# Free HD Extra Pack seems to be back



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Just looked at my account and the option for the "Free HD Extra Pack for 3 Months" is back.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I hope this is not one of those Deals where Directv gives it to you Free for Three Months and then automatically starts charging you for it if you don't cancel out of it.

Hopefully, it is just a Free Trial Period to get you to sign up for it if you like it after watching for 3 months.

What channels does it have in it's lineup?


----------



## vikefan (Jan 20, 2008)

after three months of DIRECTV HD EXTRA PACK, the service will automatically on the forth month at the then prevailing rate of $4.99 month


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

richierich said:


> *I hope this is not one of those Deals where DirecTV gives it to you Free for Three Months and then automatically starts charging you for it if you don't cancel out of it.
> *
> Hopefully, it is just a Free Trial Period to get you to sign up for it if you like it after watching for 3 months.
> 
> What channels does it have in it's lineup?


That's how they often work.

The fine print was listed in the post above.

Still a good deal for those who don't have it (yet)...you can cancel at the end of the 3 months.

Confucius say: Something for nothing is typically a good deal.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

richierich said:


> *I hope this is not one of those Deals where Directv gives it to you Free for Three Months and then automatically starts charging you for it if you don't cancel out of it.*Hopefully, it is just a Free Trial Period to get you to sign up for it if you like it after watching for 3 months.
> 
> What channels does it have in it's lineup?


This is esactly what it is. I have had it for free about 8 times now. I have never paid for those channels but they have to be dropped after the 3 months and re-added.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

vikefan said:


> after three months of DIRECTV HD EXTRA PACK, the service will automatically on the forth month at the then prevailing rate of $4.99 month


As been posted here multiple times....

Just cancel before the 3 months is up.
It will be available for free for 3 months on the website all over again as soon as they cancel it.

I am on my 6th "3 months free" in a row so that will be 18 months & counting.


----------



## jdh8668 (Nov 7, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> As been posted here multiple times....
> 
> Just cancel before the 3 months is up.
> It will be available for free for 3 months on the website all over again as soon as they cancel it.
> ...


How often do you wait till you "sign up" again? I have a feeling you probably re-sign online. I am grandfathered under the old total choice package, and have to call in to make any changes. If I did it on line, my package would be gone.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

jdh8668 said:


> How often do you wait till you "sign up" again? I have a feeling you probably re-sign online. I am grandfathered under the old total choice package, and have to call in to make any changes. If I did it on line, my package would be gone.


I thought u could signup online just not cancel online with old packs ?

I call to cancel then signup online.

2 weeks ago i called to cancel at 6:00pm....when i checked at 7:00pm it was available for free again.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

richierich said:


> I hope this is not one of those Deals where Directv gives it to you Free for Three Months and then automatically starts charging you for it if you don't cancel out of it.
> 
> Hopefully, it is just a Free Trial Period to get you to sign up for it if you like it after watching for 3 months.
> 
> What channels does it have in it's lineup?


It's ALWAYS that way. With any free package. Even for new subs. I just set up a reminder in Outlook and on my phone to cancel.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

joshjr said:


> This is esactly what it is. I have had it for free about 8 times now. I have never paid for those channels but they have to be dropped after the 3 months and re-added.


 Interesting. It was like that for me about a year ago but this is the first time I've seen it in quite a number of months. I think (for me) it stopped right around the last "annual price increase."



dcowboy7 said:


> I thought u could signup online just not cancel online with old packs ?
> 
> I call to cancel then signup online.
> 
> 2 weeks ago i called to cancel at 6:00pm....when i checked at 7:00pm it was available for free again.


Ahhh, maybe CALLING to cancel is the key. I always cancelled online.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

jdh8668 said:


> How often do you wait till you "sign up" again? I have a feeling you probably re-sign online. I am grandfathered under the old total choice package, and have to call in to make any changes. If I did it on line, my package would be gone.


Im on a grandfathered package to and have no problems adding it back. Cant remember if I have to call to cancel it though. Im thinking yes.


----------



## chevyguy559 (Sep 19, 2008)

I just went and canceled the HD Extra Pack and immediately after doing so, the 3 free months offer showed up, re-added it back after about 30 seconds  I wonder if my recievers even got the signal to remove the channels :lol:


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Thanks for the tip. I cancelled this two months ago to save some money, just added it back for the free three months.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

Thanks Tbazer, just got it back after i downgraded choice xtra to select going to keep it because it's worth 5 bucks.


