# DirecTV loses 17 channels today. And now the channels are back (7/20)



## sliderbob (Aug 10, 2007)

Apparently DirecTV loses a deal with Viacom. So DirecTV customers lose about 17 channels today..

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120711/ENT11/307110042/DirecTV-Viacom-dispute


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

So how is your AMC, sliderbob?

Every carrier goes through disagreements like this. Didn't Dish and Viacom do this same dance back in 2004?


----------



## sliderbob (Aug 10, 2007)

Carl Spock said:


> So how is your AMC, sliderbob?
> 
> Every carrier goes through disagreements like this. Didn't Dish and Viacom do this same dance back in 2004?


I'd rather lose AMC and the 3 others than the 17-27 DirecTV might lose, in which 17 are off right now.


----------



## TheSpider (Jul 3, 2012)

maby it will be short lifed for doze that are on directv


----------



## CeeWoo (Dec 1, 2008)

Carl Spock said:


> So how is your AMC, sliderbob?
> 
> Every carrier goes through disagreements like this. Didn't Dish and Viacom do this same dance back in 2004?





sliderbob said:


> I'd rather lose AMC and the 3 others than the 17-27 DirecTV might lose, in which 17 are off right now.


Don't be celebrating too soon---contracts expire and it could happen here some day


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

If I have a choice to lose 17 Viacom channels or AMC, I'd take the loss of Viacom in a heartbeat!

If it wasn't for the discussion forums, I would never have known they went down or that the contract was coming up.


----------



## mavs-fan (Aug 31, 2011)

Yes, the channels can stay gone for all we care.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

*DirecTV loses 17 channels today. Thank GOD for Dish!*

Well, Charlie Ergen is an interesting guy, but GOD? Maybe a tech god....


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

sliderbob said:


> Apparently DirecTV loses a deal with Viacom. So DirecTV customers lose about 17 channels today..
> 
> http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120711/ENT11/307110042/DirecTV-Viacom-dispute


WOW! Thats a lot of channels to lose!


----------



## akw4572 (Sep 8, 2005)

Here's the point. Both need to stand their ground so the rubbish stops. Do TV channels know revenue across the board for all consumers is down?


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

lparsons21 said:


> If I have a choice to lose 17 Viacom channels or AMC, I'd take the loss of Viacom in a heartbeat!


And I'd do just the opposite, as would many others, so let's not start that.


----------



## sliderbob (Aug 10, 2007)

phrelin said:


> *DirecTV loses 17 channels today. Thank GOD for Dish!*
> 
> Well, Charlie Ergen is an interesting guy, but GOD? Maybe a tech god....


True. Maybe I shouldn't have put "God" in, but maybe "goodness".


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> And I'd do just the opposite, as would many others, so let's not start that.


OK.

But let's take a different tack. Most of what the Viacom channels offer are available online from a few different sources, some free some pay, most being free. So the loss of Viacom would seem more palatable, imo.

For the kids shows, there are plenty of alternatives and in my experience kids aren't nearly so picky about what they watch, the PQ/AQ of it as long as it is noisy with lots of movement and brilliant color. They only get puckered up when their parents complain about other issues.

Actually while I am a very little ticked at losing channels, I'm actually quite pleased that both D* and E* are taking hard stands at the same time. With any luck, the content providers will get the message.

Thus far, since they don't actually send us a bill, they've been insulated from the consumer of their product by the retransmission companies taking the heat.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

_Friendly moderator direction...

We have discussed and decided to keep (for now) this thread about DirecTV vs Viacom and the Dish vs AMC thread separate. Comparison and discussion is inevitable, so as long as it can be civil AND both threads are distinctly different (i.e. if the threads meander off-topic and end up being about the other similar thread we might have to re-visit a thread merge in the future) then we can keep these side-by-side in the Dish forum.

