# DIRECTV New prices take effect March 4, 2009



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

As many of you know, DIRECTV raises their rates on occasion. There has been an increase in rates that will take effect March 4, 2009.

Rate change communications will start today. Some customers will receive email notifications, others will receive letters, and most via their monthly bill explaining the new prices for 2009. The form of communication is in line with how you receive your bill (i.e. if a customer receives an ebill, they are notified via email)

Most base packages will see a $3 price increase per month starting in March. DVR Service, HD Access, and mirroring/lease fees will increase by one cent.

Premiums are increasing by 99 cents if you have one premium, or $1 if you have more than one premium. This is not a per Premium price increase, but a total increase. For example, if you only have Showtime on your account, your price will increase from $12 p/mo to $12.99 p/mo. If you have Showtime and Starz on your account, your price will increase from $23 p/mo to $24 p/mo). Some customers might think each Premium is going up by $1, but that is not the case....it's in TOTAL if you have more than one premium on the account.

For a complete list of changes, please review the following URL:
http://customerinfo.directv.com/dir...91696&CMP=EMC-MQ-CS&ATT=120-B3-TE-090127proof


----------



## pjsauter (Jan 6, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> Premiums are increasing by 99 cents if you have one premium, or $1 if you have more than one premium. This is not a per Premium price increase, but a total increase.


I dunno. Premiere is $104.99 now, and is increasing to $109.99, which would seem to be a buck apiece for HBO, SHO, MAX, STARZ, and Sports Pack.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

pjsauter said:


> I dunno. Premium is $104.99 now, and is increasing to $109.99, which would seem to be a buck apiece for HBO, SHO, MAX, STARZ, and Sports Pack.


Don't forget the $3 added to the base packages .. Check the PDF for details that may be specific to your situation.


----------



## pjsauter (Jan 6, 2008)

Eh, it is what it is. If I was fiscally conservative, I wouldn't have the Premiere package in the first place.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

Thanks for the info Doug.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

pjsauter said:


> Eh, it is what it is. If I was fiscally conservative,


The amount of this increase wouldn't even buy a gallon of gasoline a couple of months ago


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

As long as I'm grandfathered for no DVR fee on Premier don't think I'll make any changes, but as soon as that goes away so will Premier.


----------



## MIAMI1683 (Jul 11, 2007)

see the thing is for me I am grandfatherd also on Premiere, but I can't help to look at it again now. If HD were included in Premiere that would be a whole different story


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

I've already planned for this (like every year)...the $3 seems to be an annual ritual for all providers (some oterhs are higher, of course).

I also read that anyone with DNS service will also see a price change (not applicable to me, but will be for some other folks...).


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

Thanks for the updated info, Doug, much appreciated.


----------



## jeffreydavisjr (Jul 12, 2007)

I am so ticked off!

$3 last year, $3 this year.

I am currently paying $72 for the HD DVR Package, after taxes and an additional receiver fee, My bill comes to $85. 

So now I will be paying $90 a month and not even getting any premiums. Man this is rediculous. I don't think it is fair. You can't just say, "It's just $3." Because it isn't just $3.00. It's a $3.00 increase every freaking year. I wish the FCC would step in a impose a limit for all this.

PLUS I AM STILL BEING CHARGED A FEE FOR HD!!?!?

I have to pay for HD when it is getting to the point where it is the standard. Screw this, I should just stop my services, pay the cancellation fee and be done with it! I actually would probably do that, but I am addicted to NFL Sunday Ticket, which by the way was raised another $20 for the 2009 seaspm!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Thanks for the info. To be expected with the current times.

Also remember people, it is not just Directv raising rates, the content providers are increasing the prices they charge Directv so Directv has to pass some of it along to customers, as do all the TV services.

If anyone wants to complain, go look at your local area cable rates after their promo periods and then evaluate what you are getting for the money...my local cable co is a good 50% premium over what I pay for Directv for less channels in HD...


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I also read that anyone with DNS service will also see a price change (not applicable to me, but will be for some other folks...).


I LOVE my DNS (SD and HD), but the prices are getting to be too high (especially with the prices of the other packages).

However, I guess I'll have to keep it until DirecTV offers HD-LIL here (if ever). 

~Alan


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Alan Gordon said:


> I LOVE my DNS (SD and HD), but the prices are getting to be too high (especially with the prices of the other packages).
> 
> However, I guess I'll have to keep it until DirecTV offers HD-LIL here (if ever).
> 
> ~Alan


They really should give you at least the Atlanta HD LIL's...even Augusta now has theirs...


----------



## ProfLonghair (Sep 26, 2006)

Any idea on whether or not the packages themselves will change? FOr example, DVR or HD finally being rolled back into Premier?


----------



## turey22 (Jul 30, 2007)

You sound angry buddy...take a chill pill. Plus hd dvr includes hd access in that

break down...choic extra..dvr service...hd access.

Man you know its an annual thing so why so upset? also its not really DIRECTV fault, i see it that way, but the channels. they are the ones that raise the prices and DIRECTV like another business has to raise them also. supply and demand baby!!!

thats what life is all about...you see a demand so then supply it. cancel services man...for all they care someone else will take your place.



jeffreydavisjr said:


> I am so ticked off!
> 
> $3 last year, $3 this year.
> 
> ...


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

Every time they raise rates, I drop a premium. So price increases actually save me money!  Next year, however, I will be all out of premiums to drop.


----------



## turey22 (Jul 30, 2007)

what i do see as crazy is the premier package...5 dollars. Last year i dont even think it went up that much or maybe it did?


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Grentz said:


> Also remember people, it is not just Directv raising rates, the content providers are increasing the prices they charge Directv so Directv has to pass some of it along to customers, as do all the TV services.


Exactly. Lets hope this price increase brings us some more HD channels.


----------



## ghfiii (Mar 25, 2005)

A few years back I had been with Directv for a couple years and I got a letter that announced a drop in the cost of my subscription. Never had that from cable...but then again it hasn't happened since from Directv either :grin:


----------



## ohiosnowman (May 9, 2007)

Looking at the press release i see preferred choice for 35.99. i wonder is that going to be the family package with a few more channels? if family had a couple more channels that would be fine by me like cnn and espn.


----------



## Alebob911 (Mar 22, 2007)

Nobody forces you to subscribe. I am sure the prices are inline with others that provide the same services. I agree that with the current state of the economy, it would be nice for a large company to skip a year or two until things get better but greedy CEO's and share holders don't care about the average everyday consumer and what "its only 3 dollars" can do to them. CEO's don't live in the "normal" world. As far as your sunday ticket response, blame those over paid undereducated players you watch. Their the reason for the skyrocketing fees.



jeffreydavisjr said:


> I am so ticked off!
> 
> $3 last year, $3 this year.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mertzen (Dec 8, 2006)

ohiosnowman said:


> Looking at the press release i see preferred choice for 35.99. i wonder is that going to be the family package with a few more channels? if family had a couple more channels that would be fine by me like cnn and espn.


preferred choice is a package that is combine with any of the international packages. It can not be had as stand alone AFAIK.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Grentz said:


> Thanks for the info. *To be expected with the current times. ..*.


To be expected with the current times? :nono2:

I would have thought the obvious logic in a failing economy with job layoffs coimng in torrents is for companies to spare no effort to freeze if not lower prices as much as possible.


----------



## ohiosnowman (May 9, 2007)

thanks for the info...


----------



## idigg (May 8, 2008)

If I wasn't under contract for another 10 months, I would cancel today.

I would go with OTA, Hulu streaming to PS3, internet, and my 3 at a time netflix with streaming to my PS3 via PlayOn, but alas I have a wife


----------



## ohiosnowman (May 9, 2007)

no offense to anyone here but if your dropping 109.99 a month to watch 49 shopping channels and 15 hbos etc, they probably thought your eyes are probably so glazed over you wont notice the 3/month increase.


----------



## lzielen (Aug 27, 2007)

I wish satellite and cable providers would offer a la carte channel choices. I am tired of paying for all the channels I never watch so that I can get the channels that I want.


----------



## kiwiquest (Jan 10, 2006)

lzielen said:


> I wish satellite and cable providers would offer a la carte channel choices. I am tired of paying for all the channels I never watch so that I can get the channels that I want.


Amen


----------



## d max82 (May 23, 2007)

Just a couple of years ago when I first signed up Premiere was $93.99 now its $109.99. $7 more than Comcast's regular rate.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

So no change for DVR, HD Access, or HD Extra Pack?

Mike


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

So, let's see, I just changed packages to save about $6 a month. Base package going up $3, premiums up $1, so I'm still saving $2 a month.


----------



## mdavej (Jan 31, 2007)

idigg said:


> If I wasn't under contract for another 10 months, I would cancel today.
> 
> I would go with OTA, Hulu streaming to PS3, internet, and my 3 at a time netflix with streaming to my PS3 via PlayOn, but alas I have a wife


I love my DirecTV service, but I've had enough of these rate increases. I'm right there with you, counting the days. It's this kind of behavior that made me drop cable to begin with.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> So no change for DVR, HD Access, or HD Extra Pack?
> 
> Mike


Don't even say that out loud!!!


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

l8er said:


> So, let's see, I just changed packages to save about $6 a month. Base package going up $3, premiums up $1, so I'm still saving $2 a month.


Yeah, I did much the same;

Recently, deactivated one older, but still usable receiver to try and save an a little extra $4.99 on the bill, only to be hit with this. So now my savings is ~ $0.00

What's the tale of the old "Brier Rabbit?" If he can't get you in one way, he will get you in another.

Now my monthly bill with Premier, HD access, and 6 receivers is going from $140.75 to $145.75 in a lousy economy.

It's the American way...


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> To be expected with the current times? :nono2:
> 
> I would have thought the obvious logic in a failing economy with job layoffs coimng in torrents is for companies to spare no effort to freeze if not lower prices as much as possible.


Yes, to be expected. Networks are losing money and raising their rates to the content delivery companies (Directv, Cable Cos, etc.) to try and make up for the lost revenue.

Its all about business, especially for the main networks and media companies.


----------



## ziggy29 (Nov 18, 2004)

Grentz said:


> Yes, to be expected. Networks are losing money and raising their rates to the content delivery companies (Directv, Cable Cos, etc.) to try and make up for the lost revenue.


Well, as long as the broadcast networks can keep getting them to pay more and more to carry them on cable and satellite, maybe those of us rapidly being priced back to OTA can keep freeloading.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

lzielen said:


> I wish satellite and cable providers would offer a la carte channel choices. I am tired of paying for all the channels I never watch so that I can get the channels that I want.





kiwiquest said:


> Amen


Yes, if this worked the way you would think it would. However, the price would likely go up for everyone (especially those taking the whole package). It's the providers (ESPN, CNN, etc.) that want bundling and believe it or not some channels (read: shopping channels) actually pay DIRECTV to be carried meaning that if they were removed your price would have to go up just so DIRECTV could stay at the same profit level. "Extra" channels are not always a bad thing even if it might seem that way on the surface.


----------



## 311Man (Oct 20, 2007)

Also for those with Both LA & NY DNS feeds that service also goes up $2 to $14.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

jeffreydavisjr said:


> You can't just say, "It's just $3." Because it isn't just $3.00. It's a $3.00 increase every freaking year.


This is the part that really irks me too.


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

I don't like the price increases either but the last several years and next year the number of HD channels(local and national) have increased drastically. Plus they continue to add new features to the DVRs such as OnDemand and better stuff coming.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Remember it is a service guys and you are in no way forced to pay for it, you can always switch to something else or OTA.

It is not always good to justify things just by looking at the prices of the alternatives, but in this case it really can make you feel better. Price out your local cable co, IPTV, or other TV service and see what you are getting for the money. In my case Directv always comes up on top for what I want and the price I have to pay.

I cannot get service from my local cable co, but many friends do have it and I know their pricing well. For example, each HD-DVR is an extra $17/mo! They also get about 15 (non-local) channels in HD for an HD addon price of $12/mo. Insane pricing!



Doug Brott said:


> Yes, if this worked the way you would think it would. However, the price would likely go up for everyone (especially those taking the whole package). It's the providers (ESPN, CNN, etc.) that want bundling and believe it or not some channels (read: shopping channels) actually pay DIRECTV to be carried meaning that if they were removed your price would have to go up just so DIRECTV could stay at the same profit level. "Extra" channels are not always a bad thing even if it might seem that way on the surface.


Very true, I do wish they could offer some of the sports channels (like ESPN) that cost so much as a premium addon instead, but I know it will never happen most likely because of the way things are put together overall.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

turey22 said:


> Man you know its an annual thing so why so upset? also its not really DIRECTV fault, i see it that way, but the channels. they are the ones that raise the prices and DIRECTV like another business has to raise them also. supply and demand baby!!!


Understood.
This is also a big reason why i would prefer a la cart. This way I would not have to gte hit with the big increases on the channels I don't care about - just the ones I do.


----------



## woj027 (Sep 3, 2007)

Whats with the note about the Outdoor Channel being Ala Carte and costing $3.50. Who out there is an ala carte customer? and what channels are available for ala carte?


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

It's not the price increase that really bothers me.
It's the fact that the programming being offered today just sucks!
Only about 4 good movies came out in 2008, PPV lineup has been dismal. The Networks have gone into reality TV mode and my favorites like Discovery and NGC have been showing mostly reruns or half baked shows. 

TV today is like going to your favorite restaurant and having the Quality of the meal going down yet your being billed more.

If someone thinks that the Satellite customers are going to Bail out the broadcasters to compensate them for the down turn in Advert revenue they are going to be surprised, because I believe most of us will just keep shrinking the packages or drop satellite altogether.

BTW no renewal of Sunday ticket for me! I have had it from it first came out on C-Band but now I have had it with the pricing black mail, enough is enough.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

It should be clear that none of the program distributors is going to be reducing prices at any time in the future. DirecTV clearly states to their shareholders that they will increasing prices by roughly 5% per year. At some time it may be prudent for some to look at other less expensive sources for viewing entertainment.

services like:
OTA, hulu.com, cnn.com, msnbc.com, joost.com, abc.com, nbc.com, cbs.com, netflix, youtube.com, mlbtv.com, apple tv, iTunes, etc.

I'm not talking about watching on your computer...There are more and more devices that hook up to your TV (or in some cases are built-in to the TV) that bring internet delivered content to your set.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Grentz said:


> Yes, to be expected. Networks are losing money and raising their rates to the content delivery companies (Directv, Cable Cos, etc.) to try and make up for the lost revenue.
> 
> Its all about business, especially for the main networks and media companies.


Correct. In fact there is an article in this week's Sports Business Journal about ESPN on that very subject. How they learned long ago not to rely solely on an advertising model but a mix of advertising and subscription revenue. So to do so, they charge DIRECTV, DISH, and all the cable companies X dollars to put them on their service. And those fees don't come cheap, nor are they usually stagnant (in other words, they go up each year)....as such, the distributors need to cover their costs.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> So no change for DVR, HD Access, or HD Extra Pack?
> 
> Mike


DVR up a penny, HD Access up a penny, HD Extra Pack frozen.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Satelliteracer said:


> DVR up a penny, HD Access up a penny, HD Extra Pack frozen.


Well...at least we can't say nickel and diming....


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> So no change for DVR, HD Access, or HD Extra Pack?
> 
> Mike


I just got the email announcement. DVR and HD Access each go up by $0.01.


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

RAD said:


> As long as I'm grandfathered for no DVR fee on Premier don't think I'll make any changes, but as soon as that goes away so will Premier.


+1


----------



## Farsight (Jul 16, 2007)

I've been a DirecTV customer since right around their inception (we had a horrrrrrible cable company here), and I'll be calling monday (post-Super Bowl, or course!) to check on the status of my contract. If it's up, I'm out.

The price increase isn't my main reason, it's just the cherry on top. I've been sick of subsidizing crappy channels for years now, and DirecTV shows no signs of offering what a lot of people seem to want (a la carte), instead they offer a terrible base package to push nearly everyone into their second tier package by default. Toss in the nickel-and-diming they do over the DVR fee, 2nd reciever fee, and HD fee, and their billing practice for me ends up as "$70-$80 a month, or nothing". Well, I guess it's time for nothing.

DirecTV could easily get a lot of money out of me if I felt it was going to the people making the programming I actually watch. I might even pay the same as I am now, or more, if I were satisfied that the money were going to fund more of what I like. But $20 of my bill is dumped on fees for things that should be free, and the rest is divvied up among everyone, including the channels I despise. DirecTV could also keep making some money off me if there were any way I could reduce my bill and keep a core of channels that I like most, but there isn't.

It's the $75 or nothing package... and now I'll choose nothing (or internet + DVDs, rather). DirecTV isn't alone in continuing these archaic and unfriendly pricing practices, but it'll be whoever steps up and changes to something that feels less like extortion that will get my loyalty (and money) in the future.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Where do you not get charged extra for things with TV providers? Cable companies usually do not have so many separate fees, just bigger single fees.

For example:
Directv for 3 HD-DVRs = 1 DVR Fee @ $5.99, 2 Receiver Lease Fees @ $4.99ea, *Total = $15.97/mo for 3 HD-DVRs*

Cable for 3 HD-DVRs = 1 @ basic rate of $6.99, 2 @ full rate of $16.94ea, *Total = $40.87/mo for 3 HD-DVRs*

I fail to see how Directv is expensive and getting us with fees.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

I know this has probably been covered before, but this is a good place to ask it again.

I currently pay for NY/LA SD DNS and I also get the NY HD versions (listed on my account as $0.00). With all of the changes recently, I'm wondering if I can drop the SD DNS, yet keep the NY HD DNS. My subscription is Plus HD DVR w/o locals, also with the HD Extra Pack. So, since I pay for the HD pack, will I still get the NY HD DNS if I drop the SD? I'm worried that if/when I call DirecTV about this, I'll lose the HD DNS, to never see them again. I believe that waivers for DNS are separate for SD and HD, but do the CSRs know this?

BTW, TWC in my area has just announced 5% increase.


----------



## Dmtalon (Nov 9, 2007)

Sirius subscription up 40% on 3/11
Directv subscription up some % on 3/4
My Pay check 0% increass

Time to decide what is worth its cost...


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Can anyone show me where it's stated Preferred Choice must be accompanied by another Intl. package. Without the added cost for the Intl package this base looks to be a really good fit for me.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Grentz said:


> Remember it is a service guys and you are in no way forced to pay for it, you can always switch to something else or OTA.


Actually, I am. My current commitment requires that I subscribe to and pay for a DirecTV programming package until Nov. 2009.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Sirshagg said:


> Can anyone show me where it's stated Preferred Choice must be accompanied by another Intl. package. Without the added cost for the Intl package this base looks to be a really good fit for me.


There was a thread awhile back, you need just one international channel (there are some that you can buy just one channel for a few bucks a month). You also can try and get lucky and get a CSR that will add it to your account, you pay for it, but you do not have to have an international dish installed (so you will not be able to get that extra channel, but it allows you to get the preferred choice package).


----------



## bgottschalk (Aug 30, 2007)

Well - I guess it is what it is... Do I like it? Not really. Do I have to pay it? Not really.

I've been thinking about dropping premier for a while anyway...this may just make up my mind. I don't really watch $45+ of movies a month anyways. Man - that's a lot of PPV's.

So - hey - thanks DTV - you just saved me a bundle..


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

Satelliteracer said:


> DVR up a penny, HD Access up a penny, HD Extra Pack frozen.


I'm reviewing my subscription and I'm wondering what others think about the HD Extra Pack. Is it worth it to you?


----------



## kokishin (Sep 30, 2006)

Grentz said:


> I fail to see how Directv is expensive and getting us with fees.


Apparently.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

jdspencer said:


> I'm reviewing my subscription and I'm wondering what others think about the HD Extra Pack. Is it worth it to you?


I dropped it over a year ago. Nothing in it worth $5 to me. I've got plenty of other stuff to watch.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

:nono2: A good pair of reading Glasses May help :nono2:



Grentz said:


> I fail to see how Directv is expensive and getting us with fees.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

I wish I could drop a lot of other channels. I bet that 90% of the people on this forum only watch about 20 different channels. The rest are just flipped over and maybe once in awhile they get watched.

If I could select 20 channels and only pay for those I would be set. Unfortunetly as it is now, those 20 get bundled with 180 others.



bonscott87 said:


> I dropped it over a year ago. Nothing in it worth $5 to me. I've got plenty of other stuff to watch.


----------



## fredandbetty (Jan 28, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> I dropped it over a year ago. Nothing in it worth $5 to me. I've got plenty of other stuff to watch.


+1!!!


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

jdspencer said:


> I'm reviewing my subscription and I'm wondering what others think about the HD Extra Pack. Is it worth it to you?


Personally I really like it. MGMHD, Universal HD, and HDNet Movies are some of the most watched channels in our household.



kokishin said:


> Apparently.





dreadlk said:


> :nono2: A good pair of reading Glasses May help :nono2:


Find me a service that delivers the same amount of channels and equipment for cheaper. I know there is not one that services my area, and I have not seen one any where else either.

The cable co in my area is about $40/mo more for less channels than I get now! I am not saying I think Directv can do whatever they like and that it is cheap, but it is much much cheaper and delivers way more than any other TV service I can find.

If you guys are so upset, there are many options you have:
-Remove receiver(s) from your account (-$4.99/mo per receiver)
-Remove premium package subscriptions (-$5-$14/mo per premium)
-Remove sports subscriptions
-Lower your core package to a smaller package
-Get rid of HD (-$9.99/mo HD access)
-Get rid of DVR(s) (-$5.99/mo)
-Get rid of Directv and switch to OTA only (-Complete Directv Bill)

Personally to fend off some fees I stopped subscribing to premiums awhile back.


----------



## Farsight (Jul 16, 2007)

Channels I watch at all:

Locals + regional sports
ESPN/ESPN2
Comedy Central
FX
Cartoon Network
USA
SciFi
AMC
NFL Network
(Showtime, but it's a la carte when Dexter is on) 

So 15 total. Of those, I only consider about half as 'must-haves'. So I'm currently paying $5 a channel, or almost $10 a channel if you only count 'must-haves'. And people think a la carte would be more???

DirecTV is IMO the best deal out there... but that doesn't mean it's a good deal. $60+ per channel per year is a lot... The cost of DirecTV is probably enough to buy every show I watch on DVD.


----------



## uteotw (Sep 30, 2006)

Sorry, but count me in to the "this is getting old every year" crowd.