----------



## calgary2800 (Aug 27, 2006)

Those of you that get it for free back and forth-here is an idea. 

How about paying for it and being a part of the business world and not cops and robbers. 

Geez, if you like it just pay 5.99 or 4.99 or whatever it going for. God, the games adults will play.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

calgary2800 said:


> Those of you that get it for free back and forth-here is an idea.
> 
> How about paying for it and being a part of the business world and not cops and robbers.
> 
> Geez, if you like it just pay 5.99 or 4.99 or whatever it going for. God, the games adults will play.


How about you not being such a moron....how about that idea.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

chevyguy559 said:


> I just went and canceled the HD Extra Pack and immediately after doing so, the 3 free months offer showed up, re-added it back after about 30 seconds  I wonder if my recievers even got the signal to remove the channels :lol:


----------



## Hdhead (Jul 30, 2007)

Thanks to this thread the "loop-hole" has been exposed and I anticipate will be eliminated.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Hdhead said:


> Thanks to this thread the "loop-hole" has been exposed and I anticipate will be eliminated.


This "loop-hole" has been around and discussed on this site for a few years now.

- Merg


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

"Hdhead" said:


> Thanks to this thread the "loop-hole" has been exposed and I anticipate will be eliminated.


Been the same loop for 2 years now.


----------



## Hdhead (Jul 30, 2007)

The Merg said:


> This "loop-hole" has been around and discussed on this site for a few years now.
> 
> - Merg


Well loopdy-do then. Glad to join the party!


----------



## calgary2800 (Aug 27, 2006)

Just be a man and pay for it if you like it simply as that. You guys are children for playing the cancel game.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

calgary2800 said:


> Just be a man and pay for it if you like it simply as that. You guys are children for playing the cancel game.


 It's not worth $5 and IMO it's a ripoff since I pay for HD. It should be part of $100+ I pay every month (as it used to be) and the $10 for HD. If they want to give it to me for free, which is what it is worth and why I have never paid for it they can. They are technologically advanced enough to stop it if they want to. Obviously they don't want to stop.


----------



## HarryD (Mar 24, 2002)

Why do they even have this plan.. just add it to the HD pack.... jeez....


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

The idea of the HD Extra Pack was for those channels that have no SD equivalent.

- Merg


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

calgary2800 said:


> Those of you that get it for free back and forth-here is an idea.
> 
> How about paying for it and being a part of the business world and not cops and robbers.
> 
> Geez, if you like it just pay 5.99 or 4.99 or whatever it going for. God, the games adults will play.


:lol:Cops and robbers.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

The Merg said:


> The idea of the HD Extra Pack was for those channels that have no SD equivalent.
> 
> - Merg


OK !? 

They are ONLY in HD and we PAY for HD. The logic eludes me.

Obviously it's not being paid for by a lot of folks so they constantly offer it for free. They probably have to keep their "number of viewers" up to meet some kind of contractual agreement with the channels.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

TBlazer07 said:


> OK !?
> 
> They are ONLY in HD and we PAY for HD. The logic eludes me. I
> 
> Obviously it's not being paid for by a lot of folks so they constanly offer it for free. They probably have to keep their "number of viewers" up to meet some kind of contractual agreement with the channels.


I believe that the initial thinking was that you paid a $10 fee to get the channels that are currently in SD in HD format. However, since your package doesn't include these other channels already (since they aren't in any SD package), you need to pay the additional $5 for them.

Hey, don't shoot the messenger! 

- Merg


----------



## mikeny (Aug 21, 2006)

calgary2800 said:


> Those of you that get it for free back and forth-here is an idea.
> 
> How about paying for it and being a part of the business world and not cops and robbers.
> 
> Geez, if you like it just pay 5.99 or 4.99 or whatever it going for. God, the games adults will play.


Or you could spend your $60 a year on something that's not actually being given away for free. There's nothing wrong with that. PS I just added it back online and I have a grandfathered TC Plus package.


----------



## SWORDFISH (Apr 16, 2007)

The Merg said:


> I believe that the initial thinking was that you paid a $10 fee to get the channels that are currently in SD in HD format. However, since your package doesn't include these other channels already (since they aren't in any SD package), you need to pay the additional $5 for them.
> 
> Hey, don't shoot the messenger!
> 
> - Merg


Although that it their current stance, it was not their initial thinking.