For more information relative to this topic:_

*Dish vs AMC*

*DirecTV vs Viacom (thread in DirecTV forum)*


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> DirecTV notes that Viacom is asking for a large increase at a time when its ratings are sinking.
> 
> "We have absolutely no problem compensating Viacom fairly," Derek Chang, DirecTV executive vice president of content, said in a written statement. "[But] the ratings for many of their main networks have plummeted and much of Viacom's programming can be seen for free online."


http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/11/technology/directv-viacom/?source=cnn_bin

Sound familiar? 

Did Dish and Direct compare notes?


----------



## jadebox (Dec 14, 2004)

akw4572 said:


> Here's the point. Both need to stand their ground so the rubbish stops. Do TV channels know revenue across the board for all consumers is down?


I'm happy to see DirecTV and Dish taking firm stands against these price increases. Since the Viacom channels show commercials, I don't think that the satellite and cable providers should pay anything to carry them.

-- Roger


----------



## red hazard (Apr 11, 2004)

mavs-fan said:


> Yes, the channels can stay gone for all we care.


We?? :nono2:


----------



## Santi360HD (Oct 6, 2008)

they're right...its not wise to jump to new providers and switch. Because Dish could do the channel pull when they come due on their contract. Now that its proven that Viacom wants to flip you upside down, shake you by your ankles and bleed you dry for carriage costs. This is bad for every provider that has a working contract with Viacom content when they come due. As is when Directv comes due for the AMC family of channels I cringe to think!!! there are no winners here..

As a subscriber to D* I want E* to work out a deal with AMC!!!..so when other providers come due they're not nickel & dimed either..

yeah if you have a provider that currently has said content...hooray for you, ha ha I have it and you dont..!! but the clouds are always on the horizon...and rain will fall..it always does..


----------



## revm1m (Jul 2, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> If I have a choice to lose 17 Viacom channels or AMC, I'd take the loss of Viacom in a heartbeat!
> 
> If it wasn't for the discussion forums, I would never have known they went down or that the contract was coming up.


Same here


----------



## Jon J (Apr 22, 2002)

Can't remember the last time a watched a Viacom channel. Can't imagine a time in the future when I would want to watch a Viacom channel. But, for some having the Viacom channels is very important. Probably why they make chocolate and vanilla ice cream.


----------



## Chihuahua (Sep 8, 2007)

sliderbob said:


> Apparently DirecTV loses a deal with Viacom. So DirecTV customers lose about 17 channels today..
> 
> http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120711/ENT11/307110042/DirecTV-Viacom-dispute


I think it's 26 when you add the HD feeds.


----------



## fhsucade07 (Jul 11, 2012)

Like several others, I wouldn't have even known they went down had it not been for the mention on forums and major news outlets. I've been with DISH for a while now and have seen my fair share of these disputes roll around. I'm not knocking either provider but I like the odds of you guys seeing Viacom channels again than those of us with DISH seeing AMC. I feel like the loss of AMC was probably calculated on the part of DISH seeing as how many customers have been offered a ROKU to attempt to make up some of the difference. I just find it alarming that companies like Viacom can ask so much in this kind of economy when, in reality, many of their channels aren't doing that well in terms of viewership. It makes me think about ten years down the road: If something doesn't change (in terms of how programming packages are structured, etc) and salaries remain the same for most of us pay television will completely price itself out of the park.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Jon J said:


> Can't remember the last time a watched a Viacom channel.


Stewart and Colbert were in reruns last week and are not scheduled this week. They are scheduled next Monday.

There are other popular shows on Viacom station but the best of them are available on the program's websites ... which along with the falling ratings of channels like Nickelodeon is not an encouragement for DirecTV and DISH to pay more for the channels. Certainly not "30%" more.

The big difference between the disputes is that Viacom is too big to lose. The channels will be back and DirecTV has conceded that point. All they have to do is find an acceptable price. AMC can be lost ... their channels are not in the same league as the top Viacom channels - and DISH will not accept a less than "creative" solution.

Other than that ... it is good to see DirecTV and DISH agreeing on not paying too much for programming. They need to work together to keep the bills low for their respective subscribers.