I've been a D* customer since 2001, and I can barely stand to think about how much I'm paying now compared to then. Yes, it's $3 ($36/year) + the other stuff (I have HBO so that brings it to $3.99/mo.), but everything's skyrocketing, and this just doesn't help at all. May have to cancel HBO and watch FOTC & Curb on Netflix later on. It's just getting old...:nono:


----------



## vaguy (Aug 7, 2007)

6 more months and I'm done with my 2-year commitment - I'm out of here then. I don't mind the rate increases per se (it's called inflation). But I despise the fact that they lock me in for 2 years on an HD upgrade and then have the audacity to increase fees. No other business that I know does this. I complained to them so bitterly they've given me several freebees to compensate. And recenty I thought I even caught a promo where they are stating they will lock rates in for a year. But I'm sure I'm not grandfathered into that. I hope they fall out of the sky.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Grandfathered packages go up $5.00 what a rip, raise the rates of those that have been with you longer more... When my contract is up or down far enough I want to buy it out, I am canceling one of my owned R22s and if it still does media share and internet feeds I am sending the HR22 unit back canceling and using my Owned R22s as media extenders.


----------



## VaJim (Jul 27, 2006)

RAD said:


> As long as I'm grandfathered for no DVR fee on Premier don't think I'll make any changes, but as soon as that goes away so will Premier.


I'm with RAD


----------



## kokishin (Sep 30, 2006)

Grentz said:


> If you guys are so upset, there are many options you have:
> -Remove receiver(s) from your account (-$4.99/mo per receiver)
> -Remove premium package subscriptions (-$5-$14/mo per premium)
> -Remove sports subscriptions
> ...


Master of the Obvious


----------



## bdowell (Mar 4, 2003)

People, people, people! You all know that these rate increases had to come.

The DirecTV execs are about $18 billion behind the execs on Wall Street that 'earned' those big bonuses last year (while running their companies into the ground, crying to get hand outs, etc.)

  


Ok, seriously, I'm not thrilled with these increases, and I do have to admit that it really makes me consider Verizon FiOS all the more. I already have FiOS TV in my house and though their HD DVR isn't as nice as the HR20 or HR21 boxes that I have are, currently I believe I'd save $$ if I went completely with FiOS and dropped DirecTV.

I think I've got about 10 months left before I could drop DirecTV if I wanted to (without early termination penalty). I'll definitely be comparing prices as that time ticks down. If I can get equivalent service out of FiOS I might, just might, drop DirecTV.


----------



## ahintz (Jan 14, 2007)

Well, while price increases always suck, but I am definitely a little jealous of my parents' grandfathered status. Even with the price increase, they will pay $8 less then I do (my parents are grandfathered on Total Choice Plus and Lifetime DVR with HBO/Showtime, while I'm on Plus HD DVR with HBO/Showtime). I'm up to $101.99 before taxes for one receiver (triple digits - ouch!) with the price increase, while my parents will still be under $100 - only $93.99 for one receiver. I think I may be dropping my premiums!


----------



## richall01 (Sep 30, 2007)

Look at what Directv has added from last year. Three bucks looks like a good deal.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

kevinwmsn said:


> I don't like the price increases either but the last several years and next year the number of HD channels(local and national) have increased drastically.


And to look at it from another perspective: their subscriber numbers have increased drastically as well. The beauty of satellite television is many of your costs are fixed. No matter how many customers you add, your distribution costs remain fairly flat. Sure, there are some costs that scale with the number of subscribers, but satellite television cost is much flatter than many businesses. Yet despite the fact that there are now many more people sharing in the costs of satellites, the cost per user is still going up. :sure:

The bottom line is: rates increase because they can. Unless and until subscriber numbers start to drastically decrease, you can continue to expect more of the same.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I don't subscribe to it, but if I did subscribe to the Game Lounge the 4 cent a month increase would make me cancel!

There's at least one good thing, we can cancel addons without contract issues. But my Total Choice Plus is still cheaper than the current plans.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

richall01 said:


> Look at what Directv has added from last year. Three bucks looks like a good deal.


Some here might just agree with you...


----------



## tjofamber (Oct 10, 2007)

uteotw said:


> Sorry, but count me in to the "this is getting old every year" crowd.
> 
> I've been a D* customer since 2001, and I can barely stand to think about how much I'm paying now compared to then. Yes, it's $3 ($36/year) + the other stuff (I have HBO so that brings it to $3.99/mo.), but everything's skyrocketing, and this just doesn't help at all. May have to cancel HBO and watch FOTC & Curb on Netflix later on. It's just getting old...:nono:


I just cancelled HBO to get my fee down just a little.

PLUS HD DVR
Starz free for three mo, wont keep
extra pac free for three mo, wiil probably keep
Sho, keep till end of call girl, wiil pick back up when Weeds, Dexter starts.
I'll email them to explain why.
TJ


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

turey22 said:


> You sound angry buddy...take a chill pill. Plus hd dvr includes hd access in that
> 
> break down...choic extra..dvr service...hd access.
> 
> ...


I know and I accept the hand digging a little deeper each year, as much as I don't like it.

What I have a gripe with, is that the base packages contain so *many *shopping and ad and other crap channels that I have no interest in. We're paying quite a bit for Total Choice plus HD plus HD Extra (should be included) plus Outdoor Channel plus DVR.... and there's probably less than 15 channels of interest. Not to mention, the new channels are not added to Total Choice so if I want Planet Green or Sportsman channel or the rest of the Discovery channels, etc, I have to pony up more each month.

I've been paying since 97 (when Total Choice was $29.99/mo - remember those days??) and will continue to do so (moreso because there is no other alternative save Dish), but it really seems like value for $$ is declining.


----------



## roadrunner1782 (Sep 28, 2008)

I despise rate increases (this one included), but I really can't complain too much only because Directv could honestly charge me $20 more a month and would still be alot cheaper than TWC for me! I also have to say whoever here is really upset about the increase should express their concerns to Directv in an appropiate manner!


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

Grentz said:


> Where do you not get charged extra for things with TV providers? Cable companies usually do not have so many separate fees, just bigger single fees.
> 
> For example:
> Directv for 3 HD-DVRs = 1 DVR Fee @ $5.99, 2 Receiver Lease Fees @ $4.99ea, *Total = $15.97/mo for 3 HD-DVRs*
> ...


Because it's $15.97 more than it should be... regardless of what another company might do.

Why on earth should I pay to use features of the machine that are built in? Why should I pay for extra receivers on the same account? It's like the old phone company practice of charging per jack... thankfully, long since gone the way of the dodo.


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

jdspencer said:


> I'm reviewing my subscription and I'm wondering what others think about the HD Extra Pack. Is it worth it to you?


This one is... though it should be included in HD access... this is a real nickel and dime package.

Wife loves Palladia and we both love the other HD channels. We'll be keeping this one.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

DarinC said:


> And to look at it from another perspective: their subscriber numbers have increased drastically as well. The beauty of satellite television is many of your costs are fixed. No matter how many customers you add, your distribution costs remain fairly flat. Sure, there are some costs that scale with the number of subscribers, but satellite television cost is much flatter than many businesses. Yet despite the fact that there are now many more people sharing in the costs of satellites, the cost per user is still going up. :sure:
> 
> The bottom line is: rates increase because they can. Unless and until subscriber numbers start to drastically decrease, you can continue to expect more of the same.


Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that programming charges that the providers charge DirecTV are based on number of subscribers and not just a flat rate for each channel or bundle of channels, are they not? Yes, some of the costs (satellites, corporate compensation, benefits, etc.) are going to be nearly the same no matter how many subscribers, but some staffing levels (CSRs, etc.) are dependant on the subscriber levels, and some equipment costs (set-top boxes, etc.) will fluctuate with the size of the subscriber base.


babzog said:


> What I have a gripe with, is that the base packages contain so *many *shopping and ad and other crap channels that I have no interest in.


And I believe that most of those shopping/ad channels actually pay DirecTV to be carried, thereby keeping subscriber costs down compared to what would need to be charged if they weren't there.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Grentz said:


> I cannot get service from my local cable co, but many friends do have it and I know their pricing well. For example, each HD-DVR is an extra $17/mo! They also get about 15 (non-local) channels in HD for an HD addon price of $12/mo. Insane pricing!


I agree.

And cable in my area - talk about nickel and diming - also charges a monthly fee for remotes and who knows what else like that.

Ya, you guys that are torqued off enough that you are ready to leave, try your local cable company, I'll bet you'll be a lot happier. :nono2:

And it ALWAYS cracks me up to read the posts that talk about how DirecTV should now - because of these difficult financial times we are in (in all sectors, by the way) - suddenly forget they are a business and become some benevolent Grandpa or Uncle Henry and LOWER their prices to help everybody out "because we're all hurting". :lol::lol::lol:

Or the posts by those that are so obvously intimately familiar enough with the television providing business to know what items/features that "SHOULD be free and yet they charge for them!" How dare they!!! 

I bet if you go back each year to the price increase announcement threads you could almost copy & paste and get the same thread as we see each year now. Apparently there aren't enough people that get so injured by the price increases that they leave and bring the big, old, mean satellite company down. If I ever get to a point (and believe me, I have VERY little 'disposable' income) where a $3 a month increase is the make or break point for subscribing or not, I should have *not* been subscribing LONG before then.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

The funny thing is that most of you complaining are not listening to those of us trying to educate you and explain why it is as it is.

-Many of those "stupid shopping channels" actually offset your costs. If it were not for them, you would be paying much more for your service.

-Ala Carte is not easily obtainable because channels help fund other channels and media networks want channels as combo packages and in certain tiers. Directv is by far not in control of each and every channel and able to take and remove at their leisure. 

-Rate increases are not just Directv, in fact most of the time it is not them at all. They have to pay media networks that are raising their prices as well...by a lot in some cases.

-You all keep complaining about rates, yet I have not heard one other suggestion of any other service that is cheaper for premium TV? The only one comparable is Dish which is very similarly priced. Switch to FiOS, UVerse, Cable, etc. and be shocked when your promo price wears off and you are stuck paying more for less. I have priced them out and compared them many times, it is just the truth.

-You also complain about fees. You dont think it costs Directv more to provide you with HD service? Premiums? DVRs? All of these incur additional costs and much of the time the tacked on fees actually do not cover them, they balance some of them into the regular subscriber costs.

-Satellite infrastructure is cheap compared to cable right? They are not running lines in my street. Just a cheap dish for me! Wrong, they have to put up multimillion dollar satellites, uplink stations, local uplink centers, and still pay for the gear that you do see at your house.

Overall I really dont mind if you think it is too expensive, if you disagree with it, etc. We all are free to our opinions. In fact I personally am not very stoked about another rate increase at all. But many of you are harping on points that are explained over and over as to why they have to be done that way or that there really is no other alternative only to turn around and keep ranting on about them.


----------



## BAHitman (Oct 24, 2007)

so, it looks like, for me, it'll be going up $5.11 + tax

+$5 for Premier
+$.01 for HD access, HD Xtra, and 9 recievers 

current bill is $175.something 

that is if my math is right... guess it's time for the annual call to TWC to see if they want to beat $181.something/Month for 7 HD DVR's and 3 HD Recievers... Last year it was more expensive, even with their promo... Only thing TWC is good for is high speed internet access... 

You know, thinking about all of the $.01 increases... that's got to be a substantial bit of profit. you have got to believe they have at least as many additional reciever fees as they do subscribers... maybe twice as much... that's a bunch of change rollin' in every month... 

as for the networks poor programming these days... wounder what an HD VOD-only service would be worth...


----------



## scott72 (Feb 17, 2008)

BattleScott said:


> Actually, I am. My current commitment requires that I subscribe to and pay for a DirecTV programming package until Nov. 2009.


To which you agreed to do. None of us enjoy the increases, but what isn't going up? Show me a cable company that isn't raising rates annually. Is Dish going up? You can't escape the increases unless you go OTA only or nothing at all.


----------



## BAHitman (Oct 24, 2007)

Grentz said:


> -Rate increases are not just Directv, in fact most of the time it is not them at all. They have to pay media networks that are raising their prices as well...by a lot in some cases.


You know, We recently had an issue here in Austin, where one of the local stations was kicked off of the local cable provider becuase they demanded a large per-subscriber fee to carry the local channel on their system. I'll bet they proposed the same or similar charges to both DTV and DISH and they likeley just paid them...

I would really love to be able to see what those contracts look like... Bet they would open a bunch of eyes... :eek2:


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

I will drink 2 less lattes per month.

Now I'm even.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

BAHitman said:


> You know, We recently had an issue here in Austin, where one of the local stations was kicked off of the local cable provider becuase they demanded a large per-subscriber fee to carry the local channel on their system. I'll bet they proposed the same or similar charges to both DTV and DISH and they likeley just paid them...
> 
> I would really love to be able to see what those contracts look like... Bet they would open a bunch of eyes... :eek2:


I think Directv does its fair share of negotiating, the PBS HD stations for one were an area where Directv did a lot of it. There are also plenty of locals not carried by Directv that I am sure have to do with what local networks want in return and the minimal benefit Directv would see from adding them, especially the smaller DMAs.


----------



## clb4g9 (Sep 24, 2007)

Alebob911 said:


> As far as your sunday ticket response, blame those over paid undereducated players you watch. *Their *the reason for the skyrocketing fees.


While I normally don't chastise people for their poor English, you really shouldn't make an ignorant blanket statement about athletes being under-educated and then make a simple grammar mistake while doing so......


----------



## ejjames (Oct 3, 2006)

I'm grandfathered on Total Choice Plus. Am I correct in assuming it will go up $3 as well?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

clb4g9 said:


> While I normally don't chastise people for their poor English, you really shouldn't make an ignorant blanket statement about athletes being under-educated and then make a simple grammar mistake while doing so......


Yes, I should say. In fact technically speaking, it's a lot worse than just one blunder.

From post #22 with copyedits:

*Nobody forces *[properly "No one forced"] you to subscribe. I am sure the prices are *inline* [should be two words "in line"] with others that provide the same services. I agree that with the current state of the economy, it would be nice for a large company to skip a year or two until things get better [comma "," needed here] but greedy *CEO's* [should be plural "CEOs" without the apostrophe] and *share holders *[should be one word "shareholders"] don't care about the average everyday consumer and what "*its* [should be "it's" with the apostrophe] only 3 dollars" can do to them. *CEO's* [again, should be plural "CEOs"] don't live in the "normal" world. As far as your *sunday ticket *[should be capitalized as "Sunday Ticket"] response, blame those *over paid *[should be one word "overpaid"] undereducated players you watch. *Their* [should be "They're" or "They are"] the reason for the skyrocketing fees.

Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones...


----------



## SWORDFISH (Apr 16, 2007)

ejjames said:


> I'm grandfathered on Total Choice Plus. Am I correct in assuming it will go up $3 as well?


That is correct.

http://www.directv.com/email/29936-0_PriceIncreaseBKSL_S2.pdf?CMP=EMC-MQ-CS&ATT=120-B3-TE-090127proof&m=



> The following base packages*: FAMILIAR™, TOTAL CHOICE®, TOTAL CHOICE® PLUS, TOTAL CHOICE SELECT™, OPCIÓN ULTRA ESPECIAL®, OPCIÓN EXTRA ESPECIAL®, OPCIÓN EXTRA™, DIRECTV Limited, PLUS DIRECTV, TOTAL CHOICE MOBILE, SELECT CHOICE®, and TOTAL CHOICE LIMITED will increase an additional $3/mo


SF


----------



## ejjames (Oct 3, 2006)

Thanks Swordfish.


----------



## Truman (Mar 8, 2006)

i'm sure this point has been made countless times in the past, but i can't help but chime in.

so many of those who seem to be complaining the loudest are subscribing to top level or nearly top level packages with multiple premiums and at least three or more STBs to top it all off.

geez louise! if you are already paying over $100/month to feed every channel known to man to eight different televisions (one for every room in your house), what's another few bucks? rather than moaning and groaning, perhaps you ought to consider finding a hobby that doesn't involve your butt leaving a permanent dent in the couch.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

vaguy said:


> 6 more months and I'm done with my 2-year commitment - I'm out of here then. I don't mind the rate increases per se (it's called inflation). But I despise the fact that they lock me in for 2 years on an HD upgrade and then have the audacity to increase fees. No other business that I know does this. I complained to them so bitterly they've given me several freebees to compensate. And recenty I thought I even caught a promo where they are stating they will lock rates in for a year. But I'm sure I'm not grandfathered into that. I hope they fall out of the sky.


If you are that disgruntled with only 6 months left on your commitment it would ore then likely be cheaper for you to buy it out and leave now. This method would save you money in the long run and you can switch to a service that you prefer.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

BattleScott said:


> Actually, I am. My current commitment requires that I subscribe to and pay for a DirecTV programming package until Nov. 2009.


Actually no, you are not required to stay, if you where required to stay they would offer no method of leaving. There is, you can buy out the remainder of your commitment at a lower cost, return the equipment and choose another service.


----------



## aramus8 (Nov 21, 2006)

Frontier communications sent out a flyer with a bundle deal today...250 channels with Dish for $9.95 with no commitment. Price good through all of 2009. I had Dish before and hated it, but I'm thinking now that $249 for the year with Dish compared to over $1400 for the year with DirecTv is more than a little hard to ignore. The price for the year includes installation. Apparantly Dish and Frontier signed a distribution agreement last November and they are just now starting to roll it out. I was going to get rid of my land line and just use cell service, but this may change everything. It looks like Frontier and Dish are taking the economy seriously. Maybe DirecTv should wake up. Here is the link:http://www.frontier.com/terms/2009Q1Offers/


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

scott72 said:


> To which you agreed to do. None of us enjoy the increases, but what isn't going up? Show me a cable company that isn't raising rates annually. Is Dish going up? You can't escape the increases unless you go OTA only or nothing at all.


What does that have to do with my post? My point is that you can't "escape" period when bound by a commitment.



wingrider01 said:


> Actually no, you are not required to stay, if you where required to stay they would offer no method of leaving. There is, you can buy out the remainder of your commitment at a lower cost, return the equipment and choose another service.


Yes, I am required to stay. If I fail to meet that requirement, I face an "early termination fee" of $20/month remaining.

PROGRAMMING COMMITMENT. The programming package(s) must be maintained for a period of not less than (a) eighteen (18) consecutive months (for accounts with only standard receiver(s)), or (b) twenty-four (24) consecutive months (for accounts with advanced product(s)/receiver(s) digital video recorder (DVR), high definition receiver (HD) or high definition digital video recorder (HD DVR), including additional DIRECTV receiver(s)). After you have fulfilled your agreement to the *required* programming package(s), you are not obligated to continue your subscription to DIRECTV programming for any specific duration. Current DIRECTV customers may activate additional receivers with their existing DIRECTV programming package. THIS PROGRAMMING COMMITMENT IS SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER PROGRAMMING COMMITMENT YOU MAY HAVE MADE WITH DIRECTV AND IS FULLY ENFORCEABLE UNDER THESE TERMS.


----------



## Hammy408 (Sep 23, 2007)

I apologize if it has already been posted here, but I cannot seem to find a price list of what DTV is currently offering nor what the new price list is.

I have gone over their website numerous times, called customer support to have them help me locate it on their website and even had the internet dept send me an email, which did not contain a price list.

To me a price list is something like: ($/mo.)
Family = 30
Choice = 53
Choice Xtra = 58
Premier = 105

1st premium = 13
2nd premium = 12

1st receiver = 0
2nd receiver = 5

HD = 9
DVR = 6

Extra Pack = 5

This should be easy to make and put on their site. But the only thing I can find is exactly what I seen the fine people here post here. The prices for this package will go up $3 per month, but it does not state a starting or ending price, which makes the reference meaningless.

Is anyone aware of anyone who might have done the due diligence and posted a price list in this format or know where we can find one?

Thank-you.


----------



## Jotas (Jan 5, 2006)

I think I'm going to call and see what D* can do for me as far as providing a monthly credit. I can't justify paying $90+ for a base package+HD+HBO.

If D* can't offer a credit I think I'll have to make the switch to cable or FiOS and their $99 have it all deals.


----------



## hiker (Mar 1, 2006)

I thought that those under a programming commitment would be exempt from the price increase until the term of the commitment is up. Is that not the case?


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

hiker said:


> I thought that those under a programming commitment would be exempt from the price increase until the term of the commitment is up. Is that not the case?


No that is not correct.


----------



## hiker (Mar 1, 2006)

Michael D'Angelo;1980544 said:


> No that is not correct.


Jeez. Nothing like a one-sided contract, more like a screw-job.


----------



## kd4ao (Jun 12, 2004)

In times of great economic crisis a good corporate citizen would lower fees to consumers thus helping the economy grow. (My Opinion, and their are a lot of corporations that seem not to care.)


----------



## fredandbetty (Jan 28, 2007)

But from what I can see, we are STILL getting a good deal .... It I guess we will just have to decide if we need the 'add-ons' ( premiums. etc)...

SWEET! I have been meaning to become a member, and glad I did!

ok, Back to topic... LOL!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

hiker said:


> Jeez. Nothing like a one-sided contract, more like a screw-job.




Those who have subscribed to all sorts of services...wireless comes to mind...know that this is not uncommon...so that would seem to indicate that everyone is executing a "screw job" as you put it.


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

Wow, so there are people that are still blind-sided by the annual programming rate hike by *submit the name of any multichannel programming provider*?! No wonder the analog cut-off is in so much trouble.


----------



## jdh8668 (Nov 7, 2007)

Grentz said:


> Thanks for the info. To be expected with the current times.
> 
> Also remember people, it is not just Directv raising rates, the content providers are increasing the prices they charge Directv so Directv has to pass some of it along to customers, as do all the TV services.
> ...


And if I was to guess, I would say the biggest increase from all of those providers comes from ESPN. With the amount of money they are laying out for MLB, NFL Monday nights, and soon all of the BCS bowl games, they are more than happy to pass it on to the consumers.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

aramus8 said:


> Frontier communications sent out a flyer with a bundle deal today...250 channels with Dish for $9.95 with no commitment. Price good through all of 2009. I had Dish before and hated it, but I'm thinking now that $249 for the year with Dish compared to over $1400 for the year with DirecTv is more than a little hard to ignore. The price for the year includes installation. Apparantly Dish and Frontier signed a distribution agreement last November and they are just now starting to roll it out. I was going to get rid of my land line and just use cell service, but this may change everything. It looks like Frontier and Dish are taking the economy seriously. Maybe DirecTv should wake up. Here is the link:http://www.frontier.com/terms/2009Q1Offers/


After your first year your savings will be barely anything I am sure.

Promo prices are great, Directv's promo prices are even great, but they only last so long...


----------



## jeffreydavisjr (Jul 12, 2007)

turey22 said:


> You sound angry buddy...take a chill pill. Plus hd dvr includes hd access in that
> 
> break down...choic extra..dvr service...hd access.
> 
> ...


Ok, how about this. You think if DirecTV has a great year and has money coming out of their ears, do you think they will lower prices? Absolutely not! I am not cancelling, but only because of NFL Sunday Ticket. I am too big of a football fan.

Someone said its not DirecTV's fault that they are raising prices? Then who's fault is it?

It's an annual thing, so why worry about it? If they keep raising prices $3 every year. In 5 years will you be saying the same thing? This is the essence of inflation, which is what I thought the government has been trying to stop for quite some time.

