# All American Direct Ceasing Operations (Feb 25th)



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

"All American Direct will cease operations on February 25th 2014 at 11:59 pm. At that time our services will no longer be available. All customers with time remaining on their service will receive a prorated refund by check or credit card. For further information please refer to the FAQ tab on this page."

http://www.allamericandirect.com/

*Frequently Asked Questions*

*Why is All American Direct closing?*
The need for our services has declined over the years since local markets have become available.

*How can we receive distant network channels?*
We know of no options at this time

*How can I get my local channels?*
Dish Network provides local channels to all markets in the United States
Please contact Dish Network at 1-800-333-dish.

*What about the money I paid for service?*
If you have money left on account a prorated refund will be issued.

*When can I expect my refund?*
If you paid by credit card your refund should appear on your account within 3 business days.
If you paid by check a refund should be received in the mail no later than March 31st.

*Why does the refund take so long?*
Because of the large number of refunds being issued

*What about using my Dish Network service while traveling in my RV?*
Please contact Dish Network regarding this option at 1-800-333-DISH

*Where can I find more information?*
Please continue to visit this website
Questions can be emailed to: [email protected]
Our call center can be reached at 1-800-909-9677

*What about my monthly credit card auto pay?*
It will be prorated to deliver service through 2/25/14.

*Can I start new, renew, or reactivate service?*
We are no longer able to accept new, renew or reactivate customers as of 1-27-14


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The above is from the All American Direct / My Distant Networks website.
A couple of comments ...

"How can we receive distant network channels? - We know of no options at this time"
Apparently no one has told AAD about DirecTV. 

"What about using my Dish Network service while traveling in my RV? - Please contact Dish Network regarding this option at 1-800-333-DISH"
Hopefully this is a sign that DISH will resume offering distants to RV customers (the DISH feeds are still uplinked).


BTW: This really doesn't help DISH bandwidth wise. While AAD leased a transponder from DISH on 119 DISH has had several of their own SD channels on that transponder. (164 FUSE, 358 SUND, 382 EPIX3, 393 PRST, 408 FOXSD, 413 PAC12, 873 BEIN2) It basically frees up four SD channels.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

That's sad to read though it's been years since I last used them. I'd still like to be able to subscribe to East Coast broadcast network channels but in HD. Guess that will never happen again along with no CBC Olympics coverage like back when I got my big dish. The good old days....


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

For a news junkie like myself, this hurts. Would the waiver option for distant networks be available with DirecTV?


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

joetex said:


> For a news junkie like myself, this hurts. Would the waiver option for distant networks be available with DirecTV?


They are if you are not covered by one of the big four, PBS or CW. If you get even a SD version from your DMA offered, then you are not able to request for a waiver. If a waiver option is available, you should be able to get it because that would mean there is no affiliate for that station in your DMA meaning no one to deny it.

I guess there are DMA's that DirecTV does not supply locals too so there are some exceptions to that. Also there would be very few who get DNS for all 4. Mostly just the one or ones you are not able to get in your local package that DirecTV offers. If I knew a zip code to check, I could give much more specific information on DNS availablility for DirecTV.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Thanks for the response. I actually have the big four in my area (NY). Like I said, being a news junkie, I enjoyed watching the different affiliates from Frisco. Oh well, maybe someday, there will be a market for us news aficionados. Still have the superstations so they will have to suffice, sigh.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

James Long said:


> .....
> "How can we receive distant network channels? - We know of no options at this time"
> Apparently no one has told AAD about DirecTV.
> 
> ...


----------



## peg645 (Jan 30, 2014)

Just joined the forum because of this issue.

Have always had DISH at this house, initially getting the NYC/LA network channels via All American Direct. Never signed up for local channels once they became available on DISH. My home is located between Utica and Albany, and my location is just on the Utica side of the FCC "line". So I would be required to receive the local broadcasts from Utica. I do more business/have more involvement in Albany, and can pick up at least their NBC & FOX channels with a small roof antenna that is connected to the bedroom TV only. But at least it allows me to grab local news/weather, see NBC/FOX shows. When I first moved here, there was a large antenna mounted on my roof that picked up all channels from both Utica and Albany. Eventually the large antenna blew over, and I only replaced it with a smaller one as the big one was really aesthetically unappealing.

So having just read the notice about All American Direct, looks like I'll have to succumb to receiving Utica channels if I want to see all networks. Called DISH, and asked would I be required now to sign a contract to add local channels? Yes and no. No just to include the local channels, but alas, I have old equipment, would have to buy new, and sign up for two years. :down:

So this stinks, let alone that I've loved getting NYC, and even LA local network channels. It's also been great having two different times I can catch the live broadcast when my DVR is filled up and I don't wish to record. 

Have no desire to sign a contract, or set up a huge antenna. 
Apologize for the long explanation. But if anyone knows any alternative to my situation, would love to hear one.
Am wondering if I could buy newer compatible equipment direct online, etc., to avoid a contract...?
I otherwise really have no DISH complaints. Well, except for their still failing to broadcast Yankee games.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

joetex said:


> Like I said, being a news junkie, I enjoyed watching the different affiliates from Frisco. Oh well, maybe someday, there will be a market for us news aficionados.


If you have the bandwidth and speed, look into Roku and some of the news options there. Many local stations are carried from all over the country.


----------



## ljr01 (Mar 6, 2008)

I was about to get a Winegard 1000SK (WA only) dish installed on my RV on the assumption I could fall back to AAD in the increasing number of areas with EA only locals. Bad assumption. I really don't want to spend all that $ on the roof top dish and still have to carry a portable around too.

Finger crossed that this motivates either Dish to offer DNS again or Winegard to support the EA.

(How many times has the RV/DNS situation changed without notice? I've lost count but I'm guessing 4 or 5.)


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

peg645 said:


> Just joined the forum because of this issue.
> 
> .....
> So having just read the notice about All American Direct, looks like I'll have to succumb to receiving Utica channels if I want to see all networks. Called DISH, and asked would I be required now to sign a contract to add local channels? Yes and no. No just to include the local channels, but alas, I have old equipment, would have to buy new, and sign up for two years. :down:
> ...