Before the HD Extra Pack was created, HDNet, HDNetMovies, UniversalHD and MHD (which later became Palladia) _were_ included with HD Access.

DirecTv then decided to take away HDNetMovies, UniversalHD, and MHD and put them in the new HD Extra Pack.

HDNet (which does not have an SD channel) is still included with HD Access.

SF


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

SWORDFISH said:


> Although that it their current stance, it was not their initial thinking.
> 
> Before the HD Extra Pack was created, HDNet, HDNetMovies, UniversalHD and MHD (which later became Palladia) _were_ included with HD Access.
> 
> ...


The reason HD Net remained in the base package is because of court settlement,it was planed on going into Hd Access.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

TBlazer07 said:


> OK !?
> 
> They are ONLY in HD and we PAY for HD. The logic eludes me.
> 
> Obviously it's not being paid for by a lot of folks so they constantly offer it for free. They probably have to keep their "number of viewers" up to meet some kind of contractual agreement with the channels.


HD Access doesn't give you HD channels you don't subscribe to so without subscribing to HD Extra you don't pay for those. You choose to ignore the logic because you want it for free.

The bottom line is people have different ethical standards. Some are willing to waive their ethics for the low low price of $4.99 a month. Some are willing to waive it for less, but either way people will justify things to get what they want and some people won't.

People of course will blame DirecTV because DirecTV clearly forces them to remove it and re-add it. Chances are the abuse this gets is cheaper than the fix for it or so small that it just doesn't warrant the time to fix it. However clearly DirecTV makes people do it.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> people have different ethical standards. Some are willing to waive their ethics for the low low price of $4.99 a month.


& you sure know about waiving ethics since you posted you shop at walmart yet walmart is one of the biggest etchical offenders for its treatment/wages of its regular employees as opposed to their corporate peeps.


----------



## mikeny (Aug 21, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> HD Access doesn't give you HD channels you don't subscribe to so without subscribing to HD Extra you don't pay for those. You choose to ignore the logic because you want it for free.
> 
> The bottom line is people have different ethical standards. Some are willing to waive their ethics for the low low price of $4.99 a month. Some are willing to waive it for less, but either way people will justify things to get what they want and some people won't.
> 
> People of course will blame DirecTV because DirecTV clearly forces them to remove it and re-add it. Chances are the abuse this gets is cheaper than the fix for it or so small that it just doesn't warrant the time to fix it. However clearly DirecTV makes people do it.


..waiving ethics :nono2: That's offensive. It's not stealing. Is it ethically wrong for DirecTV to charge some people but not others?


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Shades228 said:


> HD Access doesn't give you HD channels you don't subscribe to so without subscribing to HD Extra you don't pay for those. You choose to ignore the logic because you want it for free.
> 
> The bottom line is people have different ethical standards. Some are willing to waive their ethics for the low low price of $4.99 a month. Some are willing to waive it for less, but either way people will justify things to get what they want and some people won't.
> 
> People of course will blame DirecTV because DirecTV clearly forces them to remove it and re-add it. Chances are the abuse this gets is cheaper than the fix for it or so small that it just doesn't warrant the time to fix it. However clearly DirecTV makes people do it.





Shades228 said:


> You choose to ignore the logic because you want it for free.


I don't want it at all which is why I never paid for it and only ONCE had it for free so please do not question my ethics. I choose to ignore YOUR logic so feel free to ignore mine. As a (current or former) DirecTV employee I am sure you look at things differently then one who is not. How much did you pay for your service?

Oh, and thank you for your opinion I will certainly take it under advisement next time I look at my account and it says:
*
FREE HD EXTRA PACK FOR 3 MONTHS - SIMPLY CHECK THE BOX

*(with no disclaimer stating ANYTHING about "ethics", or "1 time per customer" or "NONONO don't touch this box just because we put it here by mistake" or "Sorry, our IT department doesn't find it convenient to fix this error which has been here for 3 years so DO NOT USE IT" or "Please feel guilty when checking this box, it is simply our ethics tester."

Gimme a break .... "ethics," you gotta be kidding.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dcowboy7 said:


> & you sure know about waiving ethics since you posted you shop at walmart yet walmart is one of the biggest etchical offenders for its treatment/wages of its regular employees as opposed to their corporate peeps.