I remember back in 2004 I was paying $39.99 a month for everything I get now minus the DVR and HD. See what $3 a year can do plus making people pay for HD and a DVR fee.

I also think that the DVR fee should go away because you own/lease the HD-DVR. The DVR process is an actual feature of the machine and we should have access to that feature regardless.

Heck why don't they start charging us $4.99 to have access to the guide information. Or $5.99 to be able to watch 1 channel for more than 1 hour at a time. That will feel their pockets up fast.


----------



## Chuck W (Mar 26, 2002)

Grentz said:


> After your first year your savings will be barely anything I am sure.
> 
> Promo prices are great, Directv's promo prices are even great, but they only last so long...


But after the first year, unlike Directv, he will be free to go wherever he chooses, because there is no commitment, so it's a win win for him. With Directv, once your promo price ends, you are still at the mercy of Directv until your contract ends.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Chuck W said:


> But after the first year, unlike Directv, he will be free to go wherever he chooses, because there is no commitment, so it's a win win for him. With Directv, once your promo price ends, you are still at the mercy of Directv until your contract ends.


Theres a contract with Dish too. And whats he going to do, switch providers every year? He'll soon run out of providers to go to.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Chuck W said:


> But after the first year, unlike Directv, he will be free to go wherever he chooses, because there is no commitment, so it's a win win for him. With Directv, once your promo price ends, you are still at the mercy of Directv until your contract ends.


Dish charges more for having no commitment, and I really fail to see how the ability to switch providers is so awesome.

I have had Directv for 12yrs personally, most of which not under a contract. Who am I going to switch too? Directv is the cheapest for the service I get, so why would I switch somewhere else?

I guess if you want to keep switching between providers and getting promos that is one option, but then you have to deal with another providers service as well!


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

BattleScott said:


> Actually, I am. My current commitment requires that I subscribe to and pay for a DirecTV programming package until Nov. 2009.





wingrider01 said:


> Actually no, you are not required to stay, if you where required to stay they would offer no method of leaving. There is, you can buy out the remainder of your commitment at a lower cost, return the equipment and choose another service.





BattleScott said:


> Yes, I am required to stay. If I fail to meet that requirement, I face an "early termination fee" of $20/month remaining.


The point being made was if you are that unhappy with the price increase that you are counting down the days until you leave, all you have to do is pay the $20 a month on the time you have left (instead of the now exorbitant monthly charges you are "forced" to pay over that same number of months) and leave now. Whatever you save over and above that $20 per month by not staying you can now pay to the cheaper, nicer, more benevolent service provider you would use in place of big, mean, greedy DirecTV. There's your way out!


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

Grentz said:


> I think Directv does its fair share of negotiating, the PBS HD stations for one were an area where Directv did a lot of it. There are also plenty of locals not carried by Directv that I am sure have to do with what local networks want in return and the minimal benefit Directv would see from adding them, especially the smaller DMAs.


Well, that's just the point... Directv is putting a given channel/network, in highdef and with good clarity, into _tens of millions_ of homes that would not otherwise be obtainable (sure, there would be _some _offset from a cable and OTA in areas which are served by cable and OTA).

Without the carriers, channels like CNN, HBO, SPEED, etc simply would not exist.

Methinks (quite naively, I admit) the carriers are not negotiating from a strong enough position if they actually paying a network more for carriage rather than dictating the terms of carriage: "You want to reach our viewers? Here's the price".


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Those who have subscribed to all sorts of services...wireless comes to mind...know that this is not uncommon...so that would seem to indicate that everyone is executing a "screw job" as you put it.


I think he's upset that he's under a contract - which, in the usual sense, includes time and price commitments - and is now subject to the increase in fees with no offset elsewhere. In essence, it makes one _feel _like a one-sided breach of contract (though I'm very certain there's fine-print somewhere that makes it ok for DTV to do this).

By committing, you are guaranteeing income for the company for a period of time... they should not be increasing contracted fees (and no cell company I know of increases fees _during _a contract. After, yes, but never during).


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Those who have subscribed to all sorts of services...wireless comes to mind...know that this is not uncommon...so that would seem to indicate that everyone is executing a "screw job" as you put it.


But every contract I have ever had - including my wireless plans - has either protected me from price increases or allowed me out of my contract.

Lokk, I am not particularly upset about the $3/mo increase I will see, but it is an inherently unfair system that allows one side to change the terms (cost in this case).

A more appropriate approach to such situations, if they choose not to grandfather prices, is to provide an opt-out period after such changes are announced that would allow people in contracts to walk away penalty free.


----------



## LCDSpazz (Dec 31, 2008)

In terms of the HD extra package, I think 5 bucks isn't too bad. The HDNet Movie and MGM channels have great presentation quality. Although I'm pretty disappointed with Universal HD, which recently went to hell. It's certainly a better deal than HBO. What is it $14 or $15 month now?! And all you get is ONE LOUSY HD channel. I can't believe people pay that. Other than original programming (none of the current crop I care for except Entourage), the rest of their offerings aren't worth even 5 bucks/month.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Grentz said:


> Remember it is a service guys and you are in no way forced to pay for it, you can always switch to something else or OTA.





BattleScott said:


> Actually, I am. My current commitment requires that I subscribe to and pay for a DirecTV programming package until Nov. 2009.





JLucPicard said:


> The point being made was if you are that unhappy with the price increase that you are counting down the days until you leave, all you have to do is pay the $20 a month on the time you have left (instead of the now exorbitant monthly charges you are "forced" to pay over that same number of months) and leave now. Whatever you save over and above that $20 per month by not staying you can now pay to the cheaper, nicer, more benevolent service provider you would use in place of big, mean, greedy DirecTV. There's your way out!


No, there was an assertion made that we were in no way required to pay for this service and that we can simply switch to something else. I merely pointed out that contention was in fact not correct, that if you are in a commitment, you are in fact 'required' to pay.

I never said I was happy or unhappy with the price increase, or indicated that if not bound by this agreement I would leave. Those are assumptions that you and others are making.


----------



## shedberg (Jan 20, 2007)

ohiosnowman said:


> no offense to anyone here but if your dropping 109.99 a month to watch 49 shopping channels and 15 hbos etc, they probably thought your eyes are probably so glazed over you wont notice the 3/month increase.


Sorry to tell you but some of us have the premier more for the sports programming that is offered so we can follow our local teams. I would think the shopping channels are included in all levels of programming.


----------



## Dave (Jan 29, 2003)

No body likes price hikes. But it has become a way of life. What I would really like to see is for the local, state, and federal governments get more involved with the satelitte providers. They need to put some local and state and yes even federal regulations on them. Right now satelitte providers are corporate oriented. The customer comes last. Be it price hikes, commitments or whatever. It is company first. We can see this by the number of complaints we see on the boards here about how customers are treated. Perhaps if they, the satalitte providers came under the same microscope that the cell phone companies have been under there would be some changes for the customer. No body like commitments, but it to is a way of life. If the sat providers had to null and void your commitment when they have a price hike it would be to the customers benifit. But we all know this will not happen as long as the sat companies have free reign to do what they pleas and when they please. Alot of you will scream and hoolar, please do not let the government come into play. I think the Federal Government should come into play and reign in some of these companies.


----------



## LCDSpazz (Dec 31, 2008)

I'd like to see what kind of fees ESPN, NFL, TBS, etc. are charging Directv for carriage. ESPN is constantly jacking up their fees to cable and sat providers to pay for their outrageous sports rights fees -BILLIONS for football, baseball, etc. God knows these sports leagues can never get enough $$$ for their impoverished players and owners.


----------



## ChrisPC (Jun 17, 2003)

Alebob911 said:


> I agree that with the current state of the economy, it would be nice for a large company to skip a year or two until things get better but greedy CEO's and share holders don't care about the average everyday consumer and what "its only 3 dollars" can do to them. CEO's don't live in the "normal" world.


A lot of this is due to channels like ESPN raising their rates. They just paid over $2 billion just for the SEC. D* has to pass it on, or make ESPN a premium like some cable companies do. If your bills went up, wouldn't you need a raise?


----------



## rnbmusicfan (Jul 19, 2005)

JLucPicard said:


> The point being made was if you are that unhappy with the price increase that you are counting down the days until you leave, all you have to do is pay the $20 a month on the time you have left (instead of the now exorbitant monthly charges you are "forced" to pay over that same number of months) and leave now. Whatever you save over and above that $20 per month by not staying you can now pay to the cheaper, nicer, more benevolent service provider you would use in place of big, mean, greedy DirecTV. There's your way out!


There's actually a cheaper way:
Subscribe to MYX alacarte ($5) and the basic locals packages (~$13) = $17/mo*tax. Winds up cheaper and you get something than paying $20/month x # months till contract ends, all up front. But, don't tell all your friends and neighbors about this, because I'm sure some person at DirecTV will see a pattern and then DirecTV will cease offering that channel alacarte. But something international (even if its $14.99), or downgrading maybe to Family or Preferred Choice are other options.

Two nice things about Dish - they permit a locals only package without international, and cancelling a contract (if needed) apparently is just $10/month x [# of months remaining], though it makes more sense again just to keep locals. $20/month is excessive though.


----------



## surfmaui03 (Feb 26, 2005)

The funny thing is.....everyones bills ARE going up, and yet I dont know too many people who are getting raises......


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

BattleScott said:


> No, there was an assertion made that we were in no way required to pay for this service and that we can simply switch to something else. I merely pointed out that contention was in fact not correct, that if you are in a commitment, you are in fact 'required' to pay.


I stand corrected on that point - if you are still in a programming commitment period there is not a way (short of death or some line of site issue) to just walk away/change providers and not pay anything at all.

And my apologies to you if I attributed someone else's feeling/complaints to you. My bad.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Boston Fan said:


> But every contract I have ever had - including my wireless plans - has either protected me from price increases or allowed me out of my contract.
> 
> Lokk, I am not particularly upset about the $3/mo increase I will see, but it is an inherently unfair system that allows one side to change the terms (cost in this case).
> 
> A more appropriate approach to such situations, if they choose not to grandfather prices, is to provide an opt-out period after such changes are announced that would allow people in contracts to walk away penalty free.


The commitment agreed to with DirecTV is just to maintain a minimum level of programming during your commitment period. You are not forming a contract for a certain price for a certain program level. And unlike some cell phone agreements I've seen in the past, you are free to raise or lower your program package at any time without that in itself extending your programming commitment.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

We want more HD channels? That takes money.

Need satellites to carry the content? That takes money.

With the increases I have to pay $4/month. I can deal with. Especially compared to what's going on at the pump, the supermarket, and department stores.

I can live with $48/year....but that's just me. :grin:

Mike


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

Over the past two years in this forum, as annual price hikes were announced I complained and threatened to reduce my service to keep my total monthly bill about the same. Actions however speak much louder than words, and so far my actions have been to make no changes. I have absorbed the price increases begrugingly, but have accepted them nevertheless.

I am retired, and on a relatively fixed income, and in these current economic times, I find it increasingly difficult to absorb price increases. I have recently made several budget adjustments to reduce my total monthly expenses, and fear that it may actually be time, this time around, to do the same with DirecTV. I'll have to wait and see, as I really don't want to drop to a lower programming package, but it might be necessary. I really have a lot of trouble justifying to my wife or myself spending over $100 a month to watch television. And with the end of some monthly discounts I've benefited from, along with the proposed increase, that will start approaching $150 a month before long. That's past my tolerance level.


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

surfmaui03 said:


> The funny thing is.....everyones bills ARE going up, and yet I dont know too many people who are getting raises......


not true got a raise and a bonus last quarter. and with the price increase i'm sure i'm helping some D* employees get a raise too which i don't mind


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

JLucPicard said:


> I stand corrected on that point - if you are still in a programming commitment period there is not a way (short of death or some line of site issue) to just walk away/change providers and not pay anything at all.
> 
> And my apologies to you if I attributed someone else's feeling/complaints to you. My bad.


No worries, that's a hazzard of posting in a multi-user forum such as this.


----------



## Alebob911 (Mar 22, 2007)

I might be one of those......



hdtvfan0001 said:


> Some here might just agree with you...


----------



## leww37334 (Sep 19, 2005)

Got the email today, my rates will go up $3 on what is about a $113/mo bill. Less than 3%, less than the current rate of inflation. I will live with that, given what I receive from Directv.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

BattleScott said:


> What does that have to do with my post? My point is that you can't "escape" period when bound by a commitment.
> 
> Yes, I am required to stay. If I fail to meet that requirement, I face an "early termination fee" of $20/month remaining.
> 
> PROGRAMMING COMMITMENT. The programming package(s) must be maintained for a period of not less than (a) eighteen (18) consecutive months (for accounts with only standard receiver(s)), or (b) twenty-four (24) consecutive months (for accounts with advanced product(s)/receiver(s) digital video recorder (DVR), high definition receiver (HD) or high definition digital video recorder (HD DVR), including additional DIRECTV receiver(s)). After you have fulfilled your agreement to the *required* programming package(s), you are not obligated to continue your subscription to DIRECTV programming for any specific duration. Current DIRECTV customers may activate additional receivers with their existing DIRECTV programming package. THIS PROGRAMMING COMMITMENT IS SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER PROGRAMMING COMMITMENT YOU MAY HAVE MADE WITH DIRECTV AND IS FULLY ENFORCEABLE UNDER THESE TERMS.


sorry do not see anyplace in what you quoted that states you do not have a choice to leave if you wish, If YOU decide to leave, YOU owe the early terminaytion fee.

No where does it state that YOU cannot choose to leave of your own free will. YOU are just responsible for the ETF. The are not telling you that under no circumstances can you terminate your contract, that is no choice. they give you a choice, you decide that you will not pay the fee. TANSTAAFL

same as with a cell phone compnay, if you decide to leave before the end of your contract, they will oblige you, you are just responsible for the balance of the fee.


----------



## montanaxvi (Oct 2, 2008)

I guess that it isn't too bad, but for someone such as myself...I have only been with them for 15 months and have seen 2 rate increases. So I jumped into a 2 year contract in the late portion of a year so the rate hikes haven't even been spaced a year apart for me.


My biggest complaint is with the lease receiver fee. Yes you pay it with every company, they charge you for using their equipment, but with D* you already had to pay an up front charge possibly up as high as $150 depending on the model just to be able to get the receiver, and don't even think about calling them to come out and fix THEIR equipment (since you are just leasing it) should something happen to it and NOT have the protection plan. That is just wrong imo.

When I had TWC if I had a problem with the box, they came right out and swapped it out for a new one, no questions asked, that was why I paid the lease fee. I didn't have to give them $100 to get the box, then another $5/month to use it as well as another $5/month in case it breaks and I need a replacement.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

JLucPicard said:


> The commitment agreed to with DirecTV is just to maintain a minimum level of programming during your commitment period. You are not forming a contract for a certain price for a certain program level. And unlike some cell phone agreements I've seen in the past, you are free to raise or lower your program package at any time without that in itself extending your programming commitment.


I understand what a commitment period is,  I am just pointing out that a one-sided contract in unfair. If they choose to raise rates, so be it, but they should be required to open a window to let those in commitments out of the contract of they do so. Seems pretty straightforward, and certainly more honest than the current system.


----------



## FLWingNut (Nov 19, 2005)

Dave said:


> No body likes price hikes. But it has become a way of life. What I would really like to see is for the local, state, and federal governments get more involved with the satelitte providers. They need to put some local and state and yes even federal regulations on them. Right now satelitte providers are corporate oriented. The customer comes last. Be it price hikes, commitments or whatever. It is company first.


That's one of the funniest posts I've ever seen. What company is not "company-first?" For-profit companies are not charities, they exist to make money for their shareholders. If you have a 401K, you likely own stock in something, not to mention stock you may own directly. Don't you want the highest return on your money?

If D*, or any other company, lowers prices, it's not because it's trying to be a good citizen or because "people are hurting." It will lower prices in response to market conditions -- not enough people can afford the product/service at its current price point. CEO's and managers don't wake up and think, "how can I help the country today?" And they shouldn't. They are hired to make decisions to help make the company more profitable.

I hate price increases as much as any of you, but to call for the government to get involved is silly. There is a place for government regulation -- if the service is a monopoly, like electric and water.. Satellite TV just doesn't fit. There are alternatives: cable, DISH, FIOS, OTA. Vote with your wallet.


----------



## Game Fan (Sep 8, 2007)

FLWingNut said:


> That's one of the funniest posts I've ever seen. What company is not "company-first?" For-profit companies are not charities, they exist to make money for their shareholders. If you have a 401K, you likely own stock in something, not to mention stock you may own directly. Don't you want the highest return on your money?
> 
> If D*, or any other company, lowers prices, it's not because it's trying to be a good citizen or because "people are hurting." It will lower prices in response to market conditions -- not enough people can afford the product/service at its current price point. CEO's and managers don't wake up and think, "how can I help the country today?" And they shouldn't. They are hired to make decisions to help make the company more profitable.
> 
> I hate price increases as much as any of you, but to call for the government to get involved is silly. There is a place for government regulation -- if the service is a monopoly, like electric and water.. Satellite TV just doesn't fit. There are alternatives: cable, DISH, FIOS, OTA. Vote with your wallet.


+1


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

About the only thing the government would do if they got more involved is add more taxes that will make your bills go up even more. So ya, I would leave the government out of it


----------



## fredandbetty (Jan 28, 2007)

Christopher Gould said:


> not true got a raise and a bonus last quarter. and with the price increase i'm sure i'm helping some D* employees get a raise too which i don't mind


Sweet! Could you put in a good word for us ??


----------



## Chuck W (Mar 26, 2002)

Grentz said:


> Dish charges more for having no commitment, and I really fail to see how the ability to switch providers is so awesome.
> 
> I have had Directv for 12yrs personally, most of which not under a contract. Who am I going to switch too? Directv is the cheapest for the service I get, so why would I switch somewhere else?
> 
> I guess if you want to keep switching between providers and getting promos that is one option, but then you have to deal with another providers service as well!


While you fail to see it, other have noticed it. Directv's rising prices have been making it even easier to see too. Things change over time. Directv used to be the clear and away leader in my area in HD and price. Now, it's a LOT closer and the rising prices have made it almost a dead heat when you consider the value you are getting(even more so with bundling).

In a way, their respective roles have almost switched in that Directv is now the one with regular price increases and are nickel and diming their customers. while cable has started to wise up and have held prices steady(at least in my area) and are starting to offer better and better deals and catching up to Directv in HD. All the while, not resorting to forcing their customers into long commitments to hold them.
I know to me, now that Directv has chosen to yet again raise pices and decided to take away my NY locals in HD(even tho I get them as significantly viewed channels in SD), cable is really starting to look good to me too

A few years ago, that thought would have NEVER even entered my mind, but in this current economy it is becoming more about price than completely about content.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

I'm sorry but I just can't see the point in getting upset about $36 - $60 dollars a year. If $3 a mo is that important to you then why are you paying for a non essenential service to begin with? This goes for everything you spend money on. Now I know everyone's situation is different and todays economy does suck but if $3 is breaking your bank then I'd look at what's really important to spend money on and what's not. 

Price increases are a necessity of business. The reason for it is that we as consumers demand more and those demands cost money. We want more HD, we want better technology, the list can go on and on. DirecTV has already stated it wants to be the premier content provider. Premier and cheap do not go hand in hand. 

Now I understand that there is a small % of people out there on disablility or social security that have very strict budgets. For those people I can understand truly being upset because they have no choice if it exceeds their budget to reduce programming. However for the vast majority of people this increase is almost nothing in terms of what is paid out monthly on entertainment/fun and can easily be absorbed if you were to look at every dollar spent per month and say "is this a necessity".

The formula is really simple for any entertainment. If the money you spend is greater then the value you get for it then it's too expensive. It's easy to get sidelined by new customer offers from other companies but looking past most of those you'll find out that you're still getting a great value. If not then it's time to switch.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Boston Fan said:


> I understand what a commitment period is,  I am just pointing out that a one-sided contract in unfair. If they choose to raise rates, so be it, but they should be required to open a window to let those in commitments out of the contract of they do so. Seems pretty straightforward, and certainly more honest than the current system.


And all I'm saying is there is nothing "unfair" about it. The Terms & Conditions and/or Customer Agreement clearly state that DirecTV can change the rates they charge as they see fit. You agree to that by using the service. You agree to keep a minimum level of programming and by doing so also agree that they can control their prices. I see nothing unfair about it.

And to think it would be "fair" to chuck the commitment because they raise their rates $3 a month (or $3.01 or $3.02 or whatever depending on the services you subscribe to) seems a bit ridiculous to me.

Most businesses WILL allow for an "out" when there are _material_ changes involved. To consider a $3 a month price increase _material_ enough to void such an agreement is a HUGE stretch of the imagination, in my opinion.

If the new price structure makes paying the charges unbearable, then there is always the choice to move on or adjust your subscriptions to something more affordable. Best case - you are no longer under a commitment and it costs you nothing to move on. Worst case, you pay the $20 a month for the time left on your commitment instead of continuing to pay the unbearable monthly charges and you get out of it that way. Middle ground is you dial back on your programming package or the equipment you are using to bring your monthly bill back into an area that is affordable for you.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

montanaxvi said:


> My biggest complaint is with the lease receiver fee. Yes you pay it with every company, they charge you for using their equipment, but with D* you already had to pay an up front charge possibly up as high as $150 depending on the model just to be able to get the receiver, ..<snip>


Currently (since March 2006), the only cost of leasing DirecTV equipment is whatever you happen to pay up front to obtain it. The $4.99 per month "leased receiver fee" is strictly a program mirroring charge for delivering your choice of programming package to your additional leased receivers (it isn't charged on your primary receiver where the programming package is set up).

If you happen to own equipment instead of leasing it, you still pay the same $4.99 per month program mirroring charge as you do on leased receivers, it's just called an "additional receiver fee" instead.

Strictly programming charges, not ongoing equipment costs.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

carl6 said:


> Over the past two years in this forum, as annual price hikes were announced I complained and threatened to reduce my service to keep my total monthly bill about the same. Actions however speak much louder than words, and so far my actions have been to make no changes. I have absorbed the price increases begrugingly, but have accepted them nevertheless.


Last year I dropped all the premium channels and got Netflix. I save over $30 a month and still can watch all the movies I want.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Grentz said:


> Remember it is a service guys and you are in no way forced to pay for it, you can always switch to something else or OTA.





BattleScott said:


> Actually, I am. My current commitment requires that I subscribe to and pay for a DirecTV programming package until Nov. 2009.





wingrider01 said:


> Actually no, you are not required to stay, if you where required to stay they would offer no method of leaving. There is, you can buy out the remainder of your commitment at a lower cost, return the equipment and choose another service.





