# Why no good HDTV PPV



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

Why doesn't Dish offer good movies and a varied schedule of HDTV movies on their PPV HD channel. Its like 2 movies rotated for months and neither of them is ever any good or like the offerings on their regular PPV stations. I would rent them daily if they were good. Dish is missing out on a lot of revenue.


----------



## lakebum431 (Jun 30, 2005)

I agree, I've said this before. It is very rare that I see anything on this channel that I want to watch.


----------



## bigrick (Oct 21, 2003)

But for hockey fans it's great because they mirror some games in HD there and for us with Center Ice, it's a free game in HD, very cool. But I do agree with the movie thing too.


----------



## the_bear (Oct 18, 2004)

DVD sales are more profitable for movie studios than PPV. The logic is if the movie is available on HD PPV, people will be less likely to buy the DVD. Is that logic correct? No one knows.


----------



## dwcobb (Oct 13, 2005)

I wish they wouldn't bother with the "looks pretty" content on that HD PPV station, and just run real movies. If they took their entire monthly line up of PPV and rotated it through the HD station, I am sure I would rent something every month. 

To date, however, I have never taken one of their HD PPV's, and only 2x have I taken a regular PPV. I don't bother with the regular because I would sooner just get a DVD which looks better and fills my screen rather than watch a movie in crappy quality in 4x3 format. And of course when you zoom one of their few LBX options, it just looks crappy too.

I would DEFINITELY buy these regularly. There is at least one movie every month on PPV I would like to see but don't bother with because of the quality issues.


----------



## kckucera (Aug 1, 2005)

I agree, I have been disappointed with the title selection in HDPPV. Then again I have been disappointed with my crap 921, the reduced image quaility on VOOM and the yet worse quality on SD stations. If one were to compare OTA digital SD to Dish "digital" SD the difference is stunning. Shame on you DISH.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I fall in the "I dunno" category.

On the one hand, I think I would be tempted more if there were more HD PPV movies... On the other hand, I buy a lot of DVDs... so the $4-$6 or whatever for a PPV eats into the DVD budget.

So in all reality, I might not actually pay for PPV even if there were more available... but I still side with the folks who would pay for them if more choice was there.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

I am leaning towards doing the NetFlix or Blockbuster thing, because then at least I can get full screen movies in decent quality. Dish is missing the boat. If the studios aren't allowing them, then they are missing the boat too. No way I am buying any more DVDs until the new HD ones come out, its just a waste of money on something you will want to replace anyway.


----------



## mth (Dec 14, 2005)

When you get a regular movie PPV through dish, what format is it in? 

Is it widescreen? 

Is it 480p


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

mth said:


> When you get a regular movie PPV through dish, what format is it in?
> 
> Is it widescreen?
> 
> Is it 480p


They are crappy SD and not even worth watching. I haven't rented a movie from Dish since I got my HDTV. They are missing tons of revenue because they dont' offer a better selection of HD PPV.


----------



## dwcobb (Oct 13, 2005)

I would certainly be a regular if they had a better selection. The truth is, you don't buy every DVD for every movie you want to see (at least I don't). That is a terrible waste of money.

There are plenty of movies I wouldn't mind paying $5 to see one time but don't expect I will watch again. I only buy DVD's if a) I know they are going to look good on my TV (not all DVD's do as you know) and b) I think it is something I might want to watch more than once, or (rarely) c) something I don't think I will find on rental easily.

I can't quite buy the studio argument on this one. I bet this is simply a case where E* isn't wanting to pay what it costs to carry more programming on the HDPPV channel because they don't get a lot of business there. And because they don't buy a better selection, they don't get more business. A vicious circle that will never break unless someone thinks it through. Of course there may be some sort of cost for formatting the movie for HD. I know movie quality is actually higher res than HD, but there is still probably some cost in there.

Remember that most TV's are still SD, and studios are perfectly content to let their movies be purchased as PPV in SD format.

Heck, if they even did 4 different real movies each month and kept rerunning the other crap they do on that station they would have a much better channel. Once I decided on Dec 1 I wasn't going to buy the Ring 2 in HDPPV, I knew there was no point in looking again until January.


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

The problem is lack of bandwidth. Every PPV HD movie would take up the same bandtwidth as 8 regular channels. Until MPEG4 is fully implemented and more birds are launched, it is unlikely we will see too much HD PPV.


----------



## dwcobb (Oct 13, 2005)

We are not talking about more channels. We are talking about more choices on the same channel.

Each month, they run ONE real movie, and 2-3 "gee isn't it pretty" HD type things - figure the kind of thing you would see in one of those dome movie theaters that is really light on content and value and all about looking at the pretty pictures.

If they ran more choices during the month, more people would buy. But in December, their only real HD PPV movie is The Ring 2. THey don't need more channels - they need to vary their program schedule more on the SAME channel.


----------



## navychop (Jul 13, 2005)

Well, I'm not the only one to sometimes pays for eye candy.