That's a stretch but if that's what you want to think then so be it. I haven't seen any company that has more than 100 employees not have a large gap between corporate and entry level. Then again I bet the people currently employed at Walmart, which just happens to be the largest private* employer in the US, are happy right now to have a job.



mikeny said:


> ..waiving ethics :nono2: That's offensive. It's not stealing. Is it ethically wrong for DirecTV to charge some people but not others?


 If you find it offensive then don't do it. They have the right because it's their right to set programming prices, offers, and deals. That logic is self justification to attempt to give merit to a decision that people truly know is not right. It's like saying that you're entitled to a discount that someone else got at a store because it was on sale but the sale is over.



TBlazer07 said:


> I don't want it at all which is why I never paid for it and only ONCE had it for free so please do not question my ethics. I choose to ignore YOUR logic so feel free to ignore mine. As a (current or former) DirecTV employee I am sure you look at things differently then one who is not. How much did you pay for your service?
> 
> Oh, and thank you for your opinion I will certainly take it under advisement next time I look at my account and it says:
> 
> ...


No I'm not kidding. I have inside knowledge of many companies and could use that knowledge to my financial benefit. You can search the web and find people that tell you, just like on here, how to get discounts and freebies for just about any company. If a company offers me a deal I'll take it but I also won't pimp myself for one either. If I'm happy with a service I pay for it. If I'm not happy with a service I find one that I am happy with. So the reason I look at it differently would not be to any personal affiliation that may or may not exist. It's because of how I am and how I decide to live my life.

If you don't want it at all then you shouldn't even want it for free. This thread shouldn't even impact you. Let's be honest you enjoy the fact that you can watch it and not pay for it. Great for you but call it for what it really is. So I'm not sure why you're upset over what I said. If you walked into a local business and they had a take a sample plate you wouldn't, at least I hope, eat the whole thing and then go back the next day for more free samples. Since you can do this without dealing with a person it's easier to justify sticking it to the man. It still doesn't make it right.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> Walmart, which just happens to be the largest employer in the US


No....the government is actually the largest employer in the US.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

dcowboy7 said:


> & you sure know about waiving ethics since you posted you shop at walmart yet walmart is one of the biggest etchical offenders for its treatment/wages of its regular employees as opposed to their corporate peeps.


Now that is one of the strangest conclusions I've ever seen jumped to. No one is forced to work at Wal-Mart. They offer a job at an agreed upon wage. You either take it or don't, it's up to you. What is unethical on their part?

This is, of course, waaaaaay off topic, so I'll restrain myself from commenting further on such utter rubbish.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

hasan said:


> Now that is one of the strangest conclusions I've ever seen jumped to. No one is forced to work at Wal-Mart. They offer a job at an agreed upon wage. You either take it or don't, it's up to you. What is unethical on their part?
> 
> This is, of course, waaaaaay off topic, so I'll restrain myself from commenting further on such utter rubbish.


Indeed.

:backtotop


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

hasan said:


> Now that is one of the strangest conclusions I've ever seen jumped to. No one is forced to work at Wal-Mart. They offer a job at an agreed upon wage. You either take it or don't, it's up to you. What is unethical on their part?
> 
> This is, of course, waaaaaay off topic, so I'll restrain myself from commenting further on such utter rubbish.


Stuff like this:
"The outcome of this unethical behavior is lawsuits against the company. 
By its own count, Wal-Mart was sued 4,851 times last year - or nearly once every two hours, every day of the year."

"rubbish"....what are we in England....you must be watching the Bond marathon on Syfy.*

*which isnt doing them OAR i might add.
See thats also the problem with adding HD movie channels like HBO, Starz....most dont do OAR....ugg.


----------



## Kevin F (May 9, 2010)

Sorry to be so stupid but could you define OAR? Thanks.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

chilibball said:


> Sorry to be so stupid but could you define OAR? Thanks.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_(image)#Original_aspect_ratio_.28OAR.29


> Original Aspect Ratio (OAR) is a home cinema term for the aspect ratio or dimensions in which a film or visual production was produced - as envisioned by the people involved in the creation of the work. As an example, the film Gladiator was released to theaters in the 2.39:1 aspect ratio. It was filmed in Super 35 and, in addition to being presented in cinemas and television in the Original Aspect Ratio of 2.39:1, it was also broadcast without the matte altering the aspect ratio to the television standard of 1.33:1. Because of the varied ways in which films are shot, IAR (Intended Aspect Ratio) is a more appropriate term, but is rarely used.


