# ESPN-HD Pricing



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

This is by no means official but I have heard from my contacts at ESPN that they do not want satellite or cable companies to sell ESPN-HD on a ala carte basis.

They want ESPN to be available in a general programming package.

I am told that ESPN is working to get ESPN-HD into the AT-150 package on Dish Network (I have also heard that it will be available to folks with the Everything pack or the Sports Channel package) but they really want the package in AT150.

On DirecTV the channel will be available in the TOTAL CHOICE PREMIER package.

Both Dish Network and DirecTV will carry ESPN-HD.

This is good news, as an HDTV owner I do not want to pay $4.99 - $7.99 for each new HD Channel that comes on. I will be very happy if I don't need to pay extra for ESPN-HD.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

If thats the case I wonder how many subs they think theyre gonna get especially with Total Choice Premier w/locals going up to 87.99.....Oh well...


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

Damn...that'd be the straw that made me upgrade to AT150.

Better than paying another $7 a month for 1 HD channel, though.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

I was reading a post over at AVSforum and noticed one that said ESPN-HD was NOT coming to DirecTV.

Here is what I know. 

My information is coming from people at ESPN (which is located just down the road from my house) all that I have have spoken to have basically told me the same things about ESPN and DirecTV.

I do not have any programming contacts at DirecTV, DirecTV is VERY tight lipped on new channels, in fact there are times people in the uplink center do not know about a new channel coming and are notified about a new channel just a few hours before the channel is to be uplinked!

So will ESPN-HD be on DirecTV March 30th? The folks at ESPN think so. Will it actually appear on DirecTV? Only those at DirecTV know and they are not saying a word at the moment.

More on this as it develops.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

I think this is something that is wrong about DBS channel packages (and cable as well). I want to buy a package of channel that I watch, not channels that the programmers THINK should be in a package. To me, sport channels should ALL be in their own package so that people that enjoy sports can buy them and all of us that don't, won't have to pay for them in our packages.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

ESPN-HD wants to be in the normal package not the HDTV package because they will make more money. It would be interesting to know how many 6000 users are out there, but I bet it is 100,000 or less. They probably have over 2 million AT150 subs, they could get 50 cents per AT 150 user and get far more money than they could get if every sub with a 6000 subscribed.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Heck yeah, finally, I might not get screwed. I already sub to AT150, SHO and HBO. I have 3 receivers hooked up and could not take advantage of the free PTV on Dishplayer offers so my bill was right at 100.00. I was pretty PO'ed about having to pay for Discovery (which I did not do). If this is true I am glad to see Dish actually reward its good customers for a change. Of course, having it in AT150 probably means little or no deal for the 8PSK module.


----------



## jrbdmb (Sep 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mike123abc _
> *ESPN-HD wants to be in the normal package not the HDTV package because they will make more money. It would be interesting to know how many 6000 users are out there, but I bet it is 100,000 or less. They probably have over 2 million AT150 subs, they could get 50 cents per AT 150 user and get far more money than they could get if every sub with a 6000 subscribed. *


And the vast majority of subscribers, who do not have HDTV capability, are forced to pay for a channel that can't even watch. Bullsh**t.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by jrbdmb _
> *And the vast majority of subscribers, who do not have HDTV capability, are forced to pay for a channel that can't even watch. Bullsh**t.  *


That is the whole point of programming packages... You are forced to buy the package for the few channels you watch. How many channels in AT150 do you actually watch? With me it is probably less than 20, maybe 10 on a regular basis. In other words I pay for 140+ channels I never watch, but you are forced to buy them to get the one or 2 in that package you want to watch.


----------



## HTguy (May 7, 2002)

FWIW, the version I heard is that ESPN doesn't want their HD to be a "Premium" channel but they don't have a problem if it's in a package with other HDs.

So I've been expecting DISH to announce an HD package with ESPNHD, DiscHDT & maybe BravoHD when it launches. Maybe even the HDNet channels, too.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

This is the whole crux of the problem with the YES network..

Cablevision offered to let YES CHARGE ANYTHING THEY WNATED and pass the cost 100% to the customer BUT they wanted it a la carte. YES said no. I hear people are trying to sue Cablevision for not carrying the channel. I wonder why no one is suing YES for not taking Cablevision up on THEIR offer........


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2003)

Putting ESPN-HD in AT150 would not be good for me and many others. I don't currently subscribe to AT150. I'm a AT100, HBO and Showtime subscriber. If it goes into AT150, then I'll probably drop Showtime. Price will stay the same but not exactly what I want! I want a reasonalby priced HD package that I can bundle with HBO and Showtime!


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

Probably depends how much ESPN wants to charge for the HD feed. The smaller the amount the smaller the base package they will be able to use. It is a balance thing on the part of ESPN:

Lets say 8million AT50 and 2million AT150:
1. they charge 15 cents a sub and get it in AT 50 net 1.2 million
2. they charge 50 cents a sub and get it in AT 150 net 1 million.

They will have to balance the price vs the number of potential subs.


----------



## jrbdmb (Sep 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mike123abc _
> *
> 
> That is the whole point of programming packages... You are forced to buy the package for the few channels you watch. How many channels in AT150 do you actually watch? With me it is probably less than 20, maybe 10 on a regular basis. In other words I pay for 140+ channels I never watch, but you are forced to buy them to get the one or 2 in that package you want to watch. *


I agree with what you say, there are many channels in AT150 that I never watch, and I understand this is how programming packages work. However, ESPN-HD is a channel that I cannot watch due to not having the right receiver equipment. If Dish is going to charge me for this, I hope they plan on sending me a 921 to watch the channel. 

In reality, with their annual 20% increases, ESPN-HD ought to be a freebie, but I know this isn't how sports programming is going these days ...


----------



## boma (Aug 14, 2002)

Those of you complaining, no one has said you will be paying MORE for AT150, so you won't be paying for something you don't get. Some will be getting more for no additional money.


----------



## spanishannouncetable (Apr 23, 2002)

It makes no sense for Directv to put this in TC Premier. It's not part of a premium package like HBOHD or ShowtimeHD and HDnet is available to anyone with a HD receiver and TC+. ESPN's stated desire to have this available widely figures into this as well.

I predict it will turn up in TC+. Even if HD subs have HBO & SHO HD (for $64-$65 a month), they won't fork over another $20 just for this, especially if Charlie puts it in AT150 at $45 a month.


----------