I do have a suggestion. I have to believe the reason they are telling you the need to get new equipment to get your locals is because they are on the Eastern Arc, while you are presently on the Western Arc. Your equipment must be old enough that is is not compatible with the Eastern Arc. (And sometime in the future won't be on the WA either) That is important because if you push a little you should get the receivers needed to get locals with no contract extension. You may have to pay some for them to change your satellite dish. If you want beyond what the considered replacement is for your receivers, then you may have to extend your contract. However even at that, I am hearing with the demand for the Hopper, if you want a VIP receiver like a 722 or 612 if you have been with DISH awhile and pay on time, you still may be able to avoid a contract extension.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

I hope dish offers dns again because i am grandfather and it will be in hd as well.


----------



## peg645 (Jan 30, 2014)

tampa8 said:


> I do have a suggestion. I have to believe the reason they are telling you the need to get new equipment to get your locals is because they are on the Eastern Arc, while you are presently on the Western Arc. Your equipment must be old enough that is is not compatible with the Eastern Arc. (And sometime in the future won't be on the WA either) That is important because if you push a little you should get the receivers needed to get locals with no contract extension. You may have to pay some for them to change your satellite dish. If you want beyond what the considered replacement is for your receivers, then you may have to extend your contract. However even at that, I am hearing with the demand for the Hopper, if you want a VIP receiver like a 722 or 612 if you have been with DISH awhile and pay on time, you still may be able to avoid a contract extension.


 That sounds like an idea. Since I could care less about upgrading my equipment for the time being, I'd be glad to take one of the other models.

And no, SayWhat? - unfortunately I have DISH because I'm out in the middle of nowhere - no TimeWarner, no Verizon high speed. Nothing. Use Exede for internet, and have limited usage monthly.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

I am calling dish to see what is the plan for people who want distant networks. The representative ask me "what is distant networks" I tell her its channels I currently subscribe to from "all american direct" and "my distant networks." She tells me what is all american direct or my distant networks, I never heard of that before. That is further I got so far, waiting to speak with supervisor now lol. They hung up on me now : )

Representative #2: Doesn't know what it is either, I find this hard to believe. No wonder all american direct is pulling their plugs from dish network. Its a 2 way street need to help out one another, but one company is doing poor job of making its customer aware that dns is available through all american direct.

Looks like dish has no plans to provide dns to its customer : (


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Thanks SayWhat? Am actually checking out Roku-they do have some local news there from different areas. Maybe I will spring for the box and who knows what will happen after that? In this day of DVRs, I can't believe that there are not others out there who would want the distant networks more for the local news and items specific to a given community that you see on them. I do not see how this would compete with viewership of hometown locals on which we watch or DVR our favorite shows.


----------



## peg645 (Jan 30, 2014)

Great news! 
I called DISH, advised I was on the fence about keeping them. (I had been, and have been having conversations with them in recent times mulling over the decision.)
Then asked if I didn't require the Hopper, could I get updated equipment that would provide the local channels with no contract?
They have waived the contract commitment, and are giving me The Hopper! I'm dropping one box which I rarely use, so my bill will still be the same. 
Now if I could get Albany channels, and Yankee games, my TV life would be perfect, but this will do.


----------



## shadough (Dec 31, 2006)

God this sucks. 14 yrs of having distants an thats it? Man. Hopefully I'll come into some $ an get an RV.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

With the Hopper you will get the locals assigned to you by the FCC via Neilson, but if you want any OTA (over the air/antenna) locals you will have to buy an OTA adapter that plugs into the Hopper USB.

One cannot be ordered from Dish until after the Hopper is activated, but you might find one on Amazon or eBay, just be sure it is for the Hopper, not the 722K, they are different.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

comizzou573 said:


> I hope dish offers dns again because i am grandfather and it will be in hd as well.


Bad news, no one can be Grandfathered with DISH. When Distants were taken away so was anyone who was Grandfathered.


----------



## sharonmu (Oct 3, 2013)

Finally i found the topic. This really sucks. Because first off. I went with dish for superstations. They took that away on the 19th of september. I then paid up til april of this year for all american direct now its going away. I had all of the distant networks on directv. LA & NY. and changed for this. & even had the HD versions also on directv. And now if i went back to directv. I could get distant networks but would only be East coast lost my chance with Los Angeles.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

Why did you lose your chance with Los Angeles? They can legally sell them to you if you qualify for Distants generally. Is that their own policy?
What they can't do is sell East Coast Distants to time zones to the west.

Why do you say the took away the Superstations from you? Subscribers are Grandfathered.


----------



## shadough (Dec 31, 2006)

No, Sharon has had the misfortune of NOT being subscribed to superstations by the deadline of sept 19th. Found out that news a lil too late an can now, no longer get them. Sometimes life throws u curve balls

I dont know what she's talkin about in regards to not getting LA DNS from Directv. Its my understanding NO-one is eligible for DNS on DIrectv unless u have NO local stations at all, available on directv. I myself have fallen victim to directvs strong stance of trying to eliminate every customer who has DNS. I even had waivers granted but wasnt able to continue the service.

The only silver lining I can see in the future now, because of all this, is once Superstations are taken away permanently, I'll be able to cancel Dish and save some $$.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

tampa8 said:


> Why did you lose your chance with Los Angeles? They can legally sell them to you if you qualify for Distants generally. Is that their own policy?
> What they can't do is sell East Coast Distants to time zones to the west.
> 
> Why do you say the took away the Superstations from you? Subscribers are Grandfathered.


You can not have both east and west coast DNS feeds.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

Got that, but can have LA. Post said lost chance at LA. Both is another story. That is assuming you would even qualify.


----------



## sharonmu (Oct 3, 2013)

tampa8 said:


> Why did you lose your chance with Los Angeles? They can legally sell them to you if you qualify for Distants generally. Is that their own policy?
> What they can't do is sell East Coast Distants to time zones to the west.
> 
> Why do you say the took away the Superstations from you? Subscribers are Grandfathered.


The reason being is when i decided on dish. Directv told me your grandfathered in for LA & NY (east & west coast) Also got standard def & High defintion. ABC,CBS,FOX,NBC but once i changed to dish & directv said if i ever remove them i won't get them back & now If i ever go back to directv. I could only get the east coast because i won't be grandfathered. Also i had CW baltimore & another one san diego. . Cause that law started and if your not grandfathered. Then your out of luck. I have east & west coast feeds now on All American Direct. But they are going to be gone. The reason i'm able to get them there's no local channels in my area. So i got waivers for both feeds. Because my area had lexington kentucky. And its so far away. Really my news isn't lexington. But for some unknown reason. the cable tv service ( time warner cable) sells cable tv & i'm close enough get this one for Knoxville TN ( i guess called significant channels) all of them plus lexington kentucky. I wish all american direct unless directv changed 6 months from when i went with dish would realize there was other options getting DNS if your grandfathered. I loved directv. I would still have All of them distant networks cause i was grandfathered. There customer service was nice enough to tell me if i ever remove them i can't get them back.