BattleScott said:


> Yes, I am required to stay. If I fail to meet that requirement, I face an "early termination fee" of $20/month remaining.
> 
> PROGRAMMING COMMITMENT...





wingrider01 said:


> sorry do not see anyplace in what you quoted that states you do not have a choice to leave if you wish, If YOU decide to leave, YOU owe the early terminaytion fee.


This is not about having a choice to stay or leave, it is about the initial assertion that we are *"in no way forced to pay for it".* You are the one trying to debate whether or not we "CAN" leave.


----------



## sdicomp (Sep 12, 2006)

Christopher Gould said:


> not true got a raise and a bonus last quarter. and with the price increase i'm sure i'm helping some D* employees get a raise too which i don't mind


Must be nice!!!


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> I'm sorry but I just can't see the point in getting upset about $36 - $60 dollars a year. If $3 a mo is that important to you then why are you paying for a non essenential service to begin with? This goes for everything you spend money on. Now I know everyone's situation is different and todays economy does suck but if $3 is breaking your bank then I'd look at what's really important to spend money on and what's not.
> 
> Price increases are a necessity of business. The reason for it is that we as consumers demand more and those demands cost money. We want more HD, we want better technology, the list can go on and on. DirecTV has already stated it wants to be the premier content provider. Premier and cheap do not go hand in hand.
> 
> ...


Shades,

The price increases are not based on their cost of programming...which, they have said they expect to decrease slightly this year. Their cost of equipment is decreasing, they are cutting capital projects as well. Price increases by DirecTV are based on their need to INCREASE profits and profit margin every year. They're a very profitable company...but if they want their stock to increase in value (and their execs to be able to make money on their options) then the stock buying marketplace has to see a company that can continually increase profits and margin.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

sdicomp said:


> Must be nice!!!


Yea, I've had one raise in 5 years and several cuts in pay and a layoff due to being outsourced to India. I'd love a raise but I'm just happy to have a job (so far)! 

Back to your regularly scheduled thread...


----------



## sdk009 (Jan 19, 2007)

Doesn't anybody at D* watch the news. Thousands are losing their jobs daily, we are going through a deflationary period in our history, and they are RAISING rates. I've been told by my company that there will not be any raises this year, as have millions of other workers across the USA who still have jobs. 

I for one will be lowering my service level and I hope others join me in protest of D*'s outrageous behavior.


----------



## wh5916 (Feb 14, 2007)

sdk009 said:


> Doesn't anybody at D* watch the news. Thousands are losing their jobs daily, we are going through a deflationary period in our history, and they are RAISING rates. I've been told by my company that there will not be any raises this year, as have millions of other workers across the USA who still have jobs.
> 
> I for one will be lowering my service level and I hope others join me in protest of D*'s outrageous behavior.


I agree with you, but it's obvious from reading the postings here that few others will. This forum is either full of mindless sheep, DirecTV employees, or a combination of both.


----------



## Packersrule (Sep 10, 2007)

I guess it's time to drop showtime but I will wiat until March 4. It starts getitng warm about that time so I don't have time to watch it anyway and it will make a point.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

wh5916 said:


> This forum is either full of mindless sheep, DirecTV employees, or a combination of both.


But the real question is, do the sheep know who they are?

:scratch:


----------



## Farsight (Jul 16, 2007)

The main problem for me is the DirecTV's entry-level package (not counting the garbage-filled 'family pack') is far too expensive. They're clearly gambling that the shows and events people really want to see will convince them to pay a high premium for a lot of junk they'll never watch. My entry-level broadband is $20/mo. My entry-level cell phone is $35/mo. Entry-level HDTV will now be $75/mo. Even removing the HD, entry-level TV is $65/mo.

Higher-end packages should be attractive because of added value, not because you don't offer any reasonable lower-end packages.

DirecTV seems to have decided that people willing to spend anything less than $75/mo on TV just aren't worth their time. Fair enough.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> But the real question is, do the sheep know who they are?
> 
> :scratch:





wh5916 said:


> I agree with you, but it's obvious from reading the postings here that few others will. *This forum is either full of mindless sheep, DirecTV employees, or a combination of both.*


Why even bother reading or posting here if there's no objectivity. That would make all the info useless and yet you stick around.

Not only that but this is the best you can do?

You can't even come up with anything useful to OP so you just pick on the forum members. Pretty Lame. 

I disagree with the analysis that DirecTV should not increase their prices. They have increased costs just like everyone else.

Would you rather they not add any LiL HD, national HD, put up new satellites? Would you rather they just enhance service and hardware?

You'll probably just say you haven't seen any service or hardware enhancements and it's dumb to think they'll start now.

Mike


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

montanaxvi said:


> My biggest complaint is with the lease receiver fee. Yes you pay it with every company, they charge you for using their equipment, but with D* you already had to pay an up front charge possibly up as high as $150 depending on the model just to be able to get the receiver, and don't even think about calling them to come out and fix THEIR equipment (since you are just leasing it) should something happen to it and NOT have the protection plan. That is just wrong imo.


Sort of like a leased car


----------



## sdk009 (Jan 19, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> I disagree with the analysis that DirecTV should not increase their prices. They have increased costs just like everyone else.


Absolutely wrong. American businesses are decreasing their costs to try and stay afloat. Why do you think jobs are being lost everyday? When expenses and costs need to be reigned in by a business, the easiest and quickest way to do so is by letting employees go.

Can you imagine the great PR victory D* would achieve by holding prices at their 2008 level, or even decreasing them.


----------



## ohiosnowman (May 9, 2007)

I like cheese


----------



## satjay (Nov 20, 2006)

I from time to time do a price comaprison against dish, just to see what it out there (how it is on the other side) I am very happy with Direct, but just like to see.

So I went today to the Dish website to get the latest with their price increase.I built a similar package on the Dish Builder site. Two HD TV's Two DVR's HD Programing and No premeiums.

In comparison to what I have right now with Direct its about 98 dollars or so with dish. That includes no premiums, if you plan on having more then one HD TV and a DVR for a second TV you are looking at about 16.00 in fees. Right now with HD and Directv 2 DVR's I think with the increase I will be at about 80 dollars or so.

I dont like increases like the next person, but right now with everything else thats going up, its not to bad and If it gets out of reach for me, I will have to look at downsizing a package. But Directv is still a better price then Dish and price against comcast....oh gosh we wont go there...lol


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Chuck W said:


> While you fail to see it, other have noticed it. Directv's rising prices have been making it even easier to see too. Things change over time. Directv used to be the clear and away leader in my area in HD and price. Now, it's a LOT closer and the rising prices have made it almost a dead heat when you consider the value you are getting(even more so with bundling).
> 
> In a way, their respective roles have almost switched in that Directv is now the one with regular price increases and are nickel and diming their customers. while cable has started to wise up and have held prices steady(at least in my area) and are starting to offer better and better deals and catching up to Directv in HD. All the while, not resorting to forcing their customers into long commitments to hold them.
> I know to me, now that Directv has chosen to yet again raise pices and decided to take away my NY locals in HD(even tho I get them as significantly viewed channels in SD), cable is really starting to look good to me too
> ...


Maybe in your area, not in mine. The cable co is WAY more expensive for WAY less service and FiOS, UVerse, Dish are all very comparable to Directv.

Go compare on MediaCom or TWC's websites and come back and tell me Directv is more expensive for the same level of service...AFTER the promo period.



wh5916 said:


> I agree with you, but it's obvious from reading the postings here that few others will. This forum is either full of mindless sheep, DirecTV employees, or a combination of both.


and lots of people who do not listen to reasoning for why things are like they are and insight on the matters, instead just opting to bash people and complain that we are all "fanboys" 



sdk009 said:


> Absolutely wrong. American businesses are decreasing their costs to try and stay afloat. Why do you think jobs are being lost everyday? When expenses and costs need to be reigned in by a business, the easiest and quickest way to do so is by letting employees go.
> 
> Can you imagine the great PR victory D* would achieve by holding prices at their 2008 level, or even decreasing them.


American Businesses are reducing their inside costs and many are increasing their outside costs to try and increase revenue and fight off the declining economy. No, not all of them, but comparing a grocery store to say a satellite TV provider is a TOTALLY different comparison as there is a completely different way the business works and money moves around.

*Also, for about the 100th time, Directv is not the sole reason for the increase, the content providers are raising prices and Directv has to pass that on somehow! They are a business.*


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> Why even bother reading or posting here if there's no objectivity. That would make all the info useless and yet you stick around.
> 
> Not only that but this is the best you can do?
> 
> ...


So, you didn't answer my question. Do you think they know who they are?


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

sdk009 said:


> Absolutely wrong. American businesses are decreasing their costs to try and stay afloat. Why do you think jobs are being lost everyday? When expenses and costs need to be reigned in by a business, the easiest and quickest way to do so is by letting employees go.
> 
> Can you imagine the great PR victory D* would achieve by holding prices at their 2008 level, or even decreasing them.


That would be a great campaign:
"We at DirecTV are proud to announce that in an effort to keep our prices at the current level for our customers, we have decided to eliminate 25% of our workforce. If this works out, we may eliminate another 25% and lower our rates..."


----------



## David Carmichael (Mar 12, 2007)

Call me an old timer...

I have a 13year old DirecTV bill and was able to get their 'GOLD' package with HBO+Showtime+Playboy for a total bill of less than $30.00 ........ w/local taxes

Now the same *type* of package is over $110.00.... an increase of almost 400% in 13years... In the same time frame my local cable has only raised their rates for a ""LIKE"" package {they can not offer Playboy due to local zoning laws} has only increased by 200%...

My cable system started with a higher rate....

Now my local cable system is $30* less *not taking into account the missing Playboy... If my local cable could offer Playboy I would switch... after 13+years of being a DirecTV customer.

--David


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

David Carmichael said:


> Call me an old timer...
> 
> I have a 13year old DirecTV bill and was able to get their 'GOLD' package with HBO+Showtime+Playboy for a total bill of less than $30.00 ........ w/local taxes
> 
> ...


Who is your local cable co?


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

sdk009 said:


> Doesn't anybody at D* watch the news. Thousands are losing their jobs daily, we are going through a deflationary period in our history, and they are RAISING rates. I've been told by my company that there will not be any raises this year, as have millions of other workers across the USA who still have jobs.
> 
> I for one will be lowering my service level and I hope others join me in protest of D*'s outrageous behavior.


LOL. Perhaps you should ask that question of Dish and cable who all have or will raise rates. How about asking your question to McDonalds where it now costs $5 for a Big Mac meal or Wendy's where it costs $7 for a double "value" meal or why it's more expensive to get my oil changed or why *everything* is more expensive. Being in a recession doesn't mean a thing, never has, never will. Perhaps you're not old enough to remember the last couple really bad recessions. Welcome to reality.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

JLucPicard said:


> And to think it would be "fair" to chuck the commitment because they raise their rates $3 a month (or $3.01 or $3.02 or whatever depending on the services you subscribe to) seems a bit ridiculous to me.
> 
> Most businesses WILL allow for an "out" when there are _material_ changes involved. To consider a $3 a month price increase _material_ enough to void such an agreement is a HUGE stretch of the imagination, in my opinion.


And your thought on what is material vs. immaterial, as well as who gets to decide pretty much makes my point for me. 

So what is "material"? You claim that $3 is not. Is $5...$10? That is an odd response to use a subjective idea of what's "material" to decide.

And simply stating that something is "fair" because it's in a contract borders on absurd. The list of unfair contracts is a lengthy one, and one of he reasons why contract law is such a specialty. Think of the numerous contracts that have been overturned as the result of consumer appeals based on their inherent unfairness.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> So, you didn't answer my question. Do you think they know who they are?


There aren't any sheep.

There isn't anyone here who provides any useful info and assistance who is just a hapless sheep blindly posting to justify their choice to subscribe to DirecTV.

AAMOF, I as well as others, have done our fair share of complaining and providing criticism.

To answer your question; out all the posters here that post/help/assist, there are no sheep end of sentence.

To imply that you "know" what is going on is someone else's head or why they do/post the things they do is pretty arrogant.

:backtotop



sdk009 said:


> Absolutely wrong. American businesses are decreasing their costs to try and stay afloat. Why do you think jobs are being lost everyday? When expenses and costs need to be reigned in by a business, the easiest and quickest way to do so is by letting employees go.
> 
> Can you imagine the great PR victory D* would achieve by holding prices at their 2008 level, or even decreasing them.


There's more to the picture then just decreasing their costs.

For example...

They still have to add locals, including PBS, and nationals in HD. That is a cost they have to negotiate with the carriers to get. How do reduce that to prevent price increases. They will have to pay on par with what the other providers pay. There's little way around that.

They still have to provide customer service. Regardless of how you feel about it, would you like to get worse with cutbacks?

I calculated that my bill will increase by 3%. I understand that for some people that can be a problem but for now I'm ok with that.

However, with that said, I had better start seeing more locals/nationals in HD coming on line. If we get to then end of the year without adding the channels that clearly most people want then I'm going to have a problem.

I expect to get something for my additional money. :grin:

The way I see it they need both locals and nationals to be able to stay competitive. When they're competitive they get more subs. When they get more subs it's easier to control costs.

Mike


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

sdk009 said:


> Doesn't anybody at D* watch the news. Thousands are losing their jobs daily, we are going through a deflationary period in our history, and they are RAISING rates. I've been told by my company that there will not be any raises this year, as have millions of other workers across the USA who still have jobs.
> 
> I for one will be lowering my service level and I hope others join me in protest of D*'s outrageous behavior.





wh5916 said:


> I agree with you, but it's obvious from reading the postings here that few others will. This forum is either full of mindless sheep, DirecTV employees, or a combination of both.





sdk009 said:


> Absolutely wrong. American businesses are decreasing their costs to try and stay afloat. Why do you think jobs are being lost everyday? When expenses and costs need to be reigned in by a business, the easiest and quickest way to do so is by letting employees go.
> 
> Can you imagine the great PR victory D* would achieve by holding prices at their 2008 level, or even decreasing them.


Somebody please help me understand what I must be obviously missing here????

With all the news of the jobs losses and businesses in trouble (hence, the job losses), I must be missing the part where DirecTV has been immune from that!

It may be some kind of PR coup for DirecTV to hold the line on package prices (or even decrease them as some have suggested), but I would think that it would ultimately hurt their business for the people in charge to be making decisions that are going to result in further cuts in their profits. I thought shareholders looked none too kindly on those types of things, but I must be wrong given all the people who are saying DirecTV is wrong for raising prices "in these economic times". I always thought it was not a good thing for a company's stock price to be dropping because of executives making decisions that cause the business to be less successful.

*I'm still looking for someone to post a rational argument for DirecTV to not raise prices (or lower them????).*

And no, I do not work for or own shares of DirecTV - my only connection is that I am a customer. I'm not thrilled with the price increases as my 'discretionary' income is very, very low right now, too. But I take responsibilty for my own finances - I don't look toward corporate America (or the government for that matter) to take care of them for me.

If, as a company in business to make a profit for their shareholders, DirecTV decides it's in the best interest of their business to raise prices, then it's up to me to adapt as necessary to take care of myself. I can't make their decisions for them. If that makes me a mindless sheep, then "baaaa". :nono2::nono2::nono2:

And one last note - I have not come across one entity that I deal with that has "watched the news" and "realized what bad shape things are in", etc., that has decided, "You know what? The consumer deserves a break in these bad times, so we're going to drop our prices to help them out". Aside from gas which goes down (and up again) and sales/coupons at stores and such, everyone I pay is pretty much raising prices. And I have not heard any news reports where the media is trumpeting the fact that XYZ company has decided to lower prices to help out the public. Again, maybe I'm just missing something, but why is it that people seem to think DirecTV owes it to people take the hit?


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Boston Fan said:


> And your thought on what is material vs. immaterial, as well as who gets to decide pretty much makes my point for me.
> 
> So what is "material"? You claim that $3 is not. Is $5...$10? That is an odd response to use a subjective idea of what's "material" to decide.
> 
> *And simply stating that something is "fair" because it's in a contract borders on absurd. The list of unfair contracts is a lengthy one, and one of he reasons why contract law is such a specialty. Think of the numerous contracts that have been overturned as the result of consumer appeals based on their inherent unfairness.*


I'm not necessarily saying that just because something is in a contract that it is fair. I'm saying that if there is something in a contract that you feel is unfair, and yet you agree to abide by the terms of that contract, then you can't really turn around and say that by DirecTV acting within that contract that you agreed to should now give you grounds to opt out of it without consequence. If the terms of the contract are not acceptable, then you shouldn't agree to it.

OK, maybe you've got me on the "material versus not material" aspect, being that it is subjective. But pardon me for being so bold as to think that a $3.00 increase on a bill that may average around $75 a month is not material enough to make it reasonable for it to invalidate the contract (which, by the way, allows DirecTV to increase prices at their discretion). :lol:


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

I'll admit to being envious of all of you who are able to absorb the annual price increases without a second thought. Maybe I'm the only one who is maxed out on spending, and whose income isn't keeping up with the bill increases. When something goes up, either it or something else has to go to meet the budget. When considering the value of DirecTV, I'm pretty frustrated at having to pay for all of the channels I don't watch (just to get the dozen or so I do watch), and the subsidy I'm providing for new subscriber incentives. If I don't drop sat TV altogether, I may jump to Dish just to get on the receiving end of the incentives. After 2 years I could always come back to Direct and get the freebies that aren't given to long-time customers. (3 months of free Showtime is of no value to me).


----------



## Link (Feb 2, 2004)

I got tired of all the price increases and I just use an older Dish Network DVR that doesn't have a DVR fee and pay $9.99 a month for a locals only package. You also get some additional channels with that like QVC, HSN, and some religious ones. I sometimes switch to the Dish Family package with locals for $24.99 a month that has had no increases and you get channels like TV Land, Nick, GAC, Hallmark, Food, Fox News, RFDTV, Weather Channel, and Headline News just to name a few.

I don't feel the need to spend $70 or $80 for a bunch of channels that I never watch and many of which just air reruns of shows I could watch commercial free on DVDs rented from Netflix.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

wh5916 said:


> I agree with you, but it's obvious from reading the postings here that few others will. This forum is either full of mindless sheep, DirecTV employees, or a combination of both.





BattleScott said:


> But the real question is, do the sheep know who they are?
> 
> :scratch:





MicroBeta said:


> To answer your question; out all the posters here that post/help/assist, there are no sheep end of sentence.


I was responding to the post indicating that this board is full of sheep and D* employees. My intention was to signal that perhaps they are correct, maybe there are great many 'sheep' here, but I wonder if those 'sheep' really know who they are? 
What I mean is that I think it is a poster who would label someone who understands the varying reasons behind a rate increase, and can begrudgingly accept them, as being either a directv employee or a mindless sheep, who is in fact the sheep. But I don't think they know that.

Anyways, that's all. Sorry if I offended you.


----------



## sdk009 (Jan 19, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> LOL. Perhaps you should ask that question of Dish and cable who all have or will raise rates. How about asking your question to McDonalds where it now costs $5 for a Big Mac meal or Wendy's where it costs $7 for a double "value" meal or why it's more expensive to get my oil changed or why *everything* is more expensive. Being in a recession doesn't mean a thing, never has, never will. Perhaps you're not old enough to remember the last couple really bad recessions. Welcome to reality.


 I'm 58 years old so I don't need to be lectured to about recessions.

Just becasue the competition is raising rates, doesn't mean D* has to. That's not a justification for anything. I'm not a Dish or cable subscriber, I'm a D* subscriber so I could care less what they other providers are doing nor do I need to know why they are doing it..

And by the way, tell the 540,000 Americans who lost their jobs in January that being in a recession doesn't mean anything. Nice compassion.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> I was responding to the post indicating that this board is full of sheep and D* employees. My intention was to signal that perhaps they are correct, maybe there are great many 'sheep' here, but I wonder if those 'sheep' really know who they are?
> What I mean is that I think it is a poster who would label someone who understands the varying reasons behind a rate increase, and can begrudgingly accept them, as being either a directv employee or a mindless sheep, who is in fact the sheep. But I don't think they know that.
> 
> Anyways, that's all. Sorry if I offended you.


Fair enough. No problem.

That's the danger with those kind of comments. It can have unintended consequences. :grin:

You make a good point. If we're to pay the price increase then we better get something in turn. 

Mike


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

BattleScott said:


> This is not about having a choice to stay or leave, it is about the initial assertion that we are *"in no way forced to pay for it".* You are the one trying to debate whether or not we "CAN" leave.


what ever, you stated you are required to stay, the accurate response is no you are not required to stay, you can leave any time you want. deal with it or not, your choice.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

JLucPicard said:


> I'm not necessarily saying that just because something is in a contract that it is fair. I'm saying that if there is something in a contract that you feel is unfair, and yet you agree to abide by the terms of that contract, then you can't really turn around and say that by DirecTV acting within that contract that you agreed to should now give you grounds to opt out of it without consequence. If the terms of the contract are not acceptable, then you shouldn't agree to it.
> 
> OK, maybe you've got me on the "material versus not material" aspect, being that it is subjective. But pardon me for being so bold as to think that a $3.00 increase on a bill that may average around $75 a month is not material enough to make it reasonable for it to invalidate the contract (which, by the way, allows DirecTV to increase prices at their discretion). :lol:


Apology accepted.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

D* retrans costs are going down this year so if you're defending the price increase with that logic please stop. It's not true.

I defend the price increase because I want to have D* another 5 years. We're in a recession because credit lines are gone. The people over spent and the banks gave money away like it was water because they could resell debt and make a profit. So that means in 2 years if we're in the same situation and companies can't get lines of credit they have to have a large ammount of cash on hand. That's what all these price increases are about. Every company out there is raising prices so that they don't fold up. The old saying is you have to spend money to make money. This is ensuring that there is money to be spent.

Now it would be nice if they didn't have to raise prices but seriously stop with the PR argument it's not even valid. Companies don't stay open with PR they stay open with good balance sheets. It's a nice thought but it's not going to happen. Now I get that most people on here are venting but seriously if you're just unhappy with it because it's more money say so. If you're going to post things like imagine what good it would be for them if they didn't. Then you're saying that for yourself and not for the company which you're claiming would be good. Also claiming to "hurt" a company by lowering your services isn't really a bad thing if you're doing it because you can't afford the service. What you should say is that to stop yourself from having to struggle you're going to reduce your monthly costs. Unless D* pays you they have no control over what you do or how you spend your money. That's like saying "I'll show Lotus where it hurts I'm going to buy a KIA (which my wife owns so it's not a knock on people owning KIA's).

With that said I'll give you some advice on how to make this increase not seem like a big deal, or just advice and you can still reduce your cost by changing programming.

Plug your DVR's into 1 UPS/Power strip and plug everything else into another. When you go to bed UNPLUG the power strip for everything but the DVR. That alone will save you more then $3 a month I guarantee it. Do that with every electrical device in your home and I bet you cut your electric bill by 33-50%.