----------



## Kevin F (May 9, 2010)

Perfect. Thanks sigma


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Shades228 said:


> Let's be honest you enjoy the fact that you can watch it and not pay for it. Great for you but call it for what it really is. So I'm not sure why you're upset over what I said. If you walked into a local business and they had a take a sample plate you wouldn't, at least I hope, eat the whole thing and then go back the next day for more free samples. Since you can do this without dealing with a person it's easier to justify sticking it to the man. It still doesn't make it right.


DAMMMMM! YOU GOT ME! I ADMIT IT! I make the rounds of Costco, SAM's then BJ's every day just to get the free tastes. I haven't had to pay for lunch for years. And yes, I even taste the stuff I don't like. I admit it, I am morally and ethically corrupt. :lol: :grin: :hurah:


----------



## mobouser (May 23, 2007)

Lookie dtv profitable company and is spreading around some good will and therefore the saying goes "if its free its for me"..


----------



## shendley (Nov 28, 2005)

Still scratching my head as to why anyone would think it unethical to take a company up on a free offer for something. I seriously just don't get that at all.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

shendley said:


> Still scratching my head as to why anyone would think it unethical to take a company up on a free offer for something. I seriously just don't get that at all.


 +1

Possibly because the person who thinks it is unethical is (or maybe was) a DirecTV employee so that would increase his/her ethics quotient. :lol: Not only that, he/she compares the "ethics" of insider trading (a Federal offense) with taking 3 free months of TV programming.


----------



## shendley (Nov 28, 2005)

Gotta love the comparison to insider trading! I think the better comparison is with people who look through the paper carefully each week for coupons to use when they go shopping. These people do this each week again and again and again, refusing to pay full price for products. How dare they!:lol:



TBlazer07 said:


> +1
> 
> Possibly because the person who thinks it is unethical is (or maybe was) a DirecTV employee so that would increase his/her ethics quotient. :lol: Not only that, he/she compares the "ethics" of insider trading (a Federal offense) with taking 3 free months of TV programming.


----------



## Maleman (Apr 18, 2007)

I can't believe after a few years that someone mentioned it hasn't been fixed.  I currently pay but have in the past year used this once/twice.


----------



## KoRn (Oct 21, 2008)

Well said! Plenty of cheapskates out there that do things like this and eventually ruin it for people. Directv should wise up and block these people from doing it.



calgary2800 said:


> Those of you that get it for free back and forth-here is an idea.
> 
> How about paying for it and being a part of the business world and not cops and robbers.
> 
> Geez, if you like it just pay 5.99 or 4.99 or whatever it going for. God, the games adults will play.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

Why are people even assuming that this is a mistake or a loophole? Clearly DIRECTV has decided that this is the way that they want this promotion to be offered because they feel it works for them. There are enough people who maintain the service after the free period (either because they like it or because they forget to cancel) that it is profitable for the company to continue to do it this way. It is also obvious that it is not a high-demand product and as a result requires this kind of a promotion to garner additional subscribers.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

KoRn said:


> Well said! Plenty of cheapskates out there that do things like this and eventually ruin it for people. Directv should wise up and block these people from doing it.


It hasn't been "ruined for people" for 2 years, why would it get "ruined for people" now? If DirecTV didn't want it to be there you can be sure their staff of web programmers would have removed it long ago.

I bet part of the reason for this is the "channels" lost/lose viewers when the packages are in a separate pay package that many people probably don't even know exists. In fact, they were sued (and settled) with HDNET for just that reason when the package first started. Fewer subs means fewer people watching the advertising on those channels so the advertisers now want to pay the channels less. By increasing the number of viewers (even for free) the advertisers on those channels get happier and pay more to the channels who in turn would be willing to negotiate lower fees or keep them the same with DirecTV.

These channels are part of "primary" or even basic packages on other providers and get a lot more viewers (and happier advertisers) then on a separate less watched, less known, less promoted add-on additional fee package on DirecTV. The "channels" want advertising money and the only way to get that is for people to watch them. I'd bet this package will be back integrated with their basic programming packages sooner rather than later anyway like the others do.

Point is, if they didn't want people to watch them for free they wouldn't make them available for free. You can be sure they can easily fix this (alleged) loophole in 2 minutes if and when they want to just as they did with premium channels when you could add/remove them on a daily basis without penalty.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

I got it for free for three but like i said i plan on keeping it because it is well worth the five bucks. And yes i have called and gotten free showtime many times and i always asked after the three months are up to automatically remove it because i have no intention keeping it.