----------



## Lou (Nov 1, 2006)

I have noticed 61.5 has the Big 4 in a numbre of markets on Conus (not Spots). Is this new? Because of one massive tree, I can only get the Western Arc. If Dish offered the same on the Western Arc, I see options.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There are about a dozen channels testing (6146-6159) that have been there for at least a year. Three of each network as if DISH was planning some sort of distants service (Denver and Chicago on 61.5, New York on 72.7). In the current test mode (which the stations have never left) they are not available to subscribers.

The other "big four" network stations are only for subscribers living in the markets those stations serve.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

I dont want to give out the wrong information, but I just saw at satelliteguys.us. Someone mention that SatelliteGuys might buy All American Direct. They said they got this information for Dish Network Representative. I spoke with someone through chat, it sounds like it might be true.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Would be great if it happened by February 25. Otherwise I am probably going to get a Roku.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

Sounds like roku and aereo is the new movement for tv.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

comizzou573 said:


> I dont want to give out the wrong information, but I just saw at satelliteguys.us. Someone mention that SatelliteGuys might buy All American Direct. They said they got this information for Dish Network Representative. I spoke with someone through chat, it sounds like it might be true.


Wait that website is saying they are going to buy America direct?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Wait that website is saying they are going to buy America direct?


It was a joke posted by someone. And now back to reality ...


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

The original post was not a joke. My response there was joke, in response to the two people who apparently believe it and believe they are somehow grandfathered to get Distants from Dish should they offer them to households.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

So Satellite Guys is really buying or All American Direct? If you have a RV, then I understand why you are not grandfathered, but household is different. One thing to do is call dish and ask them if your receiver is grandfathered to receive distant networks. They will look more into your account, and tell whether or not you are grandfathered.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

There is no such thing as a Grandfathered DISH customer for Distants.

EchoStar may not claim that any Grade B subscriber is "grandfathered" under SHVIA because it could not produce a list of such subscribers. (SHVIA did not provide any grandfathering for Grade A subscribers.)
http://www.kalb.com/story/12489711/satellite-waiver

And that doesn't even address that DISH (nor Direct) can give you Distants if you have your locals available from them, even if you can not get locals OTA. You would need a waiver from the affiliate that was obtained by DISH (Must be obtained by DISH) on your behalf. Good luck getting that.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

I respect where your getting information, I got mines from the FCC. So I am going by there most updated information they have, my waivers are from the affiliate. I just called dish to verify they still have my waivers on file, and they do.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

comizzou573 said:


> I respect where your getting information, I got mines from the FCC. So I am going by there most updated information they have, my waivers are from the affiliate. *I just called dish to verify they still have my waivers on file, and they do.*


That is an interesting response. Part of DISH's past problems with distants was that they would not provide accurate records of who were qualified to receive distants. Somehow they could not provide a list of subscribers yet they have a record of your waivers?

From what I can tell, in most cases grandfathering ends when the customer elects to no longer have distants. DISH ending delivery of distants is not the customer electing to no longer have distants. The law is rather complicated with different dates and ways of being grandfathered - but accurate records from DISH are a key.

DISH's current distant offering is channels of DISH's choice in short markets so every market in the US can have each network. The law does not guarantee the customer THEIR choice of channels - nor require a carrier to offer the service at all. It just sets forth a framework if the provider decides to offer distants.

In my personal opinion I do not see DISH offering distants to home viewers other than DISH's choice of channels in short markets. The only service I would expect them to offer is an RV/Commercial vehicle service. It is a lot easier to manage than individuals with multiple layers of waivers.

BTW: The law concerning the deliver of distants can be found at the following link:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/119


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Too bad DISH won't offer them to those that want them. If the locals were willing to waive, it would seem that it would mitigate any concern about a local affiliate losing viewers of their programming to those who want distant networks. There is definitely interest in distant networks judging by the responses here and those who would be willing to pay extra for them. This could be an additional source of revenue to both DISH and the networks.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Very few will waive their consent though. Much fewer than would probably want then.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

I was talking to dish representative, and they said they need at million subscribers who want distant networks, in order for dish to put it back. It sounds like directv is the best bet. I wish directv will offer a deal like if your receiver is grandfather to receive distant networks and superstation with dish, we will make sure we do the same with you if you move over to us today. If this happen I would leave dish in a instant.


----------



## levibluewa (Aug 13, 2005)

Rumors abound. One being that refunds would be issued on a prorated basis. Confusing since AAD clearly warned upfront when renewing (1 month, 6 months, 1 year) that NO refunds would be issued. If there is an ounce of truth to this perhaps DISH is getting involved in some way...which might account for, as James has mentioned above, the NY, Chicago & Denver stations being in TEST in HD. The only way I see DISH continuing to offer such a service would be to hand off the accounts to a 3rd party like AAD...a party that does NOT currently offer "locals". I personally think the "grandfathered" issue is a dead horse regardless of what a CSR tells a customer. To be continued, I'm sure!


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

Doesn't work that way. Simple contract law. You signed a contract (and it _is_ a contract) and part of the contract is no refunds. Well the other part of the contract is AAD will supply the service. Since they can't fulfill the contract obviously they have to refund the unused part.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

I was talking with dish, this is what they had to say they are testing the ny, chicago, and denver locals on 61.5 and 72 and has nothing to do with distant networks. They are planning to stop old receivers and upgrade people who has to be upgraded. They want to completely stop SD signals on all locals cross country and just provide HD locals. They are going to put all locals on the 61.5 for western arc and 72 eastern arc. I am not sure how this will play out for Hawai'i because we cant even get the 61.5 or 72.


----------



## Lou (Nov 1, 2006)

Denver’s big 4 on 61.5 doesn’t make sense when all other Denver locals are on 129.

Comizzou573 says “put all locals on the 61.5 for western arc”. I have a tough time with that. How hard is 61.5 to get on the West Coast? If that’s where the locals are going, then it makes more sense to aim at the entire Eastern Arc vs. having a second single focus dish on top of your triple focus dish which is getting the balance of your channels. And in that case, why have a Western Arc?


