Taylor said:


> Let's try to stay on topic, please.


I'm Trying.
But fact remains this thread wouldn't have started if E* would have just giving us a heads up before hand.
Something they never do.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I'm Trying.
> But fact remains this thread wouldn't have started if E* would have just giving us a heads up before hand.
> Something they never do.


When it comes to adding and removing channels, Dish is one thing, and thats consistant. No warnings either way.

You may want to email ESPN, or start a thread on one of their sites, and figure out why ESPN Classic has been moved by every carrier to a multi-sports package. Ask ESPN how come they gave no warnings to any of thier viewers, that carriers were moving Classic to a Higher package. Direct, Dish Network, TimeWarner Cable, and Cox Communications, have all done the samething. Looks like ESPN was up to something and should have given viewers warnings.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I've said this before... Time Warner doesn't tell anyone about channel additions/deletions either... It is something ALL of the providers are bad at if you ask me.

That's why I can't hold Dish's feet to the fire too much, since it isn't like anyone else is shining in the communication-to-customers arena.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I've said this before... Time Warner doesn't tell anyone about channel additions/deletions either... It is something ALL of the providers are bad at if you ask me.
> 
> That's why I can't hold Dish's feet to the fire too much, since it isn't like anyone else is shining in the communication-to-customers arena.


 Well it sounds like this time it wasn't E* doing, But from all the past Channel drops and moves, its hard to tell who is responsible.


----------



## hawkeye1068 (Mar 24, 2010)

All this jacking around from Dish, just wants me to take something from them too. I'm just tired of all the taking and then the attitudes, especially when CSR's remind you that they control all buttons. 

Thanks James for the response. That makes a lot more sense to me and I appreciate the input.

Happy surfin all!


----------



## Camerabuilder (Mar 27, 2010)

well, when I look at tomorrow's ESPN Classic schedule, I see the Chelsea - Villa match from the EPL being aired. Guess that ESPN will be justifiying switch to the higher tier by putting more EPL (and perhaps other Euro football) onto Classic. That is why people will pay for the upper tier - you put exclusive niche programming on that some demographic is willing to fork out the $$ for.

I would also guess that ESPN wont be adding more telecasts to ESPN2 other than the one remaining match called for on their website. 

Prediction: ESPN Classic goes HD in short order to satisfy the sports fiends...


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Camerabuilder said:


> well, when I look at tomorrow's ESPN Classic schedule, I see the Chelsea - Villa match from the EPL being aired. Guess that ESPN will be justifiying switch to the higher tier by putting more EPL (and perhaps other Euro football) onto Classic. That is why people will pay for the upper tier - you put exclusive niche programming on that some demographic is willing to fork out the $$ for.
> 
> I would also guess that ESPN wont be adding more telecasts to ESPN2 other than the one remaining match called for on their website.
> 
> Prediction: ESPN Classic goes HD in short order to satisfy the sports fiends...


2 months ago I would have been all over ESPN Classic going HD and showing EPL games. Now that we have FSC in HD, and I am not that worried about what ESPN does for Soccer coverage as FSC is superior with thier signal, camera angles. The Quality of FSC HD for soccer at least, leaves ESPN way behind. We get EPL, UEFA, Italia Series A and more with FSC. ESPN has a lot of catching up to do.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

> DISH felt that their contracts for the SD channels included the HD feeds.


Fine, if E* feels that way then they should give all of us free HD! That is the big selling point that TWC (lovingly referred to as "Crime Warner" by some on the AVS forums) makes.

What they don't tell you is that to get HD you have to lease an expensive HDTV digital cable box. Otherwise the "free" HD is just the local stations that may be in "clear QAM". E* gives us "free" HD's if you sub to your LIL's (where available in HD) if you do not sub in digital to the "AT" packs. Even the RSN's (albeit part-time - game only) and premiums are "free HD" too. All you need is an HD satellite receiver and a waiver of the "HD enabling fee" (which is what former 921 owners get now).


----------



## coldsteel (Mar 29, 2007)

Michael P said:


> All you need is an HD satellite receiver and a waiver of the "HD enabling fee" (which is what former 921 owners get now).


EVERYONE gets the fee waived if they opt to not have a metal HD package. It's been that way since last year...


----------



## etirvan (May 23, 2010)

First off, I will clarify that I hardly ever watch the ESPN networks but have found an article that might offer some insight as to why ESPN wanted ESPN Classic moved to a higher package. I don't know how many of you have read this, but here it is.

http: //hubpages.com/hub/DISH-Network-Moves-ESPN-Classic-from-Top-200-to-the-Multi-Sports-Pack

Since this is my first post on this site, I can't actually post a URL. I inserted a space between the colon and slashes to get around this, so just delete the space and copy the URL into the web bar.

According to the site, ESPN wanted to move Classic to higher packages in order to increase viewership of ESPN U. This is a deal they probably made with other cable and satellite companies, as well, which would explain why it's a universal change for other providers. It really does seem that in this case, ESPN is more at fault than either Dish Network, DirectTV, or even Time Warner.


----------



## CarolinaGuy79 (Sep 9, 2009)

I know they already have ESPN3.com but to me I think they should need to rename classic ESPN3 and show live games and such like ESPN and ESPN 2 does. And then renam ESPN3.com like ESPNonline.com or something.


----------



## Satpro92 (Jan 30, 2005)

Not everyone has signed a contract so that argument only applies to part(most) of subscribers so,do the rest of us have a legit beef?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Satpro92 said:


> Not everyone has signed a contract so that argument only applies to part(most) of subscribers so,do the rest of us have a legit beef?


You don't. Their ToS is what says what they can and will do at their discretion. If you don't agree with it as per their ToS you can leave. Now if you have an agreement that may incur a fee. This is true of all providers if you read their ToS. So whether or not you signed a contract it doesn't change their ToS.


----------