----------



## oldengineer (May 25, 2008)

United we stand. I'm tired of seeing networks buying up channels and holding up providers like D*, E*, and cablecos by forcing them to accept all or nothing deals at unfair pricing. It's time for D*, E*, TWC et al to join together and negotiate contracts as a buyers cartel. AFAIK there's nothing illegal about buyers of services negotiating as a group.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I watch Stewart and Colbert (except when they are on hiatus of course).

I also watch Futurama, new shows started a few weeks ago and a new one airs tonight.

I also watched Beavis & Butthead on MTV when it came back recently... but that is on hiatus again.

I'm not sure I can think of anything else I would miss... both Beavis/Butthead & Futurama I could get Blu-rays when they release... so Stewart/Colbert would be something I'd want to find an alternative to... that's about it.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I watch Stewart and Colbert (except when they are on hiatus of course).
> 
> I also watch Futurama, new shows started a few weeks ago and a new one airs tonight.
> 
> ...


You used to be able to watch some shows, included ones you have listed, for free on their websites but now Viacom is removing them because of this.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> NEW YORK (AP) - Viacom is ramping up its war with DirecTV over how much it is paid for shows including "The Daily Show" and "SpongeBob SquarePants." Unfortunately, its latest tactic is causing some collateral damage.
> 
> Viacom on Wednesday shut off access to full-length episodes on its own websites such as MTV.com and ComedyCentral.com to all visitors, even those who have no stake in the dispute.


http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment...-online-episodes-in-DirecTV-fight-3699271.php


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Yeah... that seems dumb. If they can't shut access off from just DirecTV customers, all they will do is make other customers of other providers mad and pile on in support of DirecTV.

So, from my perspective, this is a "win" for DirecTV.


----------



## Inkosaurus (Jul 29, 2011)

Wow thats pretty bad.

I feel for our Dtv pals but this is a step in the right direction for everyone in the long run.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

I'm sorry for the DTV customers just as I was for us DISH customers with AMC. But I have to admit my first thought when I saw the headline was to wonder if the folks who left DISH a couple weeks ago for DTV were still happy with their move.

As many have said, every service provider, whether satellite or cable, will face these situations. They can give in to providers ridiculous demands for increases and keep raising their customers' bills or they can fight for reasonable rates, which may include dropping channels. From what I've seen DISH and DTV do a better job of holding down rates than cable. 

I never like losing channels but I haven't lost one yet that has ended life as I know it. And had DISH not taken a firm stand on several occassions I'm sure my bill would be $15 or $20 a month higher by now. Hope DTV prevails in this fight because eventually the fight will come around to DISH.


----------



## thomas_d92 (Nov 29, 2004)

I am a Directv sub and wish D would just get rid of these channels and lower my rate.All these channels show are the crap reality shows that I never watch. I am planning on dropping D in November when my contract is up and going OTA and streaming. There is no value in satellite for me anymore . All the channels that I use to watch are all changing to this reality crap. History now is all pickers and pawn shows. MTV has no music etc. All this week I watched about an hour of D and the rest Netflix.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

sigma1914 said:


> You used to be able to watch some shows, included ones you have listed, for free on their websites but now Viacom is removing them because of this.


Perhaps part of a compromise would be to make current full length episodes available to people who could authenticate their cable/satellite subscription to the channels. Something along the lines of HBOGO or EPIX.

That way people who are paying for the content via cable/satellite will be able to see it and the free via internet availability will not undercut the value of the cable/satellite subscription.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

James Long said:


> Perhaps part of a compromise would be to make current full length episodes available to people who could authenticate their cable/satellite subscription to the channels.


ONLY if those episodes/films were never broadcast OTA. Once they're shown OTA, the requirement of a pay TV subscription goes out the window.


----------



## catnapped (Dec 15, 2007)

akw4572 said:


> *Do TV channels know revenue across the board for all consumers is down?*


The rich are doing just fine. Isn't that all that matters?


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

My daughter loves The Walking Dead. My wife and I are just getting into "Mad Men". As far as AMC is concerned, that's it. That's 26 hours per year.