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

You people have to stop listening to CSR's, better yet stop asking them they have no idea about this.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

comizzou573 said:


> I was talking with dish, this is what they had to say they are testing the ny, chicago, and denver locals on 61.5 and 72 and has nothing to do with distant networks. They are planning to stop old receivers and upgrade people who has to be upgraded. They want to completely stop SD signals on all locals cross country and just provide HD locals. They are going to put all locals on the 61.5 for western arc and 72 eastern arc. I am not sure how this will play out for Hawai'i because we cant even get the 61.5 or 72.


That will not work because my dish only picks up 110, 119, and 129.

Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

We have our HD locals on 61.5 and when I had a WA setup plus the wing dish for 61.5, PTAT did not work properly because the SD locals were on WA, half of the time it would skip ABC and NBC altogether, occasionally it would record all 4 sometimes it would record part of one of the big 4 then drop the last 2 hours other times it would record the SD version, sometimes the HD version.

Dish finally just switched me to EA totally with a D1000.2 EA on 61.5 and 72.7 because our SD locals were also there and we have had absolutely no more problems with PTAT.

Maybe if they drop the SD locals totally and just have the HD locals on EA a mixed arc set up would work with PTAT.

It took them about a month to figure out what to do about people here in Lubbock getting such crappy results on PTAT with HD locals on 61.5 and SD locals on 110.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

levibluewa said:


> Rumors abound. One being that refunds would be issued on a prorated basis. Confusing since AAD clearly warned upfront when renewing (1 month, 6 months, 1 year) that NO refunds would be issued.


I assume that warning would apply if the customer decided to cancel the service ... not the service provider ending all service. The refund is NOT a rumor. It is clearly stated on the my distant networks website.



levibluewa said:


> If there is an ounce of truth to this perhaps DISH is getting involved in some way...which might account for, as James has mentioned above, the NY, Chicago & Denver stations being in TEST in HD.


Those channels have been there for a long time ... DISH also has Chicago, Denver, New York and Los Angeles HD locals uplinked to 148. With all but New York also uplinked in SD. Which would be exciting if DISH had a satellite at 148. The uplinks have been there since August 2012.

The uplinks are nothing to get excited about. At least not this year.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

Lou said:


> Denver's big 4 on 61.5 doesn't make sense when all other Denver locals are on 129.
> 
> Comizzou573 says "put all locals on the 61.5 for western arc". I have a tough time with that. How hard is 61.5 to get on the West Coast? If that's where the locals are going, then it makes more sense to aim at the entire Eastern Arc vs. having a second single focus dish on top of your triple focus dish which is getting the balance of your channels. And in that case, why have a Western Arc?


They are planning to put all hd locals on 61.5 and 72, and remove sd locals completely. I am guessing this way it will make more capacity for major hd programmings on the 129, 110, and 119 by doing such move. The only locals I see staying on 119 is Hawaii and Alaska, if they decide to keep them after making such move. Then again, its not even a guarantee that dish will make such move, because they are factoring in the pros and cons.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

comizzou573 said:


> They are planning to put all hd locals on 61.5 and 72, and remove sd locals completely. I am guessing this way it will make more capacity for major hd programmings on the 129, 110, and 119 by doing such move. The only locals I see staying on 119 is Hawaii and Alaska, if they decide to keep them after making such move. Then again, its not even a guarantee that dish will make such move, because they are factoring in the pros and cons.


So that is absolutely what DISH will do unless they don't do it. Got it.

Locals on 72 would be counterproductive as it would create a satellite arc that is more congested than the Western Arc. DISH's current problem would not be solved ... it would just be shifted to the other arc and DISH would still have no space for more HD. The solution "they" are planning (quoted because that "they" cannot be DISH) is not workable.

DISH is adding some local HD markets to Eastern Arc ... but in no way is there a mass move of all locals from Western Arc to Eastern Arc. So the last part of your post is correct ... DISH is not going to do it.

But way to go predicting conflicting actions would occur so regardless of what happens you'll be right!


----------



## ljr01 (Mar 6, 2008)

James Long said:


> So that is absolutely what DISH will do unless they don't do it. Got it.
> 
> Locals on 72 would be counterproductive as it would create a satellite arc that is more congested than the Western Arc. DISH's current problem would not be solved ... it would just be shifted to the other arc and DISH would still have no space for more HD. The solution "they" are planning (quoted because that "they" cannot be DISH) is not workable.
> 
> ...


Upon encountering EA HD locals near Little Rock and Kansas City while traveling in an RV, I called Dish tech support and was told that "eventually" all locals east of a n/s line through central Texas would be EA only.

If that is incorrect it certainly wouldn't be the first time I was misled by a Dish CSR but she sounded like she knew what she was talking about.

Accurate info on the subject is of particular interest to me as I am about to spend significant $ on a WA only Winegard SK-1000.


----------



## Grandude (Oct 21, 2004)

Lou said:


> Denver's big 4 on 61.5 doesn't make sense when all other Denver locals are on 129.
> 
> Comizzou573 says "put all locals on the 61.5 for western arc". I have a tough time with that. How hard is 61.5 to get on the West Coast? If that's where the locals are going, then it makes more sense to aim at the entire Eastern Arc vs. having a second single focus dish on top of your triple focus dish which is getting the balance of your channels. And in that case, why have a Western Arc?


You are right Lou, those of us on the left coast would not be able to get locals if put on 61.5. Comizzou must be smoking something.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

Grandude said:


> You are right Lou, those of us on the left coast would not be able to get locals if put on 61.5. Comizzou must be smoking something.


call the tech support at dish and ask them about the testing of the denver and chicago locals on the 61.5 they will tell you.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

comizzou573 said:


> call the tech support at dish and ask them about the testing of the denver and chicago locals on the 61.5 they will tell you.


Chicago locals are not *testing* on 61.5. Chicago locals are *available* on 61.5 ... and have been for many years. Chicago is one of the several markets in HD on both arcs. Chicago has 17 local channels carried by DISH, 14 in HD.