So if that makes me a cheapskate in some ones sick mind all i can say is see a doctor and get a script for a antisicotic or maybe shock therapy might be more effective.


----------



## calgary2800 (Aug 27, 2006)

Dish charges 10 bucks for HD channels in addition to package costs if you want them.


----------



## calgary2800 (Aug 27, 2006)

Lets just be grateful we can get the Smithsonian Channel its a very good educational channel. 

You cant get it on Dish who I left a month ago ( Thank God) I woke up and saw how horrible they are.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

A free promo is one thing...but working the phones and web to play around for a few bucks a month seems like questionable motivation and practice...especially repeating the process to circumvent the cost.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

mikeny said:


> ..waiving ethics :nono2: That's offensive. It's not stealing. Is it ethically wrong for DirecTV to charge some people but not others?


I like Dish's Platium Pack. I don't mind paying for extra channels and 6 extra movie channels.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> A free promo is one thing...but working the phones and web to play around for a few bucks a month seems like questionable motivation and practice...especially repeating the process to circumvent the cost.


"Working the phones and web?"  Is that what you call logging into your DirecTV account and under "premium channels" it lists HD EXTRA PACK 3 MONTHS FREE and clicking on it? There isn't even an option to buy it. The only option is 3 months free. Never need to pick up the phone even to cancel it. Puhleeze.

Edit: It never ceases to amaze me how people are SO CONCERNED about a company giving away something and others accepting it. What makes it "questionable?" Are there any disclaimers that stated you can only have it once? They manage to put disclaimers about every other rule they need followed. To all these "holier then thou" folks out there questioning what's right, wrong, ethical and/or moral, I wonder if you all report all the sales taxes to your state that you DO NOT pay when you order things online? I thought not.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

TBlazer07 said:


> "Working the phones and web?"  Is that what you call logging into your DirecTV account and under "premium channels" it lists HD EXTRA PACK 3 MONTHS FREE and clicking on it? There isn't even an option to buy it. The only option is 3 months free. Never need to pick up the phone even to cancel it. Puhleeze.


An admirable practice...some folks doing this repeatedly...mom would be proud.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> An admirable practice...some folks doing this repeatedly...mom would be proud.


Most mom's would do the same thing. Check all the "Mom's" websites telling you how to get free this and free that. With prices as high as they are out there on the basic necessities there is nothing wrong with saving $5/month on entertainment as long as it is LEGAL and there are no rules saying you shouldn't do it.

Do you pay the sales taxes you avoid when buying merchandise online from out of state? That's illegal unlike accepting legitimate free offers.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> A free promo is one thing...but working the phones and web to play around for a few bucks a month seems like questionable motivation and practice...especially repeating the process to circumvent the cost.


This post makes very little sense.


----------



## shendley (Nov 28, 2005)

Absolutely with you on this. Must confessed I'm still confused as to why anyone would think there's something ethically wrong about taking the free offer on HD Extra more than once here. I mentioned clipping coupons for items at the grocery earlier as an analogy. Here's another and, perhaps, even closer analogy: Bed, Bath, and Beyond constantly sends out flyers you can bring in for a 20% discount on a purchase. And they accept them no matter what the last stated date for the discount is. Is it unethical to keep taking these discounts at Bed, Bath, and Beyond? If we really like shopping there, is the only ethical thing to do to simply ignore the discounts, man up, and pay full price because . . . well, who the heck knows why, but I guess that's the only ethical thing to do, right???



TBlazer07 said:


> "Working the phones and web?"  Is that what you call logging into your DirecTV account and under "premium channels" it lists HD EXTRA PACK 3 MONTHS FREE and clicking on it? There isn't even an option to buy it. The only option is 3 months free. Never need to pick up the phone even to cancel it. Puhleeze.
> 
> Edit: It never ceases to amaze me how people are SO CONCERNED about a company giving away something and others accepting it. What makes it "questionable?" Are there any disclaimers that stated you can only have it once? They manage to put disclaimers about every other rule they need followed. To all these "holier then thou" folks out there questioning what's right, wrong, ethical and/or moral, I wonder if you all report all the sales taxes to your state that you DO NOT pay when you order things online? I thought not.