----------



## FLWingNut (Nov 19, 2005)

sdk009 said:


> Doesn't anybody at D* watch the news. Thousands are losing their jobs daily, we are going through a deflationary period in our history, and they are RAISING rates. I've been told by my company that there will not be any raises this year, as have millions of other workers across the USA who still have jobs.
> 
> I for one will be lowering my service level and I hope others join me in protest of D*'s outrageous behavior.


Good for you. I notice you said lower your service, not cancel. Interesting. If enough people follow suit, and this increase leads to lower profits for Directv, it may rethink its pricing strategy. But it won't be to show compassion on to get a PR coup. If, on the other hand, profits go up, the goal will have been met.

That;s capitalism.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> what ever, you stated you are required to stay, the accurate response is no you are not required to stay, you can leave any time you want. deal with it or not, your choice.


OK, since you wish to split hairs about this, yes I am "required" to stay with D* until my commitment is over.

*require* - _to claim or ask for by right and authority _

If I was not "required" to stay, there would be no way for them to impose a fee on me for failing to meet their "requirements".

Do I have the ability to ignore that requirement and pay the early termination fees for doing so? Yes, I do. But since the fee is based upon the remaining length of my programming commitment, ultimately that consitutes 'paying for it'.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> D* retrans costs are going down this year so if you're defending the price increase with that logic please stop. It's not true.


I am genuinely curious, where did you hear this?

All I have heard is how Showtime, HBO, ESPN, Disney, Starz, etc. are all raising their costs.

You also have the factor that Directv is signing more locals on board and has been bringing in new HD channels.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Should we try to counter act the raise by bundling with AT&T? I have AT&T for cell and home phone. When does AT&T start offering D*? Wouldnt it be funny if everyone got the bundle and saved what the price increase was?


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> Fair enough. No problem.
> 
> That's the danger with those kind of comments. It can have unintended consequences. :grin:
> 
> ...


Yes, that is a lesson I forget from time to time. Having a heavily sarcastic nature, I tend to forget that it doesn't always translate very well to written text.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

BattleScott said:


> OK, since you wish to split hairs about this, yes I am "required" to stay with D* until my commitment is over.
> 
> *require* - _to claim or ask for by right and authority _
> 
> ...


It's not splitting hairs. You made a choice to enter an agreement with D*. If you choose to break the agreement that you made it will cost you an ecf because you said it would. Either way you make a choice. Just because you don't like the options of the choice doesn't change the fact that it's yours to make.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

joshjr said:


> Should we try to counter act the raise by bundling with AT&T? I have AT&T for cell and home phone. When does AT&T start offering D*? Wouldnt it be funny if everyone got the bundle and saved what the price increase was?


It started today so you can call AT&T now.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Grentz said:


> I am genuinely curious, where did you hear this?
> 
> All I have heard is how Showtime, HBO, ESPN, Disney, Starz, etc. are all raising their costs.
> 
> You also have the factor that Directv is signing more locals on board and has been bringing in new HD channels.


I remember hearing this on the financial meeting that last happened. While these companies may be raising their prices they can't do so until they're up for renegotiation. Now if I incorrect please let me know and I'll edit the post. While I know that all of those companies are raising their retrans costs they can't do so until the current agreements are up.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

sdk009 said:


> Just becasue the competition is raising rates, doesn't mean D* has to. That's not a justification for anything. I'm not a Dish or cable subscriber, I'm a D* subscriber so I could care less what they other providers are doing nor do I need to know why they are doing it..


Well, they are doing it because the channels raise their rates every year. So that contract signed with ESPN or Disney 3 years ago includes a "raise" every year. Thus the cost to DirecTV and Dish and so forth goes up every single year. ESPN doesn't go to DirecTV and say "hey, this rescession thing sucks, so we're going to not raise your rates". Yea right. Thus *our* cost goes up every single year. Been that way for a couple decades now.  If you don't like it OTA is just a phone call away.



> And by the way, tell the 540,000 Americans who lost their jobs in January that being in a recession doesn't mean anything. Nice compassion.


Hmmmm, never did I say anything about compassion. Heck, my job is 50-50 right now. If that extra $3 is going to break my bank then I shouldn't have DirecTV at all. And if I lose my job I'll put DirecTV in suspend and go OTA and Internet only and save bucks while I find a new job.

But hey, you obviously have a bone to pick. Pick away.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> It's not splitting hairs. You made a choice to enter an agreement with D*. If you choose to break the agreement that you made it will cost you an ecf because you said it would. Either way you make a choice. Just because you don't like the options of the choice doesn't change the fact that it's yours to make.


Has absolutely nothing to do with any of my posts. Go read the posts from the beginning before chiming in with any more nonsense.


----------



## igator99 (Jul 28, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> what ever, you stated you are required to stay, the accurate response is no you are not required to stay, you can leave any time you want. deal with it or not, your choice.


Actually you can't. Remember the commitment thing? I truly hope D* doesn't monitor these boards. All the fan boys are rather sicking.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

joshjr said:


> Should we try to counter act the raise by bundling with AT&T? I have AT&T for cell and home phone. When does AT&T start offering D*? Wouldnt it be funny if everyone got the bundle and saved what the price increase was?


Today, 02/01/2009.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Boston Fan said:


> Apology accepted.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

RobertE said:


> Today, 02/01/2009.


Today, in areas they don't offer U-Verse, AT&T's website is saying:









Yesterday it advertised DISH Net in my area, so they must be in the process of updating the site.


----------



## Farsight (Jul 16, 2007)

Up to $28 off a month with those bundles? Now -that- is a nice offer.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Farsight said:


> Up to $28 off a month with those bundles? Now -that- is a nice offer.


That just appears to be for new customers. For us that have service already it looks like $5. We shall see. I called but that deparement is not open today. Guess I get to call tomorrow evening.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

igator99 said:


> Actually you can't. Remember the commitment thing? I truly hope D* doesn't monitor these boards. All the fan boys are rather sicking.


Why is being a business owner a "fan boy"?

I enter a contract with the people that purchase the services that my company sells, if they decide to terminate the contract before the end of their commitment they are liable for a very steep penalty, a lot more then what Directv charges for their ETF.

If my costs for services go up during the period of the contract, it is written into said contract that the end users costs will increase, basic business 101. I am in the business to make a profit, keep my people employed and not a charity.

Sorry if tht "sickens you" but it is life..


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

JLucPicard said:


> The $4.99 per month "leased receiver fee" is strictly a program mirroring charge for delivering your choice of programming package to your additional leased receivers (it isn't charged on your primary receiver where the programming package is set up).


Your first phone jack is included with your monthly service fee. Each additional phone jack is $1.99.

Remember those days?


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

ohiosnowman said:


> I like cheese


So do I! A nice nippy cheddar is hard to beat!


----------



## babzog (Sep 20, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> Companies don't stay open with PR they stay open with good balance sheets.


And the way to get good balance sheets is with good PR. I will go out of my way to patronize establishments that make an effort to *earn* my business and avoid those who take my business for granted (not saying any about DTV with that statement... just commenting on the quoted part of the post).


----------



## Farsight (Jul 16, 2007)

joshjr said:


> That just appears to be for new customers. For us that have service already it looks like $5. We shall see. I called but that deparement is not open today. Guess I get to call tomorrow evening.


I've never had a problem getting the "new customers only" deals (including through AT&T). Basically, you agree to extend your contract by the same amount a new customer has to sign up for, and you get the same deal. If they're dumb enough to say no, I'd just drop the service so that one day I might be a new customer - although probably with someone else.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> I remember hearing this on the financial meeting that last happened. While these companies may be raising their prices they can't do so until they're up for renegotiation. Now if I incorrect please let me know and I'll edit the post. While I know that all of those companies are raising their retrans costs they can't do so until the current agreements are up.


I disagree, some have built in escalators in their contracts. In other words, in year X you will pay me a certain amount, but in year X +1 you will pay me an additional sum per subscriber, and so on and so forth.

Not all deals are the same, but those do exist. And with more and more programmers offering HD, they are monetizing that asset by charging for HD feeds. I don't see where retrans is getting any cheaper as all distributors are seeing the same things. I may have missed that report (it is possible), but I can tell you the things I see are not a decrease in retrans costs, especially on the sports side. All those programmers are looking to grow their businesses (more profits, more earnings) and as such, their rates go up to the distributors from almost everything I've read, seen, or heard.


----------



## aa9vi (Sep 4, 2007)

davring said:


> The amount of this increase wouldn't even buy a gallon of gasoline a couple of months ago


What is the subscription cost increase over the last 5 years? Just curious if it is in the double digits yet.


----------



## Glen_D (Oct 21, 2006)

Farsight said:


> I've never had a problem getting the "new customers only" deals (including through AT&T). Basically, you agree to extend your contract by the same amount a new customer has to sign up for, and you get the same deal. If they're dumb enough to say no, I'd just drop the service so that one day I might be a new customer - although probably with someone else.


I wonder if any established Dish Network customers were able to get the bundle discount from AT&T? According to AT&T's flyers, ads, & FAQ, you had to be a new Dish Network customer establishing service through AT&T to be eligible for the discount (but it was OK to be an exisiting AT&T customer). The fine print defined a new Dish Network customer as one who never had or who had not had Dish Network service within the last six months.

Once U-verse became available in my neighborhood, there was no further mention of Dish Network in the telemarketing, flyers, mailers, and bill inserts I received from AT&T.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

babzog said:


> Your first phone jack is included with your monthly service fee. Each additional phone jack is $1.99.
> 
> Remember those days?


Yeah, but just unhook the ringer so the phone system can't pick up the extra current draw and they never new the extra phone(s) was(were) there.


----------



## mopzo (Jun 15, 2007)

lzielen said:


> I wish satellite and cable providers would offer a la carte channel choices. I am tired of paying for all the channels I never watch so that I can get the channels that I want.


+1


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

lzielen said:


> I wish satellite and cable providers would offer a la carte channel choices. I am tired of paying for all the channels I never watch so that I can get the channels that I want.





mopzo said:


> +1


I agree that I would love to see this happen.

However, I firmly believe that it never will. 

Mike


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

And not to turn this thread into an a la carte discussion because I'm there are enough of them already, but are you guys sure you'd be happy to lose all those millions of other customers who help subsidize the channels YOU watch who would NOT be paying anything for them if they didn't want to pay for them?

Sorry... :backtotop


----------



## mopzo (Jun 15, 2007)

I ala carte the premium channels. Showtime ON for Dex, Brotherhood and The Tudors. This year Dex and Brotherhood were running concurrently saving even more.

HBO ON- True Blood and Big Love.


----------



## mopzo (Jun 15, 2007)

JLucPicard said:


> And not to turn this thread into an a la carte discussion because I'm there are enough of them already, but are you guys sure you'd be happy to lose all those millions of other customers who help subsidize the channels YOU watch who would NOT be paying anything for them if they didn't want to pay for them?
> 
> Sorry... :backtotop


You're right....sorry. (For going off-topic) Got tired of the whining.


----------



## Nightfall (Sep 1, 2003)

I read most of this thread, and I thought I might offer my thoughts on the matter.

First off, it seems that most providers are raising prices. I can't think of a single cable or satellite provider that hasn't raised prices in the last two years. That being said, the $3 increase isn't going to force me to look elsewhere. I pay for Directv service because I love it. The service is the best I have had when it comes to TV and I don't see myself switching anytime soon.

At the same time though, I do keep a careful watch on what else is available. You can bet I will be continuing to do that. If another provider suits my needs better, then and only then will I switch.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

All I know is if DTV really does read this board and saw all the "What's another three dollars" and "You can leave if you don't like it" "It's not DTV's fault" don't look for the increases to stop any time soon. I know if I were them and had all this support, I would be raising prices until you guys started to squeal and then back off a buck. :nono2:


----------



## aa9vi (Sep 4, 2007)

Grentz said:


> I am genuinely curious, where did you hear this?
> 
> All I have heard is how Showtime, HBO, ESPN, Disney, Starz, etc. are all raising their costs.
> 
> You also have the factor that Directv is signing more locals on board and has been bringing in new HD channels.


Great point. So, could it possibly be that larger market customers (me in Chicago) are subsidizing satellite launches for smaller markets so they can have locals and D* can claim, "yes we have your locals" despite the fact that you are market #125 and the number of customers in your market is much, much, lower. The smaller markets could not justify the new HD channels on their own due to their low customer count. Could we call this socialism? Oh, I'm sorry, that's progressivism.

I'm still waiting for all the HBO and Cinemax channels that were promised over a year ago. Instead I am being milked for another few bucks every year so Jackson Hole, WY can have HD locals on satellite. I just don't see it as being fair to the vast majority of customers. Yes, I am considering cancelling some premium package due to this price increase.

Memo to D*, you better give us something more if you're charging more. We should get at least 3-5 more national HD channels this year for this price increase.

At some point, Congress is going to pass some price regulation and then you and cable will be sorry you increased prices at these rates every year. Better be careful... you keep pushing and it'll happen.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

BKC said:


> All I know is if DTV really does read this board and saw all the "What's another three dollars" and "You can leave if you don't like it" "It's not DTV's fault" don't look for the increases to stop any time soon. I know if I were them and had all this support, I would be raising prices until you guys started to squeal and then back off a buck. :nono2:


Sorry, the same would also be true for gas prices, electric costs, sewer bills, phone bills, and any other business that offers services to the general or specific public.

costs of doing business goes up, businesses are generally required to show a profit to their stock holders, or their owners. In turn their suppliers raise prices for the services that they provide the business, said prices increases have to be passed on to the end user or the business is no longer viable. TANSTAAFL


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

There you have it folks, exactly what I'm talking about...... :lol:


----------



## surfmaui03 (Feb 26, 2005)

Christopher Gould said:


> not true got a raise and a bonus last quarter. and with the price increase i'm sure i'm helping some D* employees get a raise too which i don't mind


Lucky you. But you are one of the very few. I`m glad to see someone is doing well during these times. I personally know 12 people who have had their hours cut over the last 6 months, and even a few who were laid off. Unfortualty, I doubt D* price increases will be passed on to the employees in the form of a raise....


----------



## renbutler (Oct 17, 2008)

I dropped HD Extra to pay for the increase.

Seems like their price hike backfired with this subscriber.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Satelliteracer said:


> I disagree, some have built in escalators in their contracts. In other words, in year X you will pay me a certain amount, but in year X +1 you will pay me an additional sum per subscriber, and so on and so forth.
> 
> Not all deals are the same, but those do exist. And with more and more programmers offering HD, they are monetizing that asset by charging for HD feeds. I don't see where retrans is getting any cheaper as all distributors are seeing the same things. I may have missed that report (it is possible), but I can tell you the things I see are not a decrease in retrans costs, especially on the sports side. All those programmers are looking to grow their businesses (more profits, more earnings) and as such, their rates go up to the distributors from almost everything I've read, seen, or heard.


True that escalators do exist my feeling is though that D*, and most providers, will know when those price increases are happening and adjust for the year before so they still post a higher earning the next year despite that.

As far as retrans cost again I may be wrong but it's not what I recall from the meeting. With the lease of the 72.5 up that might have played into it as well but that's just me speculating on why costs would go down as no one but D* knows the contract prices for channels.

I agree 100% on sports going up though. The biggest reason I see this price increase this year though is due to the fact that the NFLST is up for renegotiation in 2010. This means they will need a large amount of cash on hand. However I see the cable companies crying foul again like they did with MLBEI and getting the senate involved now that a precedent was set.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

BKC said:


> There you have it folks, exactly what I'm talking about...... :lol:


If business sense 101 is a fanboi attitude then so be it. I am in business to make money not to give people charity. I really suspect that Directv, Sirrus/XM (their price increase is set to hit 3/11) and Dish are in it doe the same exact reason.

I doubt that this is "exactly" what you are taking about. TANSTAAFL

:nono:


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

BKC said:


> There you have it folks, exactly what I'm talking about......


Understanding and being happy with decisions are two different things.

Most of the "fan boi" responses are directed to people who say there's no reason for it or people who say things like "price increase again time to cancel". As the first group may at least get some understanding as to why if they don't follow the business that much. The second group usually get a comparison to another type of service to show that they're still getting a good deal, in some people's eyes, or to wish them well.

If you want a site that will be biased and agree with everything negative I would recommend ripoffreport.com. If you want a site where discussions can be had and real information can be given then you're already here.

I think you'll find that most of us are happy with D* overall and are more then happy to call them out if something is really wrong. Very few people blindly defend D* but are willing to give answers that don't always make people happy.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

aa9vi said:


> At some point, Congress is going to pass some price regulation and then you and cable will be sorry you increased prices at these rates every year. Better be careful... you keep pushing and it'll happen.


That will be a scary day, because with providers locked in on what they can charge, the incentive to try and further build their services and invest in additional offerings will go down. Plus the fact that they will not be able to afford to spend more money on infrastructure and acquiring new contracts most likely.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

Dave said:


> No body likes price hikes. But it has become a way of life. What I would really like to see is for the local, state, and federal governments get more involved with the satelitte providers. They need to put some local and state and yes even federal regulations on them. Right now satelitte providers are corporate oriented. The customer comes last. Be it price hikes, commitments or whatever. It is company first. We can see this by the number of complaints we see on the boards here about how customers are treated. Perhaps if they, the satalitte providers came under the same microscope that the cell phone companies have been under there would be some changes for the customer. No body like commitments, but it to is a way of life. If the sat providers had to null and void your commitment when they have a price hike it would be to the customers benifit. But we all know this will not happen as long as the sat companies have free reign to do what they pleas and when they please. Alot of you will scream and hoolar, please do not let the government come into play. I think the Federal Government should come into play and reign in some of these companies.


Please name one industry where deep government intervention in pricing has actually benefited the consumer (other than controlling fraud).

Assuming for a moment that the channel providers' price increases are unavoidable, the cable & satellite providers have 2 options to make up the increased cost:

Increase subscription costs
Drop channels

And that's not even including the infrastructure situation that Grentz mentioned.

If the government steps in and controls what the satellite companies can charge for programming, that means the only other option they have for controlling costs is to drop channels.

So, government intervention would lead to less channel selection. Not exactly "change I can believe in".

The only government intervention that _might_ actually help control costs would be to limit "bundling" from the channel providers.

The infamous DISH Network / Viacom Dispute of 2004 was caused (according to some people) partially when Viacom "demanded that Dish carry additional channels with little customer demand that EchoStar did not want to carry" (i.e. NickToons).

I don't like the fact that DISH Network was forced to carry a near-useless channel (NickToons) in order to continue carrying channels I like (CBS).

If the channel providers were forced to negotiate channel coverage individually instead of forcing bundles on the cable/satellite companies, that would accomplish a few things:
* Reduction of costs due to elimination of useless or unpopular channels
* Any watchable shows on those channels may be consolidated onto existing channels
* The cable/satellite companies may be more willing to _offer_ a la carte if they can _pay_ a la carte to the channel owners.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

There would be a lot more that I would watch on NickToons than there is on CBS, if I had to choose between the two.

Which of your "unpopular" but popular-with-you channels are you willing to give up?

If I wanted to go back to three stations, I would cancel satellite altogether.


----------



## mdavej (Jan 31, 2007)

aa9vi said:


> What is the subscription cost increase over the last 5 years? Just curious if it is in the double digits yet.


$3 per year for at least the last 4 years. Don't know prior to that. Starting with a $45 package in 2006, that's 26% over the whole period, no single year in double digits. Do we have 26% more channels? Probably.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

paulman182 said:


> There would be a lot more that I would watch on NickToons than there is on CBS, if I had to choose between the two.
> 
> Which of your "unpopular" but popular-with-you channels are you willing to give up?
> 
> If I wanted to go back to three stations, I would cancel satellite altogether.


If you read my full post, you would have noticed:


> If the government steps in and controls what the satellite companies can charge for programming, that means the only other option they have for controlling costs is to drop channels.
> 
> So, government intervention would lead to less channel selection. Not exactly "change I can believe in".


My whole point was that price increases are less important to me than keeping the channel selection. I would rather pay a few extra dollars than lose the channel selection. I understand that my favorite channels may not be your favorite channels, but getting the government to step in to control pricing would directly lead to fewer channel selections available to both of us.

If the feds told the channel providers they must negotiate channel carriage individually, the channel providers wouldn't be able to force the cable/satellite companies to carry _insert a totally useless-to-you channel name here_ in order to carry _insert your favorite channel name here_. Each channel would be carried and priced based on their own merit. Less-popular channels would be consolidated into channels that carried more popular programming.

Personally, though, I wish the marketplace itself would solve this problem. UPN and The WB couldn't support channels by themselves, but when they merged, creating The CW, they had enough popular content to at least pay the bills. The marketplace spoke on that one, not government control.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Shades228 said:


> Understanding and being happy with decisions are two different things.
> 
> Most of the "fan boi" responses are directed to people who say there's no reason for it or people who say things like "price increase again time to cancel". As the first group may at least get some understanding as to why if they don't follow the business that much. The second group usually get a comparison to another type of service to show that they're still getting a good deal, in some people's eyes, or to wish them well.
> 
> ...


Very well said.

Just because I actually understand why a business does something doesn't mean I like it. I don't like paying more then anybody else. But I understand why and will post as such. See, I don't live in a fantasy world that revolves around me and where nobody should raise prices ever. I live in the real world where prices of everything goes up every year and there isn't anything I can do about it other then shop around for a better deal, which I do all the time. If someone else gives me a better deal then DirecTV then I will jump on it.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> If business sense 101 is a fanboi attitude then so be it. I am in business to make money not to give people charity. I really suspect that Directv, Sirrus/XM (their price increase is set to hit 3/11) and Dish are in it doe the same exact reason.
> 
> I doubt that this is "exactly" what you are taking about. TANSTAAFL
> 
> :nono:


Oh but it is exactly what I am talking about.....


----------



## ubankit (Jan 7, 2005)

Shades228 said:


> D* retrans costs are going down this year so if you're defending the price increase with that logic please stop. It's not true.
> 
> I defend the price increase because I want to have D* another 5 years. We're in a recession because credit lines are gone. The people over spent and the banks gave money away like it was water because they could resell debt and make a profit. So that means in 2 years if we're in the same situation and companies can't get lines of credit they have to have a large ammount of cash on hand. That's what all these price increases are about. Every company out there is raising prices so that they don't fold up. The old saying is you have to spend money to make money. This is ensuring that there is money to be spent.
> 
> ...


That sounds like a plan to me, easy way to go a little greener and save a few bucks I forget about modern day electronics wattage draw even when off.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Please, let us be careful with anything that sounds political in nature. 