Anyway, after Echostar X launches and inserts correctly, and they finish shuffling around locals and satellite assignments, I'll bet the choices will go up along with the emplaced HD receivers- which is all new ones after 2/1/06. 

By the end of 2006, we'll probably see more HD all around. The cut off date for analog is set, people have a vested interest in pushing digital and HD in particular, and the sales of sets capable of receiving HD will skyrocket. Keep in mind, very soon ALL televisions sold will be able to receive digital signals. We'll have to see if the tuner less monitors sell well at all. DISH will feed that market. More choices on the current channel assignments, and no doubt more HD channels, PPV & otherwise.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

Yeah we aren't asking for more bandwidth, just more choices with the existing. In fact aren't they wasting bandwidth terribly right now offering the same movie over and over again for a month. I bet they are broadcasting stuff at times that not even 1 single box is viewing. Now if they rotated 10 good movies a day, then viewership and purchasing of those movies would go way up. And I certainly am not going to buy more low/standard res DVD when I know that HD-DVD is right around the corner, so NOW is the time when they could really fill the gap and make money.


----------



## the_bear (Oct 18, 2004)

Every time someone orders a PPV, Dish and the studio split the profit. I don’t know what the % split is between the two, but Dish would definitely benefit from more HD PPV, but the studios are the ones that don’t want all movies on PPV. Even if the studio got a bigger % of the profit for a great movie it still would not compare with the profit from a DVD sale. It is the same problem with HD PPV on Direct and cable.


----------



## navychop (Jul 13, 2005)

But the future is in PPV/VOD. The studios will eventually realize that, perhaps after pirates make available what people want and will pay for.


----------



## dwcobb (Oct 13, 2005)

the_bear said:


> Every time someone orders a PPV, Dish and the studio split the profit. I don't know what the % split is between the two, but Dish would definitely benefit from more HD PPV, but the studios are the ones that don't want all movies on PPV. Even if the studio got a bigger % of the profit for a great movie it still would not compare with the profit from a DVD sale. It is the same problem with HD PPV on Direct and cable.


That still doens't make any sense. There are plenty of movies available on PPV now. But only one of them a month goes out in HD.

Remember, someone with an SD set (most of the country) already has the ability to buy numerous PPV movies in the same quality they would see a DVD in. Yes, many are 4x3 but so are the pay movie stations. And some are shown LBX.

There is nothing fundamental about HD PPV that would make the studios less likely to let you see the movie PPV than in SD. It is just an untapped market for all parties.

I really don't believe it is the studios saying no here. If that were the case, HBO HD and Showtime HD would have the same problems.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

dwcobb said:


> I really don't believe it is the studios saying no here. If that were the case, HBO HD and Showtime HD would have the same problems.


I don't know about the rest of the discussion... but I can reply to the above.

When HBO or SHO pay for the rights to show a movie in HD (or otherwise) they are paying the movie studio up front for exclusive rights to show it that month, or several months, or whatever.

A movie on PPV isn't paid for until people pay to view it... so I don't believe a movie studio gets much, if anything, up front money for PPV until people actually pay to view it... so if HBO/SHO wants to pay a bundle in advance... a movie studio likes that a lot!

Who knows how many people will actually PPV it, especially with DVD sales being high on the good movies... so I imagine there isn't much incentive for the studios to let their good movies go the PPV route.

Now, if there were a middle-man who wanted to pay the movie studio for the right to have something exclusively as a PPV.... then that might be different, but I don't think it works that way now... I think it is a joint-venture where the studio makes something each time the movie is viewed.


----------



## tegage (Sep 3, 2005)

ebaltz said:


> I am leaning towards doing the NetFlix or Blockbuster thing, because then at least I can get full screen movies in decent quality. Dish is missing the boat. If the studios aren't allowing them, then they are missing the boat too. No way I am buying any more DVDs until the new HD ones come out, its just a waste of money on something you will want to replace anyway.


Netflix is awesome. I have used this service since their inception. They turn around movies very fast by having local distribution centers. It is very convenient and very affordable.


----------



## dwcobb (Oct 13, 2005)

EDIT: Responding to HDMe---

Again, these points are general statements about PPV versus pay channels versus DVD's - nothing unique about HD about them.

The studios authorize plenty of movies in PPV systems. Go to a hotel with a good system and you will see dozens. This month, Dish has 21 movies in PPV for SD. They have one real movie, and 2 cartoons I have never heard of for HD for this month. It is that way every month. 

That is the part that makes no sense.

I don't believe studios are saying "ok, show Chronicles of Riddick on PPV in SD, but not in HD." 

They seem content with their revenue share on the SD content. Since HD is more expensive, presumably they make more money on those, too.