----------



## chevyguy559 (Sep 19, 2008)

Its ok, they probably pay full price for cars, because thats ethical :lol:


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

shendley said:


> Absolutely with you on this. Must confessed I'm still confused as to why anyone would think there's something ethically wrong about taking the free offer on HD Extra more than once here. I mentioned clipping coupons for items at the grocery earlier as an analogy. Here's another and, perhaps, even closer analogy: Bed, Bath, and Beyond constantly sends out flyers you can bring in for a 20% discount on a purchase. And they accept them no matter what the last stated date for the discount is. Is it unethical to keep taking these discounts at Bed, Bath, and Beyond? If we really like shopping there, is the only ethical thing to do to simply ignore the discounts, man up, and pay full price because . . . well, who the heck knows why, but I guess that's the only ethical thing to do, right???


LOL on BB&B. We have 3 or 4 neighbors who pool our BB&B 20% coupons that we get BOMARDED with at least 3-4 times a week by mail and email (we have over 100 "in stock" at any time). Anyone who pays FULL price there for anything is unethical and it's definitely immoral! :lol::lol::lol::lol: The employees there are told to accept them no matter when they expire or whose name is on them. We always feel sorry for the poor guy or gal in line without a coupon we give them some when we have extras. We're "playing the system" and I feel SO guilty.

*Sorry, Back on topic*, if DirecTV didn't want it they simply would remove the option. Funny thing is, this is only the 2nd time I lowered my ethics to accept it because I never even thought of looking for it again after the first time a year or so ago. When this 3 months runs out I'll have to keep my eyes on the "premiums" page for a do-over then go to my place of worship to ask for forgiveness for my sin of DirecTV Gluttony. :lol::hurah::lol::hurah:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Boston Fan said:


> This post makes very little sense.


Actually, it does, in the context of multiple other postings in this thread...has nothing to do with the OP.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Actually, it does, in the context of multiple other postings in this thread...has nothing to do with the OP.


I guess I'm not certain what you were talking about then. This was not in reference to accepting the free offer for HD Extra Pack more than once?


----------



## calgary2800 (Aug 27, 2006)

All points have been made by people who do the loop thing. Its obvious you watch some of the channels there. Ok thats a given. 

Now the point is whether you guys will allow someone to make money off a product. Just say yes or no. No comes down to this- " I like your product enough to use it but I have found a way to use it for free now find a sucker nice enough to pay for it".


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

calgary2800 said:


> All points have been made by people who do the loop thing. Its obvious you watch some of the channels there. Ok thats a given.
> 
> Now the point is whether you guys will allow someone to make money off a product. Just say yes or no. No comes down to this- " I like your product enough to use it but I have found a way to use it for free now find a sucker nice enough to pay for it".


That's certainly another way of telling it like it is...


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

calgary2800 said:


> All points have been made by people who do the loop thing. Its obvious you watch some of the channels there. Ok thats a given.
> 
> Now the point is whether you guys will allow someone to make money off a product. Just say yes or no. No comes down to this- " I like your product enough to use it but I have found a way to use it for free now find a sucker nice enough to pay for it".





hdtvfan0001 said:


> That's certainly another way of telling it like it is...


Exactly 100% correct. Why should anyone "ALLOW" them to make money when they are freely, willingly and repeatedly offering it for free every 3 months without any disclaimer to the contrary? If they wanted to they could simply stop offering it. It's not like one isn't paying them for ANYTHING. Anyone taking the $5 x 3 are playing $100+- a month to them anyway.

Interesting on how all you holier then thou moralists and ethicists won't answer the question: "Do you itemize and pay all the state sales/use taxes you avoid when ordering items on the web from out of state on your state income tax forms every year?"


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

calgary2800 said:


> Now the point is whether you guys will allow someone to make money off a product.


Of course they are allowed to try and make money off of their product - what a ludicrous straw man question - and how they go about doing that is entirely up to them. They seem to have found that the process of offering it free for a few months on a regular basis to be a successful means of making money [by having people either actively decide to keep it or passively forget to cancel it]. I continue to be mystified by your objection to DIRECTV's chosen business model.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

chevyguy559 said:


> Its ok, they probably pay full price for cars, because thats ethical :lol:


And without a test drive.


----------



## jdh8668 (Nov 7, 2007)

If Directv didn't want us to keep calling back and getting the HD pack for free, then they would put a disclaimer on it and say something like "1 free trial per household". But they aren't. They also are probably counting on upselling some of the subscribers who have to call in to get the free trial. It's comparable to people coming in for a freebee when they test drive a vehicle.


----------