Two of my other favorites (in that I record every new episode) are The Daily Show and The Colbert Report - 4 hours per week, about 40+ weeks per year. That's *almost* the only thing I watch on Comedy Central (plus the occasional stand-up special).

You can imagine which dispute would anger me more.


----------



## oldengineer (May 25, 2008)

In a sound bite on CNBC Mike White stated that D* currently pays Viacom 500 million dollars a year in fees and that Viacom is asking for 1 billion dollars in additional revenues over the next 5 years.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

I and the rest of my family are glad we switched to DISH last week.


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

As a DirecTV subscriber, I am thinking this will probably play out a short time. (In less than a week.) I want more channels out of this. I want TV Land in high definition. I want MTV2 in high def. I want Nick Jr. in HD. And I want completion of the suites from MTV, VH1, BET, and CMT.

I am not caught up in which is the honest guy: DirecTV or Viacom. I suspect it's just another pissing match. But what's important is to get a new contract that gets the channels back (and more). 

About any of the Dish Network remarks over the loss of AMC Networks' programming: I hope it gets resolved before the end of the month. Sooner, even. This is cable-television programming, and we choose providers if we're fortunate to have competition, and I don't want Dish subs to suffer over the petty garbage between programmer and provider.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

APB101 said:


> I want more channels out of this. I want TV Land in high definition. I want MTV2 in high def. I want Nick Jr. in HD. And I want completion of the suites from MTV, VH1, BET, and CMT.


I want the real BBC, not the one that shows Star Trek half the day.
I want CBC.

So, what's your point?


----------



## rtd2 (Oct 2, 2006)

ATARI said:


> I and the rest of my family are glad we switched to DISH last week.


Welcome to the dish family!....as a dish customer since 1997 I can truly say I've been pleased with the service ive received.


----------



## rtd2 (Oct 2, 2006)

APB101 said:


> As a DirecTV subscriber, I am thinking this will probably play out a short time. (In less than a week.) I want more channels out of this. I want TV Land in high definition. I want MTV2 in high def. I want Nick Jr. in HD. And I want completion of the suites from MTV, VH1, BET, and CMT.
> 
> I am not caught up in which is the honest guy: DirecTV or Viacom. I suspect it's just another pissing match. But what's important is to get a new contract that gets the channels back (and more).
> 
> About any of the Dish Network remarks over the loss of AMC Networks' programming: I hope it gets resolved before the end of the month. Sooner, even. This is cable-television programming, and we choose providers if we're fortunate to have competition, and I don't want Dish subs to suffer over the petty garbage between programmer and provider.


well said....a lot of times we as CUSTOMERS end up being the losers in situations like this. Dish/Direct is NOT the enemy they are PROVIDERS just like ford/chevy its OUR choice who we pick...the blame often lie with the station owners be it Viacom, Espn-Disney, Clear Channel or local station owners,ect who try to hold DISH/DIRECT Hijack over outrageous carriage agreements! its us the customer who ends up absorbing the price increase when our provider has to give in to these demands.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

By adding Disney Jr, is Direct writing Viacom off?


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

SayWhat? said:


> By adding Disney Jr, is Direct writing Viacom off?


No.

I can understand you're thinking that, had the addition on Saturday [07.14.2012] been the HD of Disney Junior.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

oldengineer said:


> United we stand. I'm tired of seeing networks buying up channels and holding up providers like D*, E*, and cablecos by forcing them to accept all or nothing deals at unfair pricing. It's time for D*, E*, TWC et al to join together and negotiate contracts as a buyers cartel. AFAIK there's nothing illegal about buyers of services negotiating as a group.


Er, cartels are illegal per se.


----------



## oldengineer (May 25, 2008)

Laxguy said:


> Er, cartels are illegal per se.