Denver *locals* are not on 61.5 - not even testing. Denver has 16 local channels carried by DISH, 14 in HD.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

With the abundance of prime time shows available online (see CBS website for one) I still do not understand the fear of the local operators to allow distants to be offered to those who would want them. The growing online availability of prime time shows (and even newscasts) via streaming is probably more of a threat to the locals than an operation like AAD, which at the very least, could provide them with some of the $$$ that I was sending to AAD. I guess I am missing something.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

joetex said:


> With the abundance of prime time shows available online (see CBS website for one) I still do not understand the fear of the local operators to allow distants to be offered to those who would want them. The growing online availability of prime time shows (and even newscasts) via streaming is probably more of a threat to the locals than an operation like AAD, which at the very least, could provide them with some of the $$$ that I was sending to AAD. I guess I am missing something.


I agree. One biggie is look at the exposure these distant channels will have from all cross the country.

Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SeaBeagle said:


> I agree. One biggie is look at the exposure these distant channels will have from all cross the country.


Exposure that they cannot contractually have. Each network signs an affiliation agreement with each of their local stations ceding territory to each station where that station has first run rights to the programming the network airs. If the station chooses not to air all of the programming the network can find another station for the content in question. Offering a national feed cuts in to those rights.

Yes, the networks offer streaming from their websites ... but it is done under their affiliation agreements. And while more that 50% of television viewers stream some content during each week, the primary source if television content remains linear television channels. It is the easiest way for the most people to get the content. (If streaming is so easy, why do people want distants?)

Distants are offered without the permission of the networks or the stations involved. Carriers offering distants simply must follow the law as to who they deliver distants to and pay a statutory fee. No negotiation or carriage disputes. But the laws are written in a way that supports the affiliation agreements. If you can get a local affiliate (or should be able to by predictive OTA reception or in market satellite carriage) the law doesn't give you distants.

I am surprised that AAD lasted as long as it did ... with DISH offering locals in every market and AAD's customer base being DISH customers. SD feeds competing against local HD doesn't help the battle to stay alive. But now the time has come to say goodbye. And hope that something is worked out for the people who need distants (RV/commercial vehicle).


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

SD is fine because it is fun to see stations from dust ant places. So a station in SD is fine.




Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## cj9788 (May 14, 2003)

This sucks. Just reactivated an old 512 to record the shows I normally record on the west coast feed this will add ten bucks to my bill. This will also be the first tine since 2003 I will be without a west coast feed of the four networks. An era has truly come to an end.......


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Would it be cheaper to go with a hopper instead of adding another box?


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

I will miss them too as I have had west coast feeds since 1999. On the other hand, just purchased a Roku box on Friday that has fascinated me to say the least. Oh well, Dish and AAD's loss is someone else's gain.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

joetex said:


> I will miss them too as I have had west coast feeds since 1999. On the other hand, just purchased a Roku box on Friday that has fascinated me to say the least. Oh well, Dish and AAD's loss is someone else's gain.


Yes I have a ROKU as well. But, the TV stations are far from what DISH carries. Only certain times are TV stations broadcasting on ROKU.

If these TV stations broadcast like DISH carries them with out interruptions then that would be better than All American Direct.

Then there is Aereo which would be fine but are fussy on which TV market you can receive. So that company is totally useless.

Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## cj9788 (May 14, 2003)

Just got my refund check. I still had 3 more months of service prepaid so I wonder how the prorated amount is only five bucks and change. Oh well RIP distant network service you will be sorely missed....


----------



## Jon Ellis (Dec 28, 2003)

All American Direct died at 12:08 p.m. PT today while my TiVo was recording the KTVU Noon News.

I will miss being able to watch San Francisco news on a real TV (rather than a web stream). They do a great job!


----------



## Lou (Nov 1, 2006)

I just think this is a sad day in America. Today our Emails, Texts and Phone Calls are monitored, but watching a television signal from another part of OUR country, not so much acceptable. Yes I have heard the argument on the why but to ban an American from accessing any part of America, to me is simply wrong.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Yes, definitely enjoyed the SF news. KTVU, KNTV and KGO in particular provided very comprehensive news coverage as opposed to the newsmagazine shows we get in NY. Getting used to the Roku box for out of town news although i will admit to enjoying the out of town commercials as well that I saw from the SF affiliates. I have probably reached the point with Dish where once the Superstations are gone, I will look at other options. Surely a sad day when some of us who had distants for over 13 years with the waivers of the local affiliates (and presumably their blessing) are no longer allowed to access them when the technology is certainly there for us to be able to view them.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Lou said:


> I just think this is a sad day in America. Today our Emails, Texts and Phone Calls are monitored, but watching a television signal from another part of OUR country, not so much acceptable. Yes I have heard the argument on the why but to ban an American from accessing any part of America, to me is simply wrong.


Ban? There has been no recent change in law. DirecTV still offers distants to their qualified customers. DISH offers distants (generally nearby distants to fill in short markets) in many markets. There is no ban.

A company that offered distants service has ceased operating. The demand just isn't there to keep a standalone business operating.


----------



## cj9788 (May 14, 2003)

I


----------



## Lou (Nov 1, 2006)

James yes, a company ceased operating because demand is low but why is demand low? The answer: laws have changed, and continued to change, to ensure Americans are restricted from accessing other areas of our Nation. You can justify it, but the bottom line is the bottom line.

I became a Dish customer in 1996 and Subbed to East and West Network feeds with zero restrictions. That isn’t the case anymore. While technically someone can still sub to Distants, today very few can qualify and that is by design. Those restrictive laws are what I referred to when I say, “Banned”. Again I understand what this is about and why they don’t want us to access other parts of our country but any law that restricts an America from accessing any part of our Nation, I believe is wrong. 

In the mean time Canada has taken the opposite approach, Canada offers every Canadian access to every region of their country as part of the most basic package.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Lou said:


> James yes, a company ceased operating because demand is low but why is demand low? The answer: laws have changed, and continued to change, to ensure Americans are restricted from accessing other areas of our Nation. You can justify it, but the bottom line is the bottom line.
> 
> I became a Dish customer in 1996 and Subbed to East and West Network feeds with zero restrictions. That isn't the case anymore. While technically someone can still sub to Distants, today very few can qualify and that is by design. Those restrictive laws are what I referred to when I say, "Banned". Again I understand what this is about and why they don't want us to access other parts of our country but any law that restricts an America from accessing any part of our Nation, I believe is wrong.
> 
> In the mean time Canada has taken the opposite approach, Canada offers every Canadian access to every region of their country as part of the most basic package.


Can you tell us what laws changed? Because from where I am standing The laws did not change.

First dish was doing some stuff that was illegal In the first place in terms of how try are letting get distant and got caught. But far more important, dish and DIRECTV both have added thousands of local channels which then by law kept them from still offering distant channels in most situations to new accounts.