Thanks,
Tom


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

BKC said:


> All I know is if DTV really does read this board and saw all the "What's another three dollars" and "You can leave if you don't like it" "It's not DTV's fault" don't look for the increases to stop any time soon. I know if I were them and had all this support, I would be raising prices until you guys started to squeal and then back off a buck. :nono2:


Even though DirecTV reads these threads you know they can't take it as gospel otherwise they would have already added or fixed features on their DVRs with the biggest complaint threads.:sure:


----------



## crashHD (Mar 1, 2008)

Grentz said:


> Networks are losing money and raising their rates to the content delivery companies


That's the messed up part of this. Content delivery companies are providing a service to the networks, which boosts their viewership, which increases their ratings, which translates to more ad dollars. The networks should be paying the content delivery companies, not charging them. Too bad it will never happen that way.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

Jhon69 said:


> Even though DirecTV reads these threads you know they can't take it as gospel otherwise they would have already added or fixed features on their DVRs with the biggest complaint threads.:sure:


They ignore those


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> To be expected with the current times? :nono2:
> 
> I would have thought the obvious logic in a failing economy with job layoffs coimng in torrents is for companies to spare no effort to freeze if not lower prices as much as possible.


Agreed! You would think they'd halt the rate increases with this economic condition



lzielen said:


> I wish satellite and cable providers would offer a la carte channel choices. I am tired of paying for all the channels I never watch so that I can get the channels that I want.


I wish when we signed our initial 2 year contract, we locked a rate, just like a cell phone company does, and in that initial 2 year period, we could activate as many receivers as we wanted with no "new 24 month committment".

I think it's BS that "price is subject to change", however we're locked in at 24 month increments every time we activate a new box 

I hope there is a class action lawsuit filed for this very reason.
You want me to sign a contract, then lets agree on a rate for that period, no changes whatsoever!



d max82 said:


> Just a couple of years ago when I first signed up Premiere was $93.99 now its $109.99. $7 more than Comcast's regular rate.


Exactly, my bill would be $165 a month if it weren't for the credits I worked so hard for.



Grentz said:


> Yes, to be expected. Networks are losing money and raising their rates to the content delivery companies (Directv, Cable Cos, etc.) to try and make up for the lost revenue.
> 
> Its all about business, especially for the main networks and media companies.


Please, let them die IMO

These damn greedy corporations are the reason we're in this predicament. I'm sick of these reality shows on every network. Bring back the damn sitcoms! That's what TV was once about. I swear, it's like they have monkeys running the big 4: NBC, ABC, CBS (best network by far), FOX


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

BKC said:


> Oh but it is exactly what I am talking about.....


Losing battle here, basic business sense 101 - make money...or file for bankruptcy. Ain't real life grand?

Why should Directv stop their rate increase? No other company has - basic fact is I am not happy about the increase, but as a business owner I understand the premise behind it. It is not stopping any other company form raising prices, nor has it stopped me from raising my prices on contracts, both existing and new contracts. The cost of services I pay for have gone up, and I will pass them on to my customers. Bottom line - deal with it or go someplace else. No "fanboi" attitude, just raw common sense in real life and in running a business. Welcome to the wondeful world of making a living in the real world.

TANSTAAFL


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

logan2575 said:


> Agreed! You would think they'd halt the rate increases with this economic condition
> 
> *I wish when we signed our initial 2 year contract, we locked a rate, just like a cell phone company does, and in that initial 2 year period, we could activate as many receivers as we wanted with no "new 24 month committment".*
> 
> ...


WOW, what cell phone company do you have? :eek2:

My customer agreement, in the fine print of course, says "Prices are subject to change". Plus my plan has an early termination fees that reduce with time. I get a reduced price for my phone with a two year commitment and adding a phone to my plan "may require up to a two-year service agreement for each line". Hmmmm&#8230;.sounds familiar. :grin:

I have three HR2x's and my bill will go up by four bucks. Compared to how much our other bills are rising that's a bargain.

I can understand how for some this might be a problem. e.g. those on a fixed income.

However, putting it in perspective with the rest of our costs it's isn't unreasonable.

Nobody likes it when their bills go up. You do have to put it in context with the rest of the economy.

I don't know about you but if my utility bill rose by <3% (the increase in my DirecTV bill) over the last year, I'd be a happy camper.

Context and perspective.

Mike


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

crashHD said:


> That's the messed up part of this. Content delivery companies are providing a service to the networks, which boosts their viewership, which increases their ratings, which translates to more ad dollars. The networks should be paying the content delivery companies, not charging them. Too bad it will never happen that way.


So, since I am providing the ultimate "service" (viewership) to both the content delivery company AND the networks, they should both be paying me for my services. I like this philosophy!


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> So, since I am providing the ultimate "service" (viewership) to both the content delivery company AND the networks, they should both be paying me for my services. I like this philosophy!


As unrealistic at it may be, I just don't have an agrument against that.

Heck, I say show us the money! :lol:


----------



## Erocwolverine (Jan 19, 2007)

Does this mean we should get ESPNU HD then since the price is going up again? Seems like DirecTV is doing what the "cable guys" have always done and just raised prices.

In this tough economy right now it looks like DirecTV isn't effected by it and wondering if they care about their loyal subscribers. I use to be a PrimeStar subscriber that was bought out by DirecTV so I have been around for awhile, but it looks like I am going ot have to make some cuts to my programming since it seems they want to continue to raise their prices. 

Mu suggestion instead of "sucking in" new subscribers with the "more than half price off for a year" charge them original prices and give the "LOYAL customers" a break for a change.

I use to have premiere ... and now I have the "plus hd dvr" with the sports package. I guess I will have to drop down to choice extra and might be forced to get rid of my sports package that I have had ever since becoming a DirecTV Customer. I am already paying $95.00 for this and with the increase it will be either near $100.00 or over that and this seems to be getting out of hand for watching TV. I remember NOT that long ago that it was well under $50.00 to have DirecTV. At one time they use to be "cheaper" than cable and that was one reason why I choose them, but seems like their prices for packages that most do not even watch half of the channels, but they get forced on us and WE in fact still have to pay for them.

It is a sad day that in this tough economy that DirecTV does not feel the subscribers pain and in fact will get less money from me because of them raising their prices.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> Losing battle here, basic business sense 101 - make money...or file for bankruptcy. Ain't real life grand?
> 
> Why should Directv stop their rate increase? No other company has - basic fact is *I am not happy about the increase, *but as a business owner I understand the premise behind it. It is not stopping any other company form raising prices, nor has it stopped me from raising my prices on contracts, both existing and new contracts. The cost of services I pay for have gone up, and I will pass them on to my customers. Bottom line - deal with it or go someplace else. No "fanboi" attitude, just raw common sense in real life and in running a business. Welcome to the wondeful world of making a living in the real world.
> 
> TANSTAAFL


There you go, that's what you should be saying from the start. If you aren't happy say so and leave it at that. If they have to do it to stay in business then they have to do it. You or I have no idea if it's actually needed or not no matter how much you pretend you know because "You are a business owner" LOL

And yes, it's a losing battle for you.....


----------



## blade (Sep 20, 2006)

Not sure if this is covered anyway as i didn't read through the whole thread. But I have the grandfathered Total Choice PLUS with 9.99 HD fee per month and the 5.99 DVR fee per month so am I really saving by keeping the grandfathered plan? Does it have anything different than say the PLUS HD DVR (that will be 75.99)?

Currently my Total Choice PLUS is 54.99 (will be 57.99) and the other two will go up a penny each to 10 and 6 respectively making the total 73.99 (am i forgetting anything?) so basically i am saving $2 a month or is there a difference? i still have to pay the receiver fee per every other receiver i have regardless of it being HD or not right?


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

BKC said:


> There you go, that's what you should be saying from the start. If you aren't happy say so and leave it at that. If they have to do it to stay in business then they have to do it. You or I have no idea if it's actually needed or not no matter how much you pretend you know because "You are a business owner" LOL
> 
> And yes, it's a losing battle for you.....


What ever, might want to take some basic business classes though, you might just understand what the real world is about.

It really matters not what you think. Bottom line is deal with the price increase or pay what ever ETF fee you have and leave for what is precieved to be greener pastures if you can find them.

My grandfather had a perfect saying for this discussion, unfortunately it cannot be placed in the conversation with out it being perceived as something other then the truth....


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> What ever, might want to take some basic business classes though, you might just understand what the real world is about.
> 
> It really matters not what you think. Bottom line is deal with the price increase or pay what ever ETF fee you have and leave for what is precieved to be greener pastures if you can find them.
> 
> My grandfather had a perfect saying for this discussion, unfortunately it cannot be placed in the conversation with out it being perceived as something other then the truth....


I happen to own a small business. I just don't see the need to thump my chest about it and act like I know more than anyone else about business on an internet forum. :lol:


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

aa9vi said:


> What is the subscription cost increase over the last 5 years? Just curious if it is in the double digits yet.


Total Choice in January 2004: 33.99
Total Choice in January 2009: 47.99

Increase over 5 years: 41%

I dropped Verizon Wireless in '07 and Sirius in '08. My income just doesn't increase fast enough to keep up with the bill increases.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

tigerwillow1 said:


> Total Choice in January 2004: 33.99
> Total Choice in January 2009: 47.99
> 
> Increase over 5 years: 41%
> ...


Now also count in all the new channels that have been added. That has to be apart of the equation too.

I started out paying less than $30/mo, but received WAY less channels than are available today.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Grentz said:


> Now also count in all the new channels that have been added. That has to be apart of the equation too.
> 
> I started out paying less than $30/mo, but received WAY less channels than are available today.


It's amazing with all those added channels that DirecTV has been able to continually increase it's overall profits and profit margin.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Ken S said:


> It's amazing with all those added channels that DirecTV has been able to continually increase it's overall profits and profit margin.


That statement (knowingly) leaves out so very much of the equation don't you think? Very disingenuous...

DIRECTV also has many more customers.
DIRECTV has created or expanded other revenue streams
DIRECTV has dropped TiVo (sorry, had to mention that one) 
DIRECTV has adopted better controls (I think)
DIRECTV has introduced the lease model _and_ recovered costs from receivers that would otherwise be gathering dust.
DIRECTV has reduced churn
DIRECTV has introduced ways to qualify customers and targets the better ones

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Tom Robertson said:


> That statement (knowingly) leaves out so very much of the equation don't you think? Very disingenuous...
> 
> DIRECTV also has many more customers.
> DIRECTV has created or expanded other revenue streams
> ...


You might as well add DirecTV was smart enough to resign with Tivo.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Jhon69 said:


> You might as well add DirecTV was smart enough to resign with Tivo.


But they haven't made any money from that yet. 

And they did call it a premium, so perhaps they have figured out how to make money from it.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

logan2575 said:


> I wish when we signed our initial 2 year contract, we locked a rate, just like a cell phone company does, and in that initial 2 year period, we could activate as many receivers as we wanted with no "new 24 month committment".
> 
> I think it's BS that "price is subject to change", however we're locked in at 24 month increments every time we activate a new box
> 
> ...


Ya, great idea.  - :nono2:

And when you decide you really don't want to keep paying $105 (or whatever) for the Premier Package because you find you don't watch that much on the premium channels anyway, you find you're "locked into" that $105 package for another year and a half? How great an idea would it be then?


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Ken S said:


> It's amazing with all those added channels that DirecTV has been able to continually increase it's overall profits and profit margin.





Tom Robertson said:


> That statement (knowingly) leaves out so very much of the equation don't you think? Very disingenuous...
> 
> DIRECTV also has many more customers.
> DIRECTV has created or expanded other revenue streams
> ...


Couldn't have said it better myself


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

JLucPicard said:


> Ya, great idea.  - :nono2:
> 
> And when you decide you really don't want to keep paying $105 (or whatever) for the Premier Package because you find you don't watch that much on the premium channels anyway, you find you're "locked into" that $105 package for another year and a half? How great an idea would it be then?


+1


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

JLucPicard said:


> Ya, great idea.  - :nono2:
> 
> And when you decide you really don't want to keep paying $105 (or whatever) for the Premier Package because you find you don't watch that much on the premium channels anyway, you find you're "locked into" that $105 package for another year and a half? How great an idea would it be then?


Yeah, well when you've had Premiere for over 6 years straight, it doesn't really matter. I would have much rather locked @ $99.99 for 24 months than paying these $5 package increases.

So save your sarcasm for someone who cares.

I wish a class action lawsuit would be filed against DTV and require them to offer a la cart packages for customers. I'm sick of paying for crappy channels like QVC, Lifetime, etc.

It's just driving up the cost for all of us when we're forced to pay for these crap channels.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

logan2575 said:


> Yeah, well when you've had Premiere for over 6 years straight, it doesn't really matter. I would have much rather locked a $99.99 for 24 months than paying these $5 a year increases.
> 
> So save your sarcasm for someone who cares.
> 
> ...


So let me educate you a bit:
1) Calls for class action suits are not permitted at DBStalk.com. A single mention is ok, but...
2) QVC and the other sales channels reduce you bills. Even in an ala carte plan, I bet you'd get them. Just ignore them or use a favorites list.
3) It will probably take an act of the FCC (or Congress) to get ala carte. The standard contracts all the providers sign create the bundles. (A provider could try to create an ala carte system but it would take revisions to all the contracts, likely over several years as they expire.)
4) Locked in pricing would likely include locked in channels. No new ones...

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

> Now also count in all the new channels that have been added. That has to be apart of the equation too.


Please forgive me for looking at this from my point-of-view, instead of somebody else's. If I don't watch any of those new channels, it is NOT part of the equation. If I can't handle the increases that far outstrip inflation, it doesn't matter how many channels there are. I actually watch about a dozen of my 150+ digital channels. If I go to a lower package I lose a few of the channels I care about. So for me, it's an annual increase with absolutely no added value. I have to stick my head in the sand and pay up, or drop the service. DirecTV forces me to make that decision every year, and every year the scales tilt more to it not being worth it.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

tigerwillow1 said:


> Please forgive me for looking at this from my point-of-view, instead of somebody else's. If I don't watch any of those new channels, it is NOT part of the equation. If I can't handle the increases *that far outstrip inflation*, it doesn't matter how many channels there are. I actually watch about a dozen of my 150+ digital channels. If I go to a lower package I lose a few of the channels I care about. So for me, it's an annual increase with absolutely no added value. I have to stick my head in the sand and pay up, or drop the service. DirecTV forces me to make that decision every year, and every year the scales tilt more to it not being worth it.


While I can understand you being upset, you should be aware that inflation 2008 was 22.6% higher then the price increase I'll see this year.

I'm not sure that could be categorized as outstripping inflation.

Mike


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

logan2575 said:


> Yeah, well when you've had Premiere for over 6 years straight, it doesn't really matter. I would have much rather locked @ $99.99 for 24 months than paying these $5 package increases.
> 
> So save your sarcasm for someone who cares.
> 
> ...


This just shows how people are not reading this thread. Sorry, but it has been gone over time after time in this very thread and many others why the crappy channels actually are good (shopping, infomercial, etc.) and why ala carte really would be almost impossible to do, not because of Directvs desires, but because of content contracts and subscriptions that Directv negotiates with the media owners.

Why should there be any reason to force just Directv? What about the cable cos, dish, FiOS, UVerse, etc.? They all have packaging and if you notice they all end up with pacakges that are very similar as far as what channels are included...I have a sneaking suspicion this is not just to be competitive, but also because the media owners require certain channels to be in certain bundles with some of their other channels, thus things get tailored and put together in the way that they are.


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

> While I can understand you being upset, you should be aware that inflation 2008 was 22.6% higher then the price increase I'll see this year.


The 2008 all-items CPI-U was up 0.1%. The coming increase adds 6-1/4% to my monthly bill, and 3% for somebody with a $100 monthly bill.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

logan2575 said:


> I wish a class action lawsuit would be filed against DTV and require them to offer a la cart packages for customers. I'm sick of paying for crappy channels like QVC, Lifetime, etc.


A class-action lawsuit has already happened, as reported by the Parents Television Council in September 2007. I don't know what stage this lawsuit is in, though. Also see http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/bundled-cable-packages.html


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> That statement (knowingly) leaves out so very much of the equation don't you think? Very disingenuous...
> 
> DIRECTV also has many more customers.
> DIRECTV has created or expanded other revenue streams
> ...


Tom,

I didn't leave those out...they're not necessary for the discussion. The point is that DirecTV's gross profit AND gross profit margin have been increasing over the years. This relates to the basis for the price increase...it has little to do with costs and more to do with the need to increase profit margin in order to keep Wall Street happy.

So, while DirecTV has done all those things to increase profitability they have also increased prices. Without the price increase and with all of the new channels they have added they would still be a very profitable company.

This isn't meant as an attack...just a rebuttal to the nonsense that prices are going up because they're offering more channels...that's just not valid or accurate. They're raising prices because they can (limited competition) and because they want a higher stock price/valuation for the company. On the other hand, if people believe they are getting more value for their money and don't mind paying more that's certainly a valid opinion.

Now, I'm not saying what DirecTV is doing is wrong or immoral. There are certainly a lot of other companies out there doing the same thing and worse. DirecTV operates for the benefit and profits of its shareholders and executives...customers come in third.

P.S. I noticed your list also lacked mention of DirecTV canceling capital projects and items like the HDPC-20 as a way of reducing costs. I wonder what other projects were canceled and what effect that will have long term on their services.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

tigerwillow1 said:


> The 2008 all-items CPI-U was up 0.1%. The coming increase adds 6-1/4% to my monthly bill, and 3% for somebody with a $100 monthly bill.


The 0.1% is simply the difference in the index in Dec. '07 and Dec. '08.

This usually tracks pretty well the percent change in the annual average between years.

Except, this year seems to be an anomaly. The change in the average CPI from 2007 to 2008 is 3.8%. The massive drop in the price of energy through the last half of the year caused the Dec. '08 index to be close to that of Dec. '07 Since 2001, inflation has averaged 2.74%; since 1990, 2.88%.

Inflation for 2008 being at 0.1% compared to the previous 18 years would seem to make 2008 a banner year and a decisive economic recovery.

That is until you look at the change in annual average and you find that trend to be increasing on par with the past two decades

:backtotop

So, when I say that the price increase is less then that of inflation I'm talking about the annual averages and not the delta of a single monthly index for December. I don't know about you but I paid more for nearly everything in '08 vs. '07.

This makes my price increase of 3.1% which is less then the 3.8% change in the average CPI for 2008. 

Mike


----------



## crashHD (Mar 1, 2008)

wingrider01 said:


> Why should Directv stop their rate increase? No other company has - basic fact is I am not happy about the increase, but as a business owner I understand the premise behind it.


I beg to differ. I can give several examples of companies that have not increased their rates.

Landline/long distance: Flat rate unlimited long distance, for far less then my cheapest bill ever was back in the days of paying per minute fees.

Internet: I get dsl today for less than I paid for dialup 9 years ago (same company, too)

Cellular: I have two phones, with more minutes, wireless internet features, and etc.etc. bs that phones are capable of, for less today than it cost me in 2001 when I signed up for the cheapest plan available at that time.

There you have it. Three examples of companies using technology to deliver more/better, for less cost.

DirecTV could do the same, if they chose to, but they didn't.

When my cell service raises rates, they raise rates on new plans, leaving current customers unaffected if they do not change their plan. That would be a better way to do it.


----------



## BlueGuy (Aug 29, 2008)

I guess I don't blame D* for asking/getting a 4.7% raise from me. Wonder if they'd be willing to negotiate a 4.7% pay raise for me with my employer?

The good thing that came with this announcement is that it finally motivated me to drop sports pack. I wasn't getting my $12/mth out of it and this price increase was the kick in the pants I needed to go online and drop it.

The base price increase didn't surprise me but I must admit the premium increase did. I think they may lose more premium subscribers then the price increase would seem to justify. My reasoning is that is is so easy to just go in and clear out your premiums online in a knee jerk type reaction. Changing a base package or actually leaving requires a lot more effort. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

crashHD said:


> .... When my cell service raises rates, they raise rates on new plans, leaving current customers unaffected if they do not change their plan. ....


Every cell phone company I know of phases out plans all the time. When your contract is up - you cannot renew a plan that doesn't exist anymore. Which is more or less what DIRECTV is starting to do.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

l8er said:


> Every cell phone company I know of phases out plans all the time. When your contract is up - you cannot renew a plan that doesn't exist anymore. Which is more or less what DIRECTV is starting to do.


I have a cell plan that hasn't existed in years and when I renew (usually to get a new phone) I get to keep the same plan. Which is good because it cheaper then todays version. 

Just like I have Total Choice Plus. It's grandfathered and has it's own price increase of $3.00.

Mike


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

crashHD said:


> I beg to differ. I can give several examples of companies that have not increased their rates.
> 
> Landline/long distance: Flat rate unlimited long distance, for far less then my cheapest bill ever was back in the days of paying per minute fees.
> 
> ...


That is comparing grapes to grapefruit.

Cell phones, internet, regular phones _are_ pure technology companies.

MVPDs are content delivery companies, not technology companies. The cost of the content continues to go up, even while hopefully the cost of the delivery goes down with technology improvements. But the one is much larger than the other so the cost of the whole ain't goin' down.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

There's no need to put so much effort into guessing about whether or not DirecTV's content costs are going up, you an get a rough feel for that on their site through their financials. The most recent ones available are for Q2 '08. For the first six months of '08, programming costs were about 40.1% of their revenues. The same period in '07 was 41.0%, and 40.2% for '06.

So their programming costs have gone up, but so have their revenues. Both due mostly to the increase in subscriber numbers. So relative to revenue, their programming costs have been fairly flat. It looks like their _net_ income, after all costs and expenses, has run about $8 per subscriber per month for both (the first halves of) 2008 and 2007, and $7.46 for 2006.


----------



## rnbmusicfan (Jul 19, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> That is comparing grapes to grapefruit.
> 
> Cell phones, internet, regular phones _are_ pure technology companies.
> 
> ...


Regarding content costs, I can think a few things that have gone down.
Cost of a movie rental:
Before Redbox: $3-$5 a movie
Redbox $1/night.

Free over the air broadcasts from the big 4 networks is still around, with not too much loss in amount of network programming or too many commercials inserted.

Purchasing music:
prior only way: new CDs - anywhere $10-$20
now songs can be purchased individually (~$0.99).

However, I can't think of a case where anything sports-related (live sports programming) has gone down. And, there is a strong relation between that and DirecTV's prices to customers, as DirecTV carries a lot of sports networks, so if that is a constant increase, there's a good chance that prices will eventually have to increase.


----------



## denvertrakker (Feb 6, 2009)

MicroBeta said:


> I have a cell plan that hasn't existed in years and when I renew (usually to get a new phone) I get to keep the same plan. Which is good because it cheaper then todays version.
> 
> Mike


Same here. I've had the same plan with V* since 1999, originally with analog phones, upgraded to new G3 phones in 2004, still the same price, they keep begging me to get "new every 2" so they can lock me in for another two years...they keep escalating the offer to the point where now they want to give me a free Crackberry if I re-up...no, thanks, I sez.