Honestly? But buyer's groups aren't and the way E* likes to litigate it would be worth a try.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> Nomura analyst Michael Nathanson wrote in a research note that he "would not be surprised" if the standoff lasts anywhere from 10 days to one month, in line with similar disputes in 2010.
> 
> Nomura's analysts believe that Viacom will ultimately get a fee hike of around 27% -- just shy of the 30% boost that DirecTV says Viacom is requesting.
> 
> ...


http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/13/technology/directv-viacom-standoff/index.htm?iid=Popular


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

> Nomura's analysts believe that Viacom will ultimately get a fee hike of around 27% -- just shy of the 30% boost that DirecTV says Viacom is requesting.
> 
> That would take DirecTV's monthly fee per Viacom subscriber to $2.85, by Nomura's estimates. That's still a slight break on the $3 average per-subscriber fee that Nomura thinks Viacom is getting from its affiliates.


It would be a shame if after all the hassle of pulling channels if all DirecTV got cut off of the increase was 3% / 15c. (The exact deal will never be announced so both companies can claim they won.)


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

James Long said:


> It would be a shame if after all the hassle of pulling channels if all DirecTV got cut off of the increase was 3% / 15c. (The exact deal will never be announced so both companies can claim they won.)


Yeah... I am not for government intervention, but I really wish that we did know (i.e. disclosure was required) how much each channel negotiates for.

I'm find with Dish and DirecTV making a profit too... but it would be nice to know how much channels are getting paid AND how much they are asking for in rate increases at negotiation time.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

DirecTV's Latest Message To Subscribers: A Plea For A La Carte Pricing?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

SayWhat? said:


> DirecTV's Latest Message To Subscribers: A Plea For A La Carte Pricing?


Isn't that which competition is all about? Some succeed and some fail. It's suppose to be the American way.

As for losing niche programming, there is a ton of it you can watch with a Roku.


----------



## catnapped (Dec 15, 2007)

Wilf said:


> Isn't that which competition is all about? Some succeed and some fail. It's suppose to be the American way.
> 
> As for losing niche programming, there is a ton of it you can watch with a Roku.


Again, "niche programming"? That went the way of the dodo bird. Wouldn't you rather see (insert name of reality show) on six channels ten times a day?


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> LOS ANGELES (AP) - Channel blackouts such as the one that resulted from the recent spat between Viacom and DirecTV have become far more common over the past three years. Consumers can thank the changing dynamics of the entertainment industry.
> 
> Media companies such as Viacom and Disney have become steadily more profitable since the gloom of the recession lifted in early 2010. But the cable and satellite providers that pay to carry their channels have seen profitability virtually stagnate as they fight each other for subscribers.
> 
> The squeeze has prompted distributors such as Dish and DirecTV to revolt against higher programming costs. Consumers are left in the crossfire.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...ktJ2sQ?docId=6963a963cba8467f82459b7f9f73a386


----------



## Blankman2k5 (Oct 21, 2010)

When did Dish last sign a contract with Viacom, and when does it expire (not trying to incite anything, just curious).


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Blankman2k5 said:


> When did Dish last sign a contract with Viacom, and when does it expire (not trying to incite anything, just curious).


2009. See the thread Viacom & Dish/Sling multiyear deal Wall Street Journal.

(None of the links to articles there work anymore.)


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

sliderbob said:


> Apparently DirecTV loses a deal with Viacom. So DirecTV customers lose about 17 channels today..
> 
> http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120711/ENT11/307110042/DirecTV-Viacom-dispute


Until DISH's next contract negotiations then the thread will read"Damn you DISH"!!.


----------



## Blankman2k5 (Oct 21, 2010)

phrelin said:


> 2009. See the thread Viacom & Dish/Sling multiyear deal Wall Street Journal.
> 
> (None of the links to articles there work anymore.)


thanks


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Jhon69 said:


> Until DISH's next contract negotiations then the thread will read"Damn you DISH"!!.


Which would be followed a few months later with the same comment when the rates go up and pretty much from the same people!


----------



## Santi360HD (Oct 6, 2008)

Viacom blinked after Jon Stewart ripped them a new cornhole..

http://allthingsd.com/20120717/that...-web-ban-for-jon-stewart-and-stephen-colbert/


----------



## satcrazy (Mar 16, 2011)

phrelin said:


> 2009. See the thread Viacom & Dish/Sling multiyear deal Wall Street Journal.
> 
> (None of the links to articles there work anymore.)