Bottom line is the sat companies have upgrade their offering to the point the old DNS feeds are no longer needed and the chances of getting exemptions have dwindled because of it.

Sat is the only way anyone has ever really been able to get distant feeds anyway, and that law was added to let them under certain circumstances so they could compete with cable before they had locals. I know of no law dedicated to shrinking what they where allowed to offer.

And remember something else, the law is you have to get waivers. It's the businesses refusing waivers that Denies more DNS than anything, not the laws. It's te complained trying to protect their money not laws banning them from doing things.

Believe me if the industry wanted to be able to offer all channels in all markets it would be so right now today. No question about it.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Can you tell us what laws changed? Because from where I am standing The laws did not change.


No recent changes ... although the laws are up for renewal at the end of this year. The basic qualifications in law for distants have not changed with the past few renewals (they actually improved on the last pass by eliminating out of market affiliates from blocking reception). The only negative change was removing permission for early delivery (eg: NY locals delivered in California). The biggest change affecting distants is the introduction of local television stations that perform the task of delivering the national network content as well as local programming. As more markets got their own affiliates the defined need for distants was met through local stations instead of an imported signal.



Lou said:


> In the mean time Canada has taken the opposite approach, Canada offers every Canadian access to every region of their country as part of the most basic package.


The Canadian broadcast networks and stations (not the satellite carriers) have taken a different approach. Here in America the broadcast networks sell their content to affiliates ... the local affiliates pay for the exclusive right to rebroadcast that content on their stations within a defined market area. Providing a station from outside of the market area infringes on that local station's rights. When all the stations on a network are owned by a common owner it doesn't matter which station's feed one watches. Canadian networks ALLOW what Canadian satellite provides.

Here in America the broadcast networks do not allow importing a signal from another market. It would be a violation of the affiliation agreement. But in the narrow case where there is no local affiliate holding the rights a "distant" signal may be imported.

What people forget is that the distants law is a permissive law. When the law expires (unless extended) at the end of the year that permission will end. And the will of the content owners will not be overridden by the law.


----------



## Lou (Nov 1, 2006)

Inkahauts, the laws have changed. I never said they changed this week or even the past year. As I said in 1996 accessing Distants had no restrictions. Then FOX Miami made an issue of Distants and brought the issue to head. A pivotal decision was made which started restricting access to Distant stations. Wavers became part of the vocabulary. Later simply living in White Zone wasn’t reason enough to access Distants. It didn’t matter that you lived in a deep mountain valley in the Rockies where no signals could reach, you lived in DNA and that is the only DNA were allowed to get. So yes laws have changed and this week the effects of the law took another toll.

James is providing the justification (for the benefit of our reading audience) I referred to. Note the language James used, which I originally referred to as “Banned”:
- “do not allow importing a signal from another market”

I get the fact that technology advanced to the point where companies gained the capability to deliver Distants. In the 90’s Satellite penetration was low, so little attention was giving to the situation. As the numbers grew, the current situation required a solution. It did so by creating laws to restrict access. So we had problem and found a solution. That solution resulted in Americans being restricted from accessing other parts of America. It is that bottom line that I object to. There should be no law preventing American’s from accessing America. So let me pose it this way, is our audience comfortable with American laws, that tell Americans, what licensed American stations we can watch?


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

What information are you being banned from accessing that's so vital that it's not accessible online?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Lou said:


> Inkahauts, the laws have changed. I never said they changed this week or even the past year. As I said in 1996 accessing Distants had no restrictions. Then FOX Miami made an issue of Distants and brought the issue to head. A pivotal decision was made which started restricting access to Distant stations. Wavers became part of the vocabulary. Later simply living in White Zone wasn't reason enough to access Distants. It didn't matter that you lived in a deep mountain valley in the Rockies where no signals could reach, you lived in DNA and that is the only DNA were allowed to get. So yes laws have changed and this week the effects of the law took another toll.
> 
> James is providing the justification (for the benefit of our reading audience) I referred to. Note the language James used, which I originally referred to as "Banned":
> - "do not allow importing a signal from another market"
> ...


The laws you are talking about where not passed by congress just because. They where pushed though because the local stations felt their product was being hurt illegally after a technical leap changed what could be done. (Distant a could now be gotten via sat)

Those laws where about protecting businesses that had contracts to be sole providers in their area.

Blame the networks for your ban not the people who made the laws. They only made them to make it easier to enforce contracts.

And yes I'm fine with it because it's not banning me from anything as it not a ban. I am not in an area where a product is sold so I don't get it. The laws enforce me from getting it against contracts that have been made.

Other than news there really isn't any show that the majority of people in this country are "banned" from getting in your equation anyway. Almost everything is either delivered via network or in syndication on a channel somewhere in you market.

And you can get most news stations online. You are not banned from any actual information anywhere in this country. And companies decided they ,through contracts, would divi up what source you got them from in certain mediums.

I suppose you think mlb ei and nfl Sunday ticket et al should be free to all as well? Because it's the exact same thing.

I think the main thing is you think the government is the cause for all the rules about distants. It's not. Hollywood is. The rules just made their contracts easier to enforce.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

James Long said:


> The Canadian broadcast networks and stations (not the satellite carriers) have taken a different approach. Here in America the broadcast networks sell their content to affiliates ... the local affiliates pay for the exclusive right to rebroadcast that content on their stations within a defined market area. Providing a station from outside of the market area infringes on that local station's rights. When all the stations on a network are owned by a common owner it doesn't matter which station's feed one watches. Canadian networks ALLOW what Canadian satellite provides.


Exactly, comparing broadcast television in Canada to that of the USA is apples and oranges. In Canada outside of local news and regional NFL and NHL games, the networks have a uniform schedule 24/7. In the USA network programming is limited to primetime, late night, daytime and mornings for the big 3, while for Fox, CW and MyNet it's mostly limited to primetime. The rest of the day it's all syndication where various distributors and studios sell content to various station groups and individual stations. (i.e. Ellen, Dr. Oz, Dr. Phil, Judge Judy, Live with Kelly and Michael, Family Feud, Who Wants to be a Millionaire, Seinfeld, TMZ, Everybody Loves Raymond, Big Bang Theory, Modern Family, etc)

Also in Canada the networks own nearly all of their affiliates. In the USA we have multiple competing companies owning individual affiliates of multiple networks across the country. (i.e. in one market Sinclair may own an ABC affiliate while Nexstar owns the NBC affiliate, in another market it could be the opposite)


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Lou said:


> As I said in 1996 accessing Distants had no restrictions. Then FOX Miami made an issue of Distants and brought the issue to head. A pivotal decision was made which started restricting access to Distant stations.