Now, if D* would do the same in May when my 18-month commitment was up, I could have an HD DVR for free...


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

crashHD said:


> I beg to differ. I can give several examples of companies that have not increased their rates.
> 
> Landline/long distance: Flat rate unlimited long distance, for far less then my cheapest bill ever was back in the days of paying per minute fees.
> 
> ...


it was stated before in this thread that if D* keep u in the same plan price then you would get nothing new for the whole 2 year contact. no new channels, no new software, nothing.

this would be a nightmare to control so its never going to happen


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

You also have to factor things in like satellite launches which do not happen every quarter or even every year, but when they do it is a large hit to the books.

So financial reports will look very good for a long time, but they actually have to use some of that saved and reinvested money to pay for big expenditures a long the line.

Not to mention stock holders. This is a business, not a non-profit service


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

Christopher Gould said:


> it was stated before in this thread that if D* keep u in the same plan price then you would get nothing new for the whole 2 year contact. no new channels, no new software, nothing.
> 
> this would be a nightmare to control so its never going to happen


I'm fine with no new channels. Also, how is no software updates a valid excuse? Last I checked, Verizon still gives me software updates and I still pay the same amount as long as I keep my contract.

Wait till all the DirecTV customers (who aren't aware of the pricing changes) start dropping their packages or not renewing at all. We can all understand an increase, but $5 for Premiere package holders is a joke....... on top of an already jokeful $104.99.........especially when you've been with DTV for over 6 years, 10+ for many others.

If you want to call a package "Premiere", then include everything: HD access (which I still think is a joke they're charging for), DVR fee, and no more of this BS "HD Extra" crap.

Otherwise, change the name of the package to "Top choice"

Cause there's nothing "Premiere" about paying $105, then $10, then $6, then $5 for HD Extra :nono2:


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

If you think $105 or now $110 for all the channels is a joke look at cable. The all in one package from the local cable co here is $200/mo. Which does not include the HD fee (around $15) or the cost per DVR or HD-DVR (which is around $16 EACH). They also actually have less channels you get. So less for way more...

Its premier in regards to the main "premiums" which are Starz, Showtime, HBO, Cinemax, and Sports. In the future I would expect that HD Extra will be rolled into the premier pack.


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

Grentz said:


> If you think $105 or now $110 for all the channels is a joke look at cable. The all in one package from the local cable co here is $200/mo. Which does not include the HD fee (around $15) or the cost per DVR or HD-DVR (which is around $16 EACH). They also actually have less channels you get. So less for way more...


Not arguing this, just saying all the packages are a joke!

I mean come on, do any of you really feel you're getting $125+ worth of programming a month? Cause I sure don't.

I wouldn't complain one bit if I was still paying my original $87.99/month for Premiere, same price I paid when I first signed up in October 2002. I am a strong believer in making the new customers pay the higher prices and taking care of your tenured customers. Too bad DTV doesn't feel the same way. Just do a search on how they're taking away the grandfathered DVR fee for longtime Premiere customers, such as myself, and telling us there's nothing they can do about it.

I've seen a 25% increase in price within the last 6 years


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

logan2575 said:


> Not arguing this, just saying all the packages are a joke!
> 
> I mean come on, do any of you really feel you're getting $125+ worth of programming a month? Cause I sure don't.


I haven't for a while. That's why I pay $72 for the top non premium package and a whole 8 bucks or whatnot to Netflix. I save over $30, get the same programming and I can pay for Sunday Ticket with the savings plus get a pizza a month with the left overs. Works for me.


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

logan2575 said:


> I'm fine with no new channels. Also, how is no software updates a valid excuse? Last I checked, Verizon still gives me software updates and I still pay the same amount as long as I keep my contract.
> 
> Wait till all the DirecTV customers (who aren't aware of the pricing changes) start dropping their packages or not renewing at all. We can all understand an increase, but $5 for Premiere package holders is a joke....... on top of an already jokeful $104.99.........especially when you've been with DTV for over 6 years, 10+ for many others.
> 
> ...


do u get new features on your phone?


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

bonscott87 said:


> I haven't for a while. That's why I pay $72 for the top non premium package and a whole 8 bucks or whatnot to Netflix. I save over $30, get the same programming and I can pay for Sunday Ticket with the savings plus get a pizza a month with the left overs. Works for me.


Good idea.

I'm thinking of dropping Premiere and going to HD Extra+

Only problem is I despise BluRay and vowed never to use it. I was a huge HD DVD fan. So since HD DVD went under, I haven't rented nor bought a movie.

I'm addicted to HD content. So DVDs are pushing it for me.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

logan2575 said:


> Not arguing this, just saying all the packages are a joke!
> 
> I mean come on, do any of you really feel you're getting $125+ worth of programming a month? Cause I sure don't.
> 
> ...


There are two parts here.

1) Yes it is expensive, but as I said above, a ton cheaper than other services. So right now Directv is one of the cheapest ways to get that package. Not saying the price is right, but it is cheaper than everything else and actually delivers more in most cases...hardly a "bad deal" if that is the type of programming you want.

2) New customer deals are the only way to bring new customers in, as all the other providers do the new customer specials too. If you remember, this is also why the installs changed to free...which has caused install quality to go down in many cases but is the only way to keep Directv getting new subs (which are required to stay profitable = around and alive) since all the other TV services offer free install too.

I wish they treated long term customers better, but they are trying. Look at the thanks program for example and the credits they do. Those are things that not many other large companies do for customers, long term or not.

Since Oct. 02 a lot has changed. As it has from Oct. of 96 which is when I signed up. Lots more programming, lots of new infrastructure, lots of new competition. This is a changing market, and one that is adding more expense all the time with new channel contracts and expanded infrastructure to handle those additions. If Directv was not proactive and constantly developing/adding new channels/attracting new subs they would easily just slip away and go out of business as many smaller TV content providers have and continue to do.

What some of you are suggesting is that Directv should just stop doing anything really. Stop development, stop adding new content, and keep everything as it is and for the same price. That is not going to happen in the TV content delivery business simply because the media networks are constantly updating and changing agreements and services are so highly competitive. Why would Directv continue to keep prices so low if every other content provider increases their prices way above theirs? All the reasons are simply not good economic business models to use, especially when they as it is are able to keep prices lower than anyone else for the content provided.

*Anyhow, the summary of all this, including this whole thread IMO is simple. You can complain about the prices, but in reality what is your alternative option that is cheaper for the same content? This is the big question all the complainers seem to glaze over and do not seem to think about. Where else can you get the same programming for less? In my area Cable, Dish, and IPTV are all more expensive for less or the same as I get with Directv.*


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

Christopher Gould said:


> do u get new features on your phone?


Minutes, TXT/PIX/FLX, data plan............. what more do I need?


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

logan2575 said:


> Minutes, TXT/PIX/FLX, data plan............. what more do I need?


All of which are controlled directly by your carrier thus they can easily control the costs and do in fact change in price and terms (look at how data and media message packages have changed over the years).

Plus the markup has been insane from day one on many of those services (such as texting and data) thus they have plenty of margin room to lower or change pricing around to compete and "look" like the good guys.

Think about texting, it uses the backhaul area of most cell companies networks and has been shown to cost them pretty much nothing as it just uses bandwidth that is unused most of the time. Yet they get $.25 per message on people without plans and still make plenty of money off of their texting plans.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

Just got my email from D* indicating the new price structure.


----------



## Ed Campbell (Feb 17, 2006)

I get to keep my grandfathered package + $3...


----------



## shandrew (Dec 20, 2007)

I think it's a bad business decision. Raising rates at a time when the economy is in the toilet is rather odd...basically it means that they think they can make more money selling fewer subscriptions at higher rates. They'll probably increase profits in the short term, but in the long term the subscriber count will suffer. Since the business is largely a fixed cost business, subscriber count is really the key to their long term success.

I wonder if directv is seeing the end of subscriber growth in the near future. For me, the only reason i subscribe to any TV is for live sports. Regular TV and movies i can get over the internet and on netflix. For more and more people this is becoming true. I know lots of recent college grads who don't even consider subscribing to cable or satellite; they have big tvs that are only hooked up to computers and PS3s.

In my area, cable has finally nearly caught up on the HD front (at least in channels i care about), and U-verse is making inroads. Both are now cheaper for the channels i want than directv. On cable i can use a real tivo now, and plus, the picture quality on SD RSNs isn't garbage. on U-verse i get ESPNU in the regular package. I probably won't switch because it's not worth the effort for me, but I definitely would not choose directv if i were starting out today.

In 5-10 years, every channel will be available individually on demand over the internet in HD quality for people who want to pay for it. I'm not sure what role directv would play in that world.


----------



## California King (Nov 24, 2007)

Just received the e-mail today and from a person who already thinks they're over charging, I'm a little pissed off. The least they can do is upgrade their GUI to compensate for the higher price.


----------



## DrZaius (Jan 24, 2006)

ghfiii said:


> A few years back I had been with Directv for a couple years and I got a letter that announced a drop in the cost of my subscription. Never had that from cable...but then again it hasn't happened since from Directv either :grin:


It could be worse...I am a Sirius/XM subscriber and I can only afford 2 radios because those idiots still charge full price of service per radio. It is crazy


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

DrZaius said:


> It could be worse...I am a Sirius/XM subscriber and I can only afford 2 radios because those idiots still charge full price of service per radio. It is crazy


No, they don't...Sirius XM discount all radios after the first for a family.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

DrZaius said:


> It could be worse...I am a Sirius/XM subscriber and I can only afford 2 radios because those idiots still charge full price of service per radio. It is crazy


Look Here:


> Get a discounted XM radio and pay just $6.99 per month for an additional subscription!
> 
> To qualify for this special offer, you must have an existing active account with XM Radio and less than 5 active radios on that account.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Ken S said:


> No, they don't...Sirius XM discount all radios after the first for a family.


And they are raising their prices next month also.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> And they are raising their prices next month also.


Yes, they are although they aren't raising the main subscription price and the extra radios are still less. In addition, they have offered all subscribers the option of locking in current pricing for up to three years.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

shandrew said:


> I think it's a bad business decision. Raising rates at a time when the economy is in the toilet is rather odd...basically it means that they think they can make more money selling fewer subscriptions at higher rates. They'll probably increase profits in the short term, but in the long term the subscriber count will suffer. Since the business is largely a fixed cost business, subscriber count is really the key to their long term success.


LOL. So what's been their problem the last 5+ years? Every year it goes up 2-3 bucks and yet the subscriber base continues to grow while the competition (cable and Dish) shrink. And Dish has a larger increase this year and cable almost always is a larger increase.

Hmmmm, so DirecTV increases *less* then nearly everyone else and their grown continues. Funny how that works.


----------



## BigFoot48 (Aug 31, 2007)

HBO will now cost us $180 a year with this increase. We don't watch many movies, but have enjoyed some of the HBO series, like Rome, True Blood and Entourage, but can just rent those with a time lag for substantially less.

So HBO gets cut to absorb these ever increasing D* costs. BTW, as a retiree I don't get raises that might help make such increases "acceptable".


----------



## Prince Oz (Jan 15, 2009)

When I was with E*, I was paying almost $100 a month. I went back to D* and of course the first year I will be saving about $40 a month. When that first year is up, I calculated what I would be paying and with everything I had with E*, my monthly would still be cheaper with D*. I had with E* the America's top 250, HD and the extra HD package, PP, and locals, with A DVR fee and lease. With D* I will have Choice HD DVR package and there extra HD package, PP, locals included, and lease fee. D* is still cheaper even with there price increase. I won't complain about a price increase as long as I am still cheaper than I was before.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

DrZaius said:


> It could be worse...I am a Sirius/XM subscriber and I can only afford 2 radios because those idiots still charge full price of service per radio. It is crazy


Welcome! Nice Avatar.

"I like her, she seems smart..."


----------



## itguy05 (Oct 24, 2007)

Ken S said:


> No, they don't...Sirius XM discount all radios after the first for a family.


Not if you have 1 Sirius and 1 XM as do my wife and I... She prefers XM and I Sirius. It's full sub for both.


----------



## greencat (Aug 9, 2007)

In the wireless world a change in fees allows people to get out of their contract without an early termination fee. I wonder if that applies to the Direct TV terminantion fee.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

greencat said:


> In the wireless world a change in fees allows people to get out of their contract without an early termination fee. I wonder if that applies to the Direct TV terminantion fee.


See my post here for an answer to that question.

The short answer is _no_, they don't let you out of the contract.

I was about to call you crazy for saying your cell phone service lets you cancel without a penalty, but looked up my T-Mobile Terms and Conditions:


> 5. Our Rights to Make Changes. Your Service is subject to our business policies, practices, and procedures, which we can change without notice. UNLESS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY LAW, WE CAN CHANGE PRICES, CHARGES AND ANY TERMS IN THE AGREEMENT AT ANY TIME. IF WE MATERIALLY MODIFY THESE T&Cs IN A WAY THAT IS MATERIALLY ADVERSE TO YOU, OR IF A CHANGE INCREASES YOUR SET MONTHLY RECURRING CHARGE(S) (the set amount - which does not include overage, features, optional services, taxes and fees - you agreed to pay each month for at least a one-year Term), WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH AT LEAST 30 DAYS NOTICE AND YOU MAY TERMINATE YOUR SERVICE WITHOUT AN EARLY TERMINATION FEE (WHICH IS YOUR ONLY REMEDY) BY NOTIFYING US WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER YOU RECEIVE THE NOTICE. IF YOU FAIL TO TERMINATE WITHIN THOSE 30 DAYS, YOU ACCEPT THE CHANGES.


I've never noticed that before.


----------



## greencat (Aug 9, 2007)

Kheldar said:


> See my post here for an answer to that question.
> 
> The short answer is _no_, they don't let you out of the contract.
> 
> ...


People have gotten out of their phone contracts for as little as a 5 cent increase in texting and they keep the phone. There have been class action against the cell phone companies over the ETF and the companies were forced to go to pro-rated fees. The cell companies justified the ETF because they said they subsidized the phone equipment. In the class action the remedy was that the ETF was pro rated because if the fee covered the equipment then the fee should be reduced as you to the end of the contract. This would be difficult for D* since we no longer own the equipment.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

greencat said:


> People have gotten out of their phone contracts for as little as a 5 cent increase in texting and they keep the phone. There have been class action against the cell phone companies over the ETF and the companies were forced to go to pro-rated fees. The cell companies justified the ETF because they said they subsidized the phone equipment. In the class action the remedy was that the ETF was pro rated because if the fee covered the equipment then the fee should be reduced as you to the end of the contract. This would be difficult for D* since we no longer own the equipment.


DirecTV does the same thing. The ETF is prorated so if you have only 10 months left then you only pay the prorated fee on 10 months. I think just about any service noadays that has an ETF is prorated.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

My new prices take effect today. Just called and lowered my package from Premier to Choice Plus HD/DVR plus HBO. Sorry DirecTV, I really liked "having it all", but the budget just wasn't there to continue to support it.


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> As many of you know, DIRECTV raises their rates on occasion. There has been an increase in rates that will take effect March 4, 2009.
> 
> Rate change communications will start today. Some customers will receive email notifications, others will receive letters, and most via their monthly bill explaining the new prices for 2009. The form of communication is in line with how you receive your bill (i.e. if a customer receives an ebill, they are notified via email)
> 
> ...


well i guess my NRTC provider isn't going to tell us in advance that the price is going up. just got my bill in the mail today and not a word in here. :nono:


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

carl6 said:


> My new prices take effect today. Just called and lowered my package from Premier to Choice Plus HD/DVR plus HBO. Sorry DirecTV, I really liked "having it all", but the budget just wasn't there to continue to support it.


While it's nice don't believe an apology is necessary as I believe what you had to do will be considered by all DirecTV subscribers before this year is done.I know I will take a extreme view of my DirecTV bill as it seems the Premier package is not the"good deal" it use to be.:nono2:


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

greencat said:


> People have gotten out of their phone contracts for as little as a 5 cent increase in texting and they keep the phone. There have been class action against the cell phone companies over the ETF and the companies were forced to go to pro-rated fees. The cell companies justified the ETF because they said they subsidized the phone equipment. In the class action the remedy was that the ETF was pro rated because if the fee covered the equipment then the fee should be reduced as you to the end of the contract. This would be difficult for D* since we no longer own the equipment.


 It will hold up but it is lame for D* to do this, they get the Receivers back, throw in a new hard drive, access card, and $10.00 worth of cables and send them out to new subs to start the whole process over again... If they di dthat 3 times with a $99.00 DVR it more than paid for itself in "purchase fees" alone.


----------



## greencat (Aug 9, 2007)

dodge boy said:


> It will hold up but it is lame for D* to do this, they get the Receivers back, throw in a new hard drive, access card, and $10.00 worth of cables and send them out to new subs to start the whole process over again... If they di dthat 3 times with a $99.00 DVR it more than paid for itself in "purchase fees" alone.


The agreement says 
_if you cancel Service or change your Service package, you may be subject to an early cancellation fee if you entered into a separate programming agreement with DIRECTV in connection with obtaining Receiving Equipment, and have failed to maintain the required programming package for the required period of time. _

I understand what you are saying. The above part of the agreement is the part I have questions about. My contract was extended because I accepted a AAA discount. I didn't receive any equipment or installation for the discount. I think I could win in arbitration. I think it would be hard for D* to justify a $300 ETF for a $50 discount that they gave me. The class action would be if there were other people who were charged ETF for reasons other then receiving equipment.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

greencat said:


> The agreement says
> _if you cancel Service or change your Service package, you may be subject to an early cancellation fee if you entered into a separate programming agreement with DIRECTV in connection with obtaining Receiving Equipment, and have failed to maintain the required programming package for the required period of time. _
> 
> I understand what you are saying. The above part of the agreement is the part I have questions about. My contract was extended because I accepted a AAA discount. I didn't receive any equipment or installation for the discount. I think I could win in arbitration. I think it would be hard for D* to justify a $300 ETF for a $50 discount that they gave me. The class action would be if there were other people who were charged ETF for reasons other then receiving equipment.


What did DirecTV tell you when you talked to them about the new commitment?

Mike


----------



## Piratefan98 (Mar 11, 2008)

ETF's often appear to be Arbitrary and Capricious, and because of that, it's not surprising that they can sometimes land in court (i.e. cell phone ETF cases).

I think it's the same with DirecTV. There doesn't seem to be much of a connection between the ETF and the goods DirecTV provides (free installations, reduced price equipment, etc.). A guy getting a simple, one receiver install is going to cost DirecTV a lot less than the guy getting a complicated multi-floor 5-TV install, with all HD boxes. Yet, if either of them cancelled after one month of service, wouldn't their ETF be the same? If it is the same, then the ETF can't be reasonably tied to the discounted equipment and free installation they received .... and thus, labels like arbitrary and capricious appear accurate.

Jeff


----------



## greencat (Aug 9, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> What did DirecTV tell you when you talked to them about the new commitment?
> 
> Mike


That I am on the hook until late 2010. I don't want to leave D*. I just don't like being under contract. Maybe I need to talk to a supervisor to have them explain why ETF applies to me.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

greencat said:


> That I am on the hook until late 2010. I don't want to leave D*. I just don't like being under contract. Maybe I need to talk to a supervisor to have them explain why ETF applies to me.


That's a good idea.

A supervisor may be able to explain the policy.

Mike


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

A quick reminder folks, discussion of class action suits or litigation is against forum rules.


----------



## toneman (Oct 23, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> And they are raising their prices next month also.


And IIRC will also start charging for XM Online Radio next month unless you choose to renew your XM subscription by March 10...and even then, it will be free only for the duration of whichever term length you choose at the time of renewal.


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

Great idea to go forward with price increases while thousands of people a week are losing their jobs.:nono2:
I just saw on the news that even some banks are suspending foreclosure actions to help those that have lost their jobs.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

BubblePuppy,

DirecTV is in business with one goal to maximize their share price and return to the shareholders. They will stop raising prices when people start discontinuing the service and those terminations cost them more than a price increase gains them.


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

Ken S said:


> BubblePuppy,
> 
> DirecTV is in business with one goal to maximize their share price and return to the shareholders. They will stop raising prices when people start discontinuing the service and those terminations cost them more than a price increase gains them.


That day is right around the corner.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Ken S said:


> BubblePuppy,
> 
> DirecTV is in business with one goal to maximize their share price and return to the shareholders. They will stop raising prices when people start discontinuing the service and those terminations cost them more than a price increase gains them.


Lets see: They increased my package $3, and Sports pak $0.99. Upon email notification of this, I cancelled Showtime and Starz. Not knowing their percentage of take on each package, I dont know if it lost them more than the increase or not, but its saving me $18 a month, rather than costing me $4 more a month.


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> Lets see: They increased my package $3, and Sports pak $0.99. Upon email notification of this, I cancelled Showtime and Starz. Not knowing their percentage of take on each package, I dont know if it lost them more than the increase or not, but its saving me $18 a month, rather than costing me $4 more a month.


 I cancelled all of my premium packages.
I was going to add a HD receiver for the bedroom but decided against it.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

There is a whole ecosystem that plays into the cost increases: First and foremost (according to the SEC filings) is the cost of the content. That drives up the cost for all the providers, across the board. For real change, the providers would have to take a break in their price increases.

But the providers have to pay the production companies. Guess they'd have to take a price break.

Yet the production companies are now going HD. Paying salaries. Guess all that would have to take a break.

Hmm... So if everyone's salary is frozen, gas goes down to 30 cents a gallon, and there are two tuesdays this week, we might see prices for MVPDs actually stabilize. 

Now, I do understand that many people have their limits as to what they can afford or they are willing to afford. That is part of the cycle of life and as well as the values we each hold (differently.) (And if I sound insensitive, I do not wish to.)

The thing is there are always new generations coming along who don't have those same break points. So some people reach their stopping point, and others take up the charge. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

DirecTv's price increase does not upset me one bit. I still pay less for the Quality and choice of programming that i receive than if i were with my local cable company. I'm a sports lover and I have DirecTv for NFL Sunday Ticket, and MLB Extra Innings. If DirecTv decided to go up on there price $5 I would still never consider leaving DirecTv to go back to Cable or switch to Dish Network. DirecTv is the best service out there and I have no reason to switch just because of 3 Lousy More Dollars a month.


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

Msguy said:


> DirecTv's price increase does not upset me one bit. I still pay less for the Quality and choice of programming that i receive than if i were with my local cable company. I'm a sports lover and I have DirecTv for NFL Sunday Ticket, and MLB Extra Innings. If DirecTv decided to go up on there price $5 I would still never consider leaving DirecTv to go back to Cable or switch to Dish Network. DirecTv is the best service out there and I have no reason to switch just because of 3 Lousy More Dollars a month.


Do you work for DirecTV?