Phrelin,

If contract was signed in 2009 for a multi-year deal, when do you estimate it will expire?

Yup, links don't tell the story:nono:

Could be anytime now, yes? [ here we go again] :lol:

As a side note, after looking around, a article from bloomburg said direct's contract with viacom was 7 years. The only other comment I found on a sister site was speculation [?]


----------



## CarolinaGuy79 (Sep 9, 2009)

They can stay gone for all I care and I am a Directv sub, the channels include TV Land,MTV,VH1,Spike TV,CMT and BET plus all the Nick channels, I mean I do not watch any of those.


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

unlike Dish, we know Directv will get these channels back in a few weeks, once Dish drop a channel they don't even try to bring it back aka AMC


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

lacubs said:


> unlike Dish, we know Directv will get these channels back in a few weeks, once Dish drop a channel they don't even try to bring it back aka AMC


Untrue.

Both Dish and DirecTV have lost channels permanently... and both Dish and DirecTV have had some prolonged negotiations where the channel was gone for a while and then came back.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

lacubs said:


> unlike Dish, we know Directv will get these channels back in a few weeks, once Dish drop a channel they don't even try to bring it back aka AMC


Don't know but there maybe some still waiting for G4 to come back to D*.


----------



## olguy (Jan 9, 2006)

lacubs said:


> unlike Dish, we know Directv will get these channels back in a few weeks, once Dish drop a channel they don't even try to bring it back aka AMC


I take it you weren't around when Dish and FX had their squabble a few years ago? Fx went away the week Sons of Anarchy returned. It was back about a month later. So, Dish does get channels back. Occasionally. :lol:


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

Stewart Vernon said:


> Untrue.
> 
> Both Dish and DirecTV have lost channels permanently... and both Dish and DirecTV have had some prolonged negotiations where the channel was gone for a while and then came back.


name the Channels that DirecTV lost channels permanently?


----------



## 3HaloODST (Aug 9, 2010)

Carl Spock said:


> So how is your AMC...


It's pretty good on the free Roku that Dish gave me + $10 off for 12mos  .


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

lacubs said:


> name the Channels that DirecTV lost channels permanently?





Jhon69 said:


> Don't know but there maybe some still waiting for G4 to come back to D*.


More to follow,it will become the nature of the beast for both providers.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

lacubs said:


> name the Channels that DirecTV lost channels permanently?


G4

And I was glad I switched to DISH in time for G4's ComicCon coverage.


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

ATARI said:


> G4
> 
> And I was glad I switched to DISH in time for G4's ComicCon coverage.


i don't even called G4 a channel!, bring back TechTV!, what will happen to this thread when all channels come back?


----------



## strikes2k (Dec 10, 2008)

lacubs said:


> i don't even called G4 a channel!, bring back TechTV!, what will happen to this thread when all channels come back?


So the only channels that count are the ones you define as channels? How convenient!!!

:lol:


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

strikes2k said:


> So the only channels that count are the ones you define as channels? How convenient!!!
> 
> :lol:


more cops shows or cheater! i was into TechTV but i sorry G4 was over rated!


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Yeah, I don't get the big to-do over the COPS channel.


----------



## sliderbob (Aug 10, 2007)

Sounds like Viacom reached a deal with Directv, but at a cost...they have to add Epix..for an additional 1/2 BILLION Dollars...

DirecTV quote..

"Viacom’s current statement on our negotiations is completely inaccurate. They made a proposal last night for our carriage of the 17 channels they pulled from DIRECTV and we accepted all material terms for those channels including an increase that was more than fair. We are ready to close this deal at anytime and restore those channels to our customers.

However, as part of that offer, Viacom insists that we carry the EPIX channel at an additional cost of more than half a billion dollars. We know our customers don’t want to pay such an extreme price for an extra channel, they simply want the ones they had returned to them. We stand ready and willing to work with Viacom to get this done and, once again, ask Viacom to do the right thing and restore these channels to our customers immediately. Thank you."