A court decision. The copyright owners asserted their rights and a court decided that the satellite companies were infringing on the rights of the stations and networks. In response to the court decision that would have prohibited any rebroadcast without an agreement between the station and the satellite company, laws were written that addressed the copyright concerns and permitted carriage, despite the objections of the stations and networks.



Lou said:


> James is providing the justification (for the benefit of our reading audience) I referred to. Note the language James used, which I originally referred to as "Banned":
> - "do not allow importing a signal from another market"


You missed it ... "do not allow" is not the same as "prohibits". A ban would come from a prohibition. Permissive laws that allow carriage under certain laws are not a ban.



Lou said:


> I get the fact that technology advanced to the point where companies gained the capability to deliver Distants.


Actually technology has advanced to the point where companies gained the capability to deliver every local station into each local market. DISH is now able to deliver local channels to all markets - wherever a satellite dish can be installed. Part of the cost is that the locals are delivered by spotbeam ... a limit of the technology that means I cannot watch Seattle locals in Indiana or Florida locals in Wyoming. In order to deliver a set of locals to the entire US the channels must be on ConUS transponders. The more space used on ConUS transponders for locals the less space that is available for other channels.


----------



## dish556 (Feb 18, 2014)

what a joke Sat TV has became why because when you get one your thinking Sky The F limits then you find out No East coast feed can be show because the F jerk that bet on game can cheat and that why they Cut showing the East coast feeds!

I want my East coast WWOR and others back D it Dish we are the people that should get to watch these feeds don't show any sports on the superstations and no sports news on those stations!

Superstations available in most areas via Dish Network
Most locations in the US qualify for receiving the 5 Superstations from Boston, Denver, Los Angeles and New York City.

Channels featured:

WSBK - Boston, MA
KWGN - Denver, CO
KTLA - Los Angeles, CA
WPIX - New York City, NY
WWOR - Secaucus, NJ (part of NYC Metro area)
 Pricing and options:

$7/month for all 5 superstations
bring them back that why everyone sign up to get out of market news!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Umm... what?

How would an east coast feed of a game allow someone to cheat? Are they still showing west coast games on tape delay? I thought that was done decades ago... I'm not even sure what any part of that rant has to do with this topic actually.


----------



## thomasingram2nd (Mar 10, 2014)

dish556 said:


> what a joke Sat TV has became why because when you get one your thinking Sky The F limits then you find out No East coast feed can be show because the F jerk that bet on game can cheat and that why they Cut showing the East coast feeds!
> 
> I want my East coast WWOR and others back D it Dish we are the people that should get to watch these feeds don't show any sports on the superstations and no sports news on those stations!
> 
> ...


 I wish the super stations were in hi definition. I do not think Dish will do what was planned since S.T.E.L.A. is the law spot beam locals.. It is true Dish can not provide super stations, since congress passed law in 1992. The copy right act.. If your getting c.w. 39 WZZZ, then Dish can not sell you super station. These 5 including wgn hd will be grandfathered end of the year and will see at the end what happens. In the mean time, Dish Is looking at the possible matter of a RV/Truck only waiver for only Dish receiver DVR 211z. You can purchase that receiver at Camping World. You must be a RV or truck owner. The Dish unit must be in the Truck or RV for distant networks. So far as of Today. Dish has said, we have no plans yet. Check back with us in another couple days.. Will see. Do not get frustrated with this government. Thanks and you have a blessed day..


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

thomasingram2nd said:


> It is true Dish can not provide super stations, since congress passed law in 1992.


Not true. DISH can legally provide superstations as defined and permitted in the relevant laws. If a local station complains about syndicated content DISH must black out the content they complain about - and it is easier to black out the entire channel than keep track of per market blackouts on the superstations - but DISH can provide the stations.



thomasingram2nd said:


> These 5 including wgn hd will be grandfathered end of the year and will see at the end what happens.


WGN is no longer a superstation. They ceased being a superstation years ago when they created a special feed just for satellite systems. The channel satellite subscribers receive nationwide is "WGN America". WTBS Atlanta went the same path splitting off their local TV station from the satellite fed "TBS" feed.

The WGN9 feed continues to serve the Chicago market as a local station.


----------



## dish556 (Feb 18, 2014)

Stewart Vernon said:


> Umm... what?
> 
> How would an east coast feed of a game allow someone to cheat? Are they still showing west coast games on tape delay? I thought that was done decades ago... I'm not even sure what any part of that rant has to do with this topic actually.


I talk to a Dish Rep he said too manying people back when Echostar had East coast live feed 3 hours ahead of west coast were getting early score so they were betting on game. now as a viewer I can careless why you took them just bring them back. what I don't get is why the FCC let Time warner and comcast meger and not Dish and Directv? anyone Really this is a Real Question anyone???


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

dish556 said:


> I talk to a Dish Rep he said too manying people back when Echostar had East coast live feed 3 hours ahead of west coast were getting early score so they were betting on game. now as a viewer I can careless why you took them just bring them back. what I don't get is why the FCC let Time warner and comcast meger and not Dish and Directv? anyone Really this is a Real Question anyone???


What year do you live in 1814? Unless the game scores on the east coast are being sent to the rest of the world by pony express or stagecoach would you be correct.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

I too, do not understand the most recent rant about the game scores. However, I do miss my West Coast distants. Roku is a somewhat adequate substitute for the local news that I liked from the distant feeds although I do miss the SF local news affiliates!! Also, it is hard to figure out what channels are actually showing live news programming on Roku and yes, I do miss the commercials as well.