And there is actually less risk of them losing a DVD sale on an HD PPV than on an SD one. If you have an SD movie, and have a decent harddrive, you can store that thing virtually forever. On the current Dish DVR's, you can't back anything up and only have 25h of HD storage. You simply areon't going to buy that movie one time and store it forever in HD - or at least, you are far less likely to than you might if you were an SD user. It is possible that they fear it just the same, but it isn't a rational fear, and at least one of the movie executives would be smart enough to figure that part out.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

dwcobb said:


> Again, these points are general statements about PPV versus pay channels versus DVD's - nothing unique about HD about them.


I agree, it's not new territory really from that perspective. To you and me it seems the same... but I wonder if the movie studio doesn't see it differently.

The same movie studios that fought VHS/Beta VCRs back in the day because they thought people would stop going to movies if they could record off TV and watch whenever they wanted to... but then people started buying movies on VHS, and then eventually DVD and the movie companies finally are starting to realize that there is money to be made in those markets... even if it does take away some of the movie market.



dwcobb said:


> The studios authorize plenty of movies in PPV systems. Go to a hotel with a good system and you will see dozens. This month, Dish has 21 movies in PPV for SD. They have one real movie, and 2 cartoons I have never heard of for HD for this month. It is that way every month.
> 
> That is the part that makes no sense.
> 
> I don't believe studios are saying "ok, show Chronicles of Riddick on PPV in SD, but not in HD."


I have no real evidence to support it... but I think maybe they do say that sometimes. Knowing their HD presentation is superior to the SD one... they may very well hold back. I'd also be interested to know when HBO or SHO buys a movie to air on their channel... do they have to pay more for the rights to show the HD version on their HD channels? It would surprise me if the movie studios didn't ask for more for the right to the higher quality stuff.



dwcobb said:


> They seem content with their revenue share on the SD content. Since HD is more expensive, presumably they make more money on those, too.
> 
> And there is actually less risk of them losing a DVD sale on an HD PPV than on an SD one. If you have an SD movie, and have a decent harddrive, you can store that thing virtually forever. On the current Dish DVR's, you can't back anything up and only have 25h of HD storage. You simply areon't going to buy that movie one time and store it forever in HD - or at least, you are far less likely to than you might if you were an SD user. It is possible that they fear it just the same, but it isn't a rational fear, and at least one of the movie executives would be smart enough to figure that part out.


I think your last bit might be the hammer hitting the nail... it isn't rational, but I suspect it may be true... and I also suspect that there is someone smart who will see it at some point.

Then again, I don't know how many of us HD people there are... Voom only had 50,000 people at most. Even if every single one of them paid for a PPV movie that pales in comparison to the 11 million subscribers Dish has potential for SD PPV movies. Maybe there just aren't enough of us HD subs for them to figure a good turnaround average on the HDPPVs?


----------



## kb7oeb (Jun 16, 2004)

If the profit on its so bad why do they bother at all, they even mirror the channel on 148.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

kb7oeb said:


> If the profit on its so bad why do they bother at all, they even mirror the channel on 148.


I can't speak for DirecTV... but Dish is sharing the bandwidth between a HDPPV, NBAHD, NFLTV and the sometimes Center Ice NHL game in HD.

If you notice, when they do have something NFLTV, NBATV, or a Center Ice, then there is no PPVHD movie. Also the whole channel is Off Air a lot.

So I'm guessing that if they had something else more compelling, they might do away with the PPV altogether, but right now those other channels sharing the bandwidth are not 24hr HD channels... so Dish can triple up and use the same bandwidth for multiple purposes.

On the Devil's Advocate side... they may also be feeling things out, and trying the channel to see how people react. If no one buys, and no one says anything... expect it to disappear... but if some people buy and lots of people ask for more movies, then perhaps they will consider adding more?


----------



## navychop (Jul 13, 2005)

It may be an investment in the future. By this time next year, I suspect the market for HD PPV will have grown several fold. And still be small potatoes. But at least the trend will be visible, and it will be clear that long before that 2/17/09 date rolls around, there will be money to be made from HD.


----------



## the_bear (Oct 18, 2004)

dwcobb said:


> That still doens't make any sense. There are plenty of movies available on PPV now. But only one of them a month goes out in HD.
> 
> Remember, someone with an SD set (most of the country) already has the ability to buy numerous PPV movies in the same quality they would see a DVD in. Yes, many are 4x3 but so are the pay movie stations. And some are shown LBX.
> 
> ...


Dish SD PPV is about half the quality of DVD. The Dish HD PPV is about three times the quality of DVD. I know I personally am less likely to rent a DVD of something I could see for three times the quality PPV. On the other hand, I would rather rent a DVD than watch it at half the quality, SD PPV. The PPV does not effect my purchasing decisions, but for some it might. This is the big question studios are trying to figure out.

Even if a movie has already come out on DVD and PPV, HBO is still willing to pay a lot for the movie. I have never heard of HBO will to pay a premium for a movie that has not been on PPV, but they are usually willing to pay a premium for a movie if it has not been on a major network yet.


----------