----------



## mdavej (Jan 31, 2007)

Sounds like Dr. Evil is Viacom's chief negotiator.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

That is "no deal" from DirecTV's perspective. It is an offer ... and one could assume that carrying Epix is the package that we DISH subscribers have, not a single channel for half a billion (or an unspecified time period). "*An* extra channel"? Really?


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- More than one week into their cable blackout, the standoff between Viacom and DirecTV isn't showing any signs of thawing. The two sides are at an impasse, according to a scathing blog post Viacom fired off on Wednesday.
> 
> "It's now clear that they have no intention of working with us to expedite a resolution," Viacom wrote about the discussions. "DirecTV has moved backwards significantly and created more obstacles to reaching an agreement."
> 
> DirecTV (DTV, Fortune 500) has a different take. It says Viacom's statement is "completely inaccurate" and that it has already offered to increase the fees it pays Viacom for its programming.





> They're both right: Nomura analyst Michael Nathanson, who is tracking the dispute, estimates that DirecTV is currently paying Viacom a fee of around $2.25 per subscriber per month. That's significantly less than the $3 per month average fee Viacom collects from its other distributors, he believes.


http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/18/technology/directv-viacom/?source=cnn_bin


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

just make this deal! and Epix! and put its in the HD extra pack and people pay for it, i know a lot people get the HD extra pack for free


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

OH NO!!!

DirecTV will go bankrupt, they will loose 12 million customers, their satellites will fall from orbit!!

What shall we do!!!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Jim5506 said:


> OH NO!!!
> 
> DirecTV will go bankrupt, they will loose 12 million customers, their satellites will fall from orbit!!
> 
> What shall we do!!!


That's the only difference between the Dish and the DirecTV dispute threads at this point.

In the Dish thread, someone (usually the same someone) always posts "the sky is falling"... but the DirecTV threads usually don't get that post


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Jim5506 said:


> OH NO!!!
> 
> DirecTV will go bankrupt, they will *loose *12 million customers, their satellites will fall from orbit!!
> 
> What shall we do!!!


Maybe they should *tighten *their 12 million customers then. Would that help?


----------



## Inkosaurus (Jul 29, 2011)

^lmao.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

Stewart Vernon said:


> That's the only difference between the Dish and the DirecTV dispute threads at this point.
> 
> In the Dish thread, someone (usually the same someone) always posts "the sky is falling"... but the DirecTV threads usually don't get that post


We should combine both threads -- that should be entertaining.

I'll go pop some popcorn.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

lacubs said:


> i don't even called G4 a channel!, bring back TechTV!, what will happen to this thread when all channels come back?


TechTV is gone forever. I loved it because was educational. G4 is JUNK!!


----------



## azjimbo (Jun 4, 2010)

Saw this article in yesterday's WSJ online... it's subscriber access only though, so here are some excerpts:

"Several cable-TV operators have come out publicly supporting their satellite-TV rival DirecTV during its program-fee dispute with Viacom Inc., adding that they don't intend to ramp up marketing to capitalize on the situation."

"In the past, some cable and satellite systems have swooped in to grab competitors' disgruntled customers during such blackouts--but those efforts are less common nowadays, executives say. It seems the pay-TV industry has more to gain from resisting price increases than from exploiting the troubles of a besieged rival distributor."

"Consumers are tired of these disputes and so are we," said Time Warner Cable in a statement Tuesday morning said. "We will continue to stand up for consumers against programmers' outrageously large price increases that serve no purpose other than to line network pockets at our customers' expense."

"Viacom's channels were pulled off DirecTV systems just before midnight last Tuesday after the two sides failed to agree on program fee increases. DirecTV says Viacom wants a 30% increase whereas Viacom says it is looking for a fair deal to replace a seven-year old agreement."

"DirecTV says it has seen some subscriber losses since the dispute, but so far the numbers are "very low." A spokesman added, "for the first time ever, we are seeing a huge number of our customers actually voicing support for us in our goal to keep programming costs as low as possible."

and my favorite: "The dispute is hurting Viacom ratings. With the whole swath of DirecTV viewers cut off, the average number of people watching Nickelodeon since last Wednesday has fallen by more than 20%, according to Nielsen."