I recall that a court order barred Dish from offering distant net feeds, hence the offering from All American Direct in 2006 I believe. Maybe someday, if the local affiliate is willing to give permission in the form of a waiver, subscribers to Dish who would like to watch a West Coast feed would be able to do so. The number of posts here would seem to be indicative of some interest in having this service.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

joetex said:


> I too, do not understand the most recent rant about the game scores. However, I do miss my West Coast distants. Roku is a somewhat adequate substitute for the local news that I liked from the distant feeds although I do miss the SF local news affiliates!! Also, it is hard to figure out what channels are actually showing live news programming on Roku and yes, I do miss the commercials as well.
> 
> I recall that a court order barred Dish from offering distant net feeds, hence the offering from All American Direct in 2006 I believe. *Maybe someday, if the local affiliate is willing to give permission in the form of a waiver, subscribers to Dish who would like to watch a West Coast feed would be able to do so. The number of posts here would seem to be indicative of some interest in having this service.*


It'll take alot more than a little interest. Local affiliates are not gonna give a waiver to anyone in their area to watch duplicate programming from another DMA. Even if one was to say to watch news elsewhere, the local affiliate would just say its not local news to you. I don't see this one happening in any other way than Significantly Viewed anytime in the near future.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Well I did have waivers from all four of the majors when I had All American Direct. Not to say that other affiliates in other areas of the country may not be as willing but it would seem to be worth asking about rather than just assume that no affiliate would ever give a waiver out. If they deny the waiver, (which did happen to me for the first number of years from one of the local affiliates), then I would understand why we can't have them. But if the locals are willing to grant them, which was my experience, then why not offer distants? Particularly if those affiliates who would ostensibly suffer a loss of viewers are willing to allow it.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

joetex said:


> Well I did have waivers from all four of the majors when I had All American Direct. Not to say that other affiliates in other areas of the country may not be as willing but it would seem to be worth asking about rather than just assume that no affiliate would ever give a waiver out. If they deny the waiver, (which did happen to me for the first number of years from one of the local affiliates), then I would understand why we can't have them. But if the locals are willing to grant them, which was my experience, then why not offer distants? Particularly if those affiliates who would ostensibly suffer a loss of viewers are willing to allow it.


One reason why is you are not able to request a waiver if there is already an affiliate of the big four in your DMA then you are not able/eligible to request for a waiver. It has to be for a network that is not offered in your DMA at least not offered by your carrier.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Yes, well that is a part of the law or regulation that I will never understand. We have always had an affiliate of the big four in our area (Long Island) and they were all quite willing to give me waivers via All American Direct to allow me to watch the west coast feeds, which I used mostly for their local news. I can't quite figure out why if my local affiliate is willing to give me something, I am not eligible to ask. Just doesn't make sense.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

joetex said:


> Yes, well that is a part of the law or regulation that I will never understand. We have always had an affiliate of the big four in our area (Long Island) and they were all quite willing to give me waivers via All American Direct to allow me to watch the west coast feeds, which I used mostly for their local news. I can't quite figure out why if my local affiliate is willing to give me something, I am not eligible to ask. Just doesn't make sense.


The NAB will tell you it has to do with Localism. The idea is to have the big 4 in every DMA to ensure you are getting local to you news, weather and sports content. With the local affiliate getting add revenue to get commercials to people in the defined DMA, they are not overly willing (now days anyways) to let you get that from another affiliate. Significantly Viewed is an option that does not matter that its duplicate programming and its a close by affiliate too if they are on the list as Significantly Viewed.

There are problems with just letting people pick another market for locals. One would be that it would do away with the need for specific out of market sports packages. Everyone would just call and change their locals to the market wanted for that days game. Even if you could buy your markets locals and an additional market for a set additional price, I think the local affiliates would see a decline in add revenue as the adds would not be reaching the eyes originally intended too. Distants were never designed to just give you additional programming from somewhere else in the country. That definitely is not the intent now for sure.

Alot of people with DirecTV (me included) had the distants before their market offered LIL and were just allowed to keep them once their market launched their DMA's locals. Dish had their distants taken away originally because they were giving it to people who did not meet the criteria to get them in the first place. I dont think there is a satellite company out there that can afford to make all local channels available nationally to anyone who wants to pay for them.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Thanks for the explanation, needless to say after having distants since 1999, my viewing habits were significantly impacted. The sports meant zero to me and I agree that it would be unwise to allow people to call and change their markets on a given game day. However, a west coast option at an additional charge, subject to waivers from the locals would be a nice thing to be able to offer, if for nothing else than the novelty alone. I think that the people that operate Roku understand this, hence the offerings of local news via Livestream, Nowhere TV, etc.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

joetex said:


> Thanks for the explanation, needless to say after having distants since 1999, my viewing habits were significantly impacted. The sports meant zero to me and I agree that it would be unwise to allow people to call and change their markets on a given game day. However, a west coast option at an additional charge, subject to waivers from the locals would be a nice thing to be able to offer, if for nothing else than the novelty alone. I think that the people that operate Roku understand this, hence the offerings of local news via Livestream, Nowhere TV, etc.


Agreed, I love having west coast locals too. It allows me to schedule later recordings if needed. With a Genie that does not happen often but occasionally it does.


----------



## thomasingram2nd (Mar 10, 2014)

James Long said:


> Not true. DISH can legally provide superstations as defined and permitted in the relevant laws. If a local station complains about syndicated content DISH must black out the content they complain about - and it is easier to black out the entire channel than keep track of per market blackouts on the superstations - but DISH can provide the stations.
> 
> WGN is no longer a superstation. They ceased being a superstation years ago when they created a special feed just for satellite systems. The channel satellite subscribers receive nationwide is "WGN America". WTBS Atlanta went the same path splitting off their local TV station from the satellite fed "TBS" feed.
> 
> The WGN9 feed continues to serve the Chicago market as a local station.


Thank James. I had a feeling I left a bunch out on the super station. :righton:


----------



## dish556 (Feb 18, 2014)

do people with C band sat's have too live by the same rules that we do? or are they free too rip off all paid channels>?


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

Nearly all, if not all, commercial signals on C band are encrypted.


----------



## dish556 (Feb 18, 2014)

joetex said:


> Thanks for the explanation, needless to say after having distants since 1999, my viewing habits were significantly impacted. The sports meant zero to me and I agree that it would be unwise to allow people to call and change their markets on a given game day. However, a west coast option at an additional charge, subject to waivers from the locals would be a nice thing to be able to offer, if for nothing else than the novelty alone. I think that the people that operate Roku understand this, hence the offerings of local news via Livestream, Nowhere TV, etc.


I just proved that KU and C bands are unencrypted and that people can get east coast feed on the west coast and getting free paid channel!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dish556 said:


> I just proved that KU and C bands are unencrypted and that people can get east coast feed on the west coast and getting free paid channel!


SOME KU and C band signals are unencrypted. It would take the appropriate FTA satellite system to receive the signals.


----------