----------



## sliderbob (Aug 10, 2007)

Looks like they came to some deal and the customers got their channels back this morning.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

$600 Million a year according to Businessweek:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...ach-new-program-fee-agreement-ending-blackout


----------



## braven (Apr 9, 2007)

Guess the thread title needs changed.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

braven said:


> Guess the thread title needs changed.


Yes it needs to say Viacom and DirecTV settle,DirecTV gets the Viacom channels back,Viacom gets a multiyear 20% increase.:eek2::ramblinon

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...ach-new-program-fee-agreement-ending-blackout


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

braven said:


> Guess the thread title needs changed.


goodness for DirecTV! they never give up, and they option to add EPIX! and don't expect that!


----------



## jimb (Feb 13, 2006)

sliderbob said:


> Looks like they came to some deal and the customers got their channels back this morning.


Must be nice for them. Too bad we still don't have AMC.


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

jimb said:


> Must be nice for them. Too bad we still don't have AMC.


that why this topic was just dum to start with! DirecTV has a track record settling disputes, Dish don't!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

lacubs said:


> that why this topic was just dum to start with! DirecTV has a track record settling disputes, Dish don't!


This is not a Dish vs DirecTV thread.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

It doesn't sound like they settled - it sounds like they caved - 20% increase - WOW!


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Jim5506 said:


> It doesn't sound like they settled - it sounds like they caved - 20% increase - WOW!


20% over 7 years isn't that bad.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Jim5506 said:


> It doesn't sound like they settled - it sounds like they caved - 20% increase - WOW!


But it's over seven years, and DIRECTV® is said to have gained other concessions such as iPad authorization. Hard to assess unless one has a lot more info than any of us has access to.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

RAD said:


> 20% over 7 years isn't that bad.


Not considering the last deal was 7 years ago. How much has the cost of living gone up in the last 7 years?


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> "The Viacom-DirecTV dispute may be remembered as a critical turning point in programmer/distributor negotiations. For the first time in memory, it was the distributor that won the public relations war," said Todd Juenger, analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., in a note to clients.
> 
> Juenger notes that Viacom, according to DirecTV, lowered its increase demand from 30% to some undisclosed percentage, and ended up getting a smaller price hike than it has obtained from "anyone in the industry" and working quickly to resolve the dispute during its final 24 hours.


http://stream.marketwatch.com/story/markets/SS-4-4/SS-4-7544/


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

lacubs said:


> that why this topic was just dum to start with! DirecTV has a track record settling disputes, Dish don't!


And that's why I have......DISH!!.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

RAD said:


> 20% over 7 years isn't that bad.


A good contract should have a regular escalator clause in it ... not a large jump when it comes time for negotiation. Write it as a 2.6% increase per year effective July 1st of each year and 7 years from now one is paying 19.6% more.

The reports of 500m last year vs 600m this year reflects a jump, not an escalator. If there wasn't already an escalator in the contract it would explain the largeness of the jump. If there was an escalator then that makes the reported jump even larger (compared to 7 years ago).

A good escalator helps take the edge off of renegotiating at the end of the contract.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Sorry, guess I missed when it was published that this was a 20% increase now and not spread over 7 years.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

lacubs said:


> that why this topic was just dum to start with! DirecTV has a track record settling disputes, Dish don't!


For the record, there is no ongoing dispute in DISH's carriage of AMC. DISH has decided to no longer carry the channels.

If AMC would like to make a creative offer to restore their channels DISH is listening. Otherwise, there is no ongoing negotiation.

DirecTV agreed from the beginning that they would continue to carry the 17 Viacom channels as soon as there was an agreeable contract.


----------



## lacubs (Sep 12, 2010)

Stewart Vernon said:


> This is not a Dish vs DirecTV thread.


i didn't want to turn this Dish vs DirecTV thread but how can someone make this topic knowing the track record of DirecTV?


----------