----------



## UltraMagnus0001 (Sep 16, 2006)

Eh, gonna cancel and get HD tuners form my computer and use that as DVR. Might not be as good as Directv's DVR but but I'll save $85 and just pay for my cable internet.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

greencat said:


> The agreement says
> _if you cancel Service or change your Service package, you may be subject to an early cancellation fee if you entered into a separate programming agreement with DIRECTV in connection with obtaining Receiving Equipment, and have failed to maintain the required programming package for the required period of time. _
> 
> I understand what you are saying. The above part of the agreement is the part I have questions about. My contract was extended because I accepted a AAA discount. I didn't receive any equipment or installation for the discount. I think I could win in arbitration. I think it would be hard for D* to justify a $300 ETF for a $50 discount that they gave me. The class action would be if there were other people who were charged ETF for reasons other then receiving equipment.


The terms and conditions of the credits you received were to agree to keep programming for a specific time. Your agreement will be in the documentation for the AAA discount not on their lease program. You would not win in arbitration because of a special promotion you accepted but you can always try.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

logan2575 said:


> That day is right around the corner.


People say this every price increase and it just doesn't happen. People keep talking about the economy but really last year was garbage all around. People were paying $4-$5 a gallon for gas. People were having hours cut and layoffs happened much sooner. We read about all the job losses however even in places where there is super high unemployment, the state of Michigan for example (I think that is the highest place right now), there's still only a small % of total D* customers there and only a % of them will actually completely cancel their service outright.

The biggest thing that will happen is that people will reduce service which really doesn't impact D* as much as canceling would. Canceling a package where they have to pay by subscriber really just removes the profit margin for that 1 customer. It doesn't cost them anything extra to maintain that customer they just have less ARPU. So they may turn less of a profit but they will still turn a profit.

I think a more correct version of your statement is that people who are over spending and not budgeting correctly will be leaving and that day is right around the corner.
I expect all companies to see a higher volume of involuntary churn this quarter however it's not always a bad thing. Customers who usually involuntarily churn generally cost a company more then customers who involuntarily churn. It was about 5 or 6 years ago where both D* and E* chose to let involuntary churn people go and not attempt to retain them as much. Both companies stated that they would increase profits by not trying to keep those people because of the cost of company resources it took. Plus those customers generally call in more and request more discounts due to finances.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Shades228 said:


> I think a more correct version of your statement is that people who are over spending and not budgeting correctly will be leaving and that day is right around the corner.


There you go, that's the answer. I came to that conclusion about a year ago when I couldn't figure out why I was paying $47 extra for all the premiums and getting what???? So I dumped them and got Netflix. Save a ton of money. Savings pays for Sunday Ticket and I still have a bunch left over.

But the base package going up 3 bucks a month had nothing really to do with it other then it made me examine where my money was going every month.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

logan2575 said:


> Do you work for DirecTV?


Whether or not, he may be right.

In my case DirecTV is the cheapest option, especially considering the hardware costs associated with cable. 

Mike


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

The good thing is more competition is coming. If you watched the Super Bowl you saw Hulu's ads. IP delivered content is becoming more and more of a reality. TVs are now coming with browsers built in, Roku/Netflix, Popcorn Hour, Windows Media Center, etc. I know there are some true-blue DirecTV fans that don't believe this will have an effect, but the content owners want to make more money...given a way to go direct they will. MLBTV is now $99 for the season MLB EI is almost twice that. Is that HD quality the same? Not quite, but it's getting there.

This is much the same type of competition that the dial-up guys faced in the mid to late 90s.

How long before HBO says...we can sell through DirecTV and get 45% of the fee or sell it direct over the net and get 100%?

This will only serve the customer well as the distribs haven't ever gone out of their way to give customers the kind of ala-carte selections that they may like. Remember you don't need 500 channels at one time...just the one program you want to watch at any given time.

No, this isn't here today...but it's coming a lot quicker than some satellite companies would like to think. The cable companies will make their money selling TV or selling net bandwidth...their business model will shift. Oh, and no...DirecTV isn't going to fold-up shop in three years...but there will be more and more high quality choices coming and that's going to put a lot of pressure on the downstream only distribs.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Ken S said:


> The good thing is more competition is coming. If you watched the Super Bowl you saw Hulu's ads. IP delivered content is becoming more and more of a reality. TVs are now coming with browsers built in, Roku/Netflix, Popcorn Hour, Windows Media Center, etc. I know there are some true-blue DirecTV fans that don't believe this will have an effect, but the content owners want to make more money...given a way to go direct they will. MLBTV is now $99 for the season MLB EI is almost twice that. Is that HD quality the same? Not quite, but it's getting there.
> 
> This is much the same type of competition that the dial-up guys faced in the mid to late 90s.
> 
> ...


I'm sure the cable companies are hoping what you say will happen does. Look at all the extra money they'll be making from charging you for exceeding their bandwidth caps or the price per gig charge when they go with measured service.

Even if they don't end up with these extra charges, not everyone will be getting the bandwidth into their homes to support high quality HD images. Then start to figure in multiple HD streams and you're soon hitting the wall for what your internet connection can support, assuming it can even do that one stream. Right now I get 15Mbps to my home, burstable to 22Mbps for about $75/month. That would handle what, two HD streams, maybe three, and I'm at $75 and that doesn't include any content. Maybe your model will work in Japan or Korea where they're putting cheap gig connections into homes but I don't see your plan flying as a replacement for DBS, cable or FIOS.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

RAD said:


> I'm sure the cable companies are hoping what you say will happen does. Look at all the extra money they'll be making from charging you for exceeding their bandwidth caps or the price per gig charge when they go with measured service.
> 
> Even if they don't end up with these extra charges, not everyone will be getting the bandwidth into their homes to support high quality HD images. Then start to figure in multiple HD streams and you're soon hitting the wall for what your internet connection can support, assuming it can even do that one stream. Right now I get 15Mbps to my home, burstable to 22Mbps for about $75/month. That would handle what, two HD streams, maybe three, and I'm at $75 and that doesn't include any content. Maybe your model will work in Japan or Korea where they're putting cheap gig connections into homes but I don't see your plan flying as a replacement for DBS, cable or FIOS.


You're right because we have never seen the bandwidth available to consumers increase in short periods of time. We're all still stuck at 56k modems right? That DOCSIS 3.0 stuff isn't possible. Remember the cable companies already have the bandwidth...they can shift it over if forced.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Ken S said:


> You're right because we have never seen the bandwidth available to consumers increase in short periods of time. We're all still stuck at 56k modems right? That DOCSIS 3.0 stuff isn't possible. Remember the cable companies already have the bandwidth...they can shift it over if forced.


That's all well and good if you:

A - Have cable internet service available to you
B - Your local cable company upgrades their plant to DOCSIS 3.0
C - They make all that extra bandwidth available to you for the same price, and that pricing make video content delivery to you cost effective. 
D- The cable company doesn't implement caps and/or metered pricing to deliver that content. Remember they're also in the video delivery business and they're not going to want to give up their video business at the expense of their internet if it's being used to compete.

And that's only if you have cable available. Some places you have only DSL and at least in the AT&T area 6Mbps is the top that you'll get. If your area is upgraded to U-Verse then you can get some faster speeds, but then you're again assuming that the telco will not have a problem with loosing their video business because folks are using their internet connection for video service.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Charter is starting to put in 100 gig caps per month. If Internet was my only source of TV I'd probably hit that in less then a week. Until these caps are lifted IP based TV will just be a supplement for most, but not a full replacement.


----------



## jay24k (Feb 15, 2009)

I dont have any caps with comcast but watching tv over internet isn't really viable. Many make you wait till the next day.

Why dont some of you guys just call directv up? I called and asked for retention. Told them my bill was way too high. They knocked off 30 dollars a month for 12 months. 

I did the same for sprint. I work for local government. They have a pick 3 that you can get in their retention. You can choose three numbers where you can call and receive calls from with absolutely zero costs. Because of local government I had a 15% off my bill. When I called, they changed it to 25% discount on my bill for life.

You can always threaten to leave. Tell them you want to cancel and turn your equipment off at the end of the month. Then if you don't get anything, call back and cancel the cancellation.


----------



## GenTso (Aug 26, 2008)

@Jay24K: What do you mean by local government ... some office in your municipality involved in consumer affairs or protection? If so, what is the name of the office, and is it common on most mid- to major-American cities?

Also, anyone have any advice on which package offers the most bang for your buck? Right now I have Premier ... mostly as a layover from the Sunday Ticket deal. I enjoy having pretty much everything, especially the premium channels. The only thing I really don't take much of an advantage of are the sports channels and all the RSNs that come with the Premier package. 

I've looked through the options and they're kind of confusing. Is there any package that give you your local RSNs (I'm in Alabama and would like to get FSN South and SportSouth .... I'd also like ESPNU, FOX College Sports and CBS College Sports, but I imagine those probably come with the primo sports package)?


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

RAD said:


> That's all well and good if you:
> 
> A - Have cable internet service available to you
> B - Your local cable company upgrades their plant to DOCSIS 3.0
> ...





bonscott87 said:


> Charter is starting to put in 100 gig caps per month. If Internet was my only source of TV I'd probably hit that in less then a week. Until these caps are lifted IP based TV will just be a supplement for most, but not a full replacement.


1. There are places where satellite isn't available (LOS). Places where cable isn't available, places where OTA isn't available, places with cellular service isn't available, even some places in the US where POTS service isn't available. None of this issues have stopped companies from doing relatively well in those markets. Do you really doubt that within 5 - 10 years internet speed will be many times faster than it is today to the average home? Ten years ago most people were lucky to have 1.5mpbs and many were still on dialup at 56.6k.

2. Cable caps will not stand in the way of this technology for very long...Some cable companies will replace their lost TV revenue with higher ISP fees...other will drop them due to competition. People who are paying $100/month for TV services might not be bothered by replacing that with $50/month extra for higher speed ISP service.

Look, I'm not going to say this will happen tomorrow...but it's coming and DirecTV and Dish have a long-term problem facing them and it will afford more competition that benefits the consumer down the road.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

jay24k said:


> I dont have any caps with comcast but watching tv over internet isn't really viable. Many make you wait till the next day.
> 
> Why dont some of you guys just call directv up? I called and asked for retention. Told them my bill was way too high. They knocked off 30 dollars a month for 12 months.
> 
> ...


Welcome to DBSTalk. :welcome_s

Comcast, at least here, has a 250GB/mo limit.

http://help.comcast.net/aup?fss=Acceptable Use Policy

I don't think I understand what you're saying about the 25% for life. Does that mean that when the prices rise you will rise but still be 25% less then everyone elses?

Mike


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Ken S said:


> 1. There are places where satellite isn't available (LOS). Places where cable isn't available, places where OTA isn't available, places with cellular service isn't available, even some places in the US where POTS service isn't available. None of this issues have stopped companies from doing relatively well in those markets. Do you really doubt that within 5 - 10 years internet speed will be many times faster than it is today to the average home? Ten years ago most people were lucky to have 1.5mpbs and many were still on dialup at 56.6k.


Will home internet connections get faster, yep, but will it be your many times or just the occasional few megabit increase? But will they reach the speeds to allow what you propose at a competative price, that's the question. ISP's, which are either the phone or cable company are out there to make money and they're sure not going to double or triple the speed of your home connection for the same price if it's going to lead to them loosing money on their TV business.



Ken S said:


> 2. Cable caps will not stand in the way of this technology for very long...Some cable companies will replace their lost TV revenue with higher ISP fees...other will drop them due to competition. People who are paying $100/month for TV services might not be bothered by replacing that with $50/month extra for higher speed ISP service.


Don't know about your cable company but TWC when they lower the rates it goes along with a slower speed package, not lower price for the same speeds. And even if they did cut their ISP price how much are you now going to have to spend with the content providers for the programming. They know if you're looking for speed they're the only game in town, DSL doesn't touch what cable can do.

You also neglect the hardware part of your equation for interfacing your TV(s) with the network. You can usually get a HD STB from D* or E* for free with the monthly mirroring/lease charge, how much are you going to have to pay for your hardware? It's just in your OP on this you were bringing up how cost effective it was for you to go with MLB.COM vs. MLB-EI on D*. In the long term for 'specialized' programming like this maybe but for a replacement of the current content available via cable/DBS/FIOS/U-Verse I don't see it from a cost standpoint.



Ken S said:


> Look, I'm not going to say this will happen tomorrow...but it's coming and DirecTV and Dish have a long-term problem facing them and it will afford more competition that benefits the consumer down the road.


Guess we'll have to just sit back and wait to see which way this will go.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jay24k said:


> You can always threaten to leave. Tell them you want to cancel and turn your equipment off at the end of the month. Then if you don't get anything, call back and cancel the cancellation.


What will be done (or note done) is primarily based on your payment record, your current level of services, and your attitude on the phone when you call.

The "threat method" is not recommended, as in some cases, the CRS may just quickly take you up on it and cancel your account.

I'm not fond of the whole CSR routlette "threaten to leave" process...and you need to know that they make record of all that on your account history for future reference.

If you have a clean history, typical or advanced services, and a positive attitude on the phone, CSRs tend to be much more apt to provide you with the best pricing scenario that you qualify for at that time - you have to remember that periodic promos happen, so its the luck of the draw on those as well.


----------



## Phroz (Jul 3, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> Whether or not, he may be right.
> 
> In my case DirecTV is the cheapest option, especially considering the hardware costs associated with cable.
> 
> Mike


Yeah, same here. I don't have any of the premiums that a lot of people here have, but DirecTV is still a lot cheaper than cable. Time Warner recently increased their rates by a lot more.

TOTAL CHOICE Monthly 50.99
DIRECTV Protection Plan Monthly 5.99	
DIRECTV DVR Service Monthly 5.99
Leased Receiver 4.99
Sales Tax 1.35	
AMOUNT DUE	$69.31

Digital Cable $62.95
Digital, HD, DVR or HD/DVR converter $ 7.95
Digital, HD, DVR or HD/DVR converter $ 7.95
DVR Service w/digital cable $ 10.95
Total $89.80

So even after the increase, I'll still be paying $15 less than it would cost me with cable. If I was to drop the protection plan, which cable doesn't have, it would be more than $20 cheaper for the same service.


----------



## Mark L (Oct 23, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> What will be done (or note done) is primarily based on your payment record, your current level of services, and your attitude on the phone when you call.
> 
> The "threat method" is not recommended, as in some cases, the CRS may just quickly take you up on it and cancel your account.
> 
> ...


I'll have to 2nd this.

Being courteous on the phone pays massive dividends in the long run. All the credits and adjustments I've received for my account have been made through retention, however, I was calm and nice to them.

Being an a**hole gets you no where.


----------



## shandrew (Dec 20, 2007)

Ken S said:


> DirecTV is in business with one goal to maximize their share price and return to the shareholders. They will stop raising prices when people start discontinuing the service and those terminations cost them more than a price increase gains them.


Don't forget that new prices also cause new subscriber numbers to grow at a slower rate. I picked directv a couple years ago primarily because of cost and HD channels. If i were choosing today i'd probably go for cable.

Maximizing investor return is certainly a goal, but which returns are they trying to increase? This years, or those three years from now? A price increase in this environment seems to be aiming towards short term returns.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

bonscott87 said:


> Charter is starting to put in 100 gig caps per month. If Internet was my only source of TV I'd probably hit that in less then a week. Until these caps are lifted IP based TV will just be a supplement for most, but not a full replacement.


Do not think the caps will be lifted anytime soon, since charter just implemented then 02/10/09 with the published change of their terms of service.

5 MB - 10 Mbit = 100 GB @ aprox 54.99 a month without TV
16 Mbit = 250 GB @ 64.99 a month without TV
60 Mbit where available = 149.99 a month without TV no cap.

1.00 a GB over limit, multiple incidents of over limit can be grounds for cancelation of service.

Charter also just filed Chapter 11.

Comcast has a similiar policy. IP based TV is a luxury right now with the newly implemented policies for caps and limits. Have already turned off the VOD capabilities of the DVRs via my router with IP blocking, can still do the PC viewing but the router blocks any request for VOD from and of my units.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

OK...I just e-filed my Fed & State tax returns...so I'm ready for the increase.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> OK...I just e-filed my Fed & State tax returns...so I'm ready for the increase.


The IRS put mine into my savings account on Friday


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RAD said:


> The IRS put mine into my savings account on Friday


Two customers ready in standby mode for March price increase.

(By the way...whats a savings account?)

Turbotax to the rescue for uninterrupted viewing of HDTV.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

RAD said:


> The IRS put mine into my savings account on Friday


u musnt be paying enough $$ quarterly then....thats a no-no.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

RAD said:


> Will home internet connections get faster, yep, but will it be your many times or just the occasional few megabit increase? But will they reach the speeds to allow what you propose at a competative price, that's the question. ISP's, which are either the phone or cable company are out there to make money and they're sure not going to double or triple the speed of your home connection for the same price if it's going to lead to them loosing money on their TV business.
> 
> Don't know about your cable company but TWC when they lower the rates it goes along with a slower speed package, not lower price for the same speeds. And even if they did cut their ISP price how much are you now going to have to spend with the content providers for the programming. They know if you're looking for speed they're the only game in town, DSL doesn't touch what cable can do.
> 
> ...


1. If you have a choice of paying $100 a month to DirecTV or getting a similar internet content for $50 a month which would you go with? That's what I mean about the cable/telcos grabbing more share. Yes, I think within 10 years we'll be looking at net connections in excess of 100mbs...I think we'll also see better compression methodology....all of this is far more likely than the Cubs EVER winning a World Series.

2. The equipment you talk about is already out. Here's a few examples. An HTPC can be gotten for about $500. The Roku player which streams NetFlix and soon more is $99. Samsung is including browsers in their TVs. The Popcorn Hour is under $200. We all know what happens to the price of hardware over time.

3. When you say replacement of current content. All of the networks have their shows online. You can also get them through services like NetFlix, AppleTV/ITunes/Amazon, etc. The NFL did live streaming of several games this season as a test with NBC. In the past they did it with DirecTV. Add in Hulu, Joost, etc. and the selection is pretty broad. It's still early, but the movement is to increase the quantity and quality.

It will be fun to watch...in a long-term game where do you see DirecTV in 10 years? How do they get past this issue? Hey, they and Boeing do have some rocket scientists...maybe they'll find ways to do more from the satellites.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> Do not think the caps will be lifted anytime soon, since charter just implemented then 02/10/09 with the published change of their terms of service.
> 
> 5 MB - 10 Mbit = 100 GB @ aprox 54.99 a month without TV
> 16 Mbit = 250 GB @ 64.99 a month without TV
> ...


A downloaded movie is like 5GBs-7GBs (HD)...Comcast allows 250GB a month. With eight computers here we have never come close to that limit.The 100GB limit is a little tougher, but if you cut your $100 DirecTV bill you could get that 16mbit connection and have plenty of bandwidth and save money.

Personally, I think the caps will go away...they may charge for higher download limits, but there won't be a penalty like losing service for going over.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Ken S said:


> 1. If you have a choice of paying $100 a month to DirecTV or getting a similar internet content for $50 a month which would you go with? That's what I mean about the cable/telcos grabbing more share. Yes, I think within 10 years we'll be looking at net connections in excess of 100mbs...I think we'll also see better compression methodology....all of this is far more likely than the Cubs EVER winning a World Series.
> 
> 2. The equipment you talk about is already out. Here's a few examples. An HTPC can be gotten for about $500. The Roku player which streams NetFlix and soon more is $99. Samsung is including browsers in their TVs. The Popcorn Hour is under $200. We all know what happens to the price of hardware over time.
> 
> ...


#1, I don't see how your numbers will work out. You say pay $50 for what I get now from DirecTV and that's including an internet connection to be able to stream 10 concurrent HD streams which is what I can do now with DirecTV. It will be interesting to see if you can get the 100Mbps you invision and all this content for $50 per month.

#2, for $500 for a HTPC that does HD, DD5.1 and can access all the content and don't need a different box to be able to download from all the various content providers? Yea, hardware prices always come down but D*/E* hardware is already cheaper and does more so it should continue to be lower cost following that model.

#3, great if every single channel out there has live internet streaming of every show including local channels in HD but I don't see that now and it may be a long time before it doesn.

Where do I see DirecTV, probably just about the same place that they are now. If they need capacity there's always the reverse BSS that they tested with D11. They could also swap out all the old MPEG2 STB's for MPEG4 and buy back a bunch of bandwidth that way.


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

Phroz said:


> Yeah, same here. I don't have any of the premiums that a lot of people here have, but DirecTV is still a lot cheaper than cable. Time Warner recently increased their rates by a lot more.
> 
> TOTAL CHOICE Monthly 50.99
> DIRECTV Protection Plan Monthly 5.99
> ...


Do you pay the HD access fee that DirecTV charges? DirecTV would still be cheaper, but your not comparing apples to apples.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

GoBeavs said:


> Do you pay the HD access fee that DirecTV charges? DirecTV would still be cheaper, but your not comparing apples to apples.


I don't think he has HD I think his local cable company charges that fee whether it's a dvr or hd or hd dvr box.

So to clarify it sounds as if he has 2 DVR's without HD programming.


----------



## Phroz (Jul 3, 2006)

GoBeavs said:


> Do you pay the HD access fee that DirecTV charges? DirecTV would still be cheaper, but your not comparing apples to apples.


I don't have HD. I have one standard receiver and one SD DVR.

Yes, HD is included for free with cable, but that is a moot point for me.


----------



## churdie (May 4, 2003)

if you keep current package and dont make changes will you be grandfathered under old rates???


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

churdie said:


> if you keep current package and dont make changes will you be grandfathered under old rates???


No


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

Really, my wife and I get so much enjoyment from DirecTV that this price increase is very far down the list of increases we would complain about.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Ken S said:


> A downloaded movie is like 5GBs-7GBs (HD)...Comcast allows 250GB a month. With eight computers here we have never come close to that limit.The 100GB limit is a little tougher, but if you cut your $100 DirecTV bill you could get that 16mbit connection and have plenty of bandwidth and save money.
> 
> Personally, I think the caps will go away...they may charge for higher download limits, but there won't be a penalty like losing service for going over.


You may be correct IF the internet connection was there ONLY for the purpose of downloading moives. Unfortunaltey you may have that luxury but I don;t. have 3 kids that need it for school project research, a wife that needs it for her schooling, brownies, daisy scouts and various other research projects for work. I use it for VPNing into my work, utilize it for Cisco VOIP phone transfer so that I can not inconvience my employee's if they have to contact me and to play games.

Personally 3 bucks is nothing, just one less drink on friday night. Don;t pay 100 for directv at the moment, pay less then that, so your comparision is based on valid suppositions - since if I did what you said they would be paying me. 3 bucks once a year is not bad, considering the local electric company just got a 3.50 increase about 5 weeks ago and it looks like they are going to get another 4.00 increase next month by the local PSC, the water bill just went up 3.00 for the 3rd time in a year, the sewer bill just went up 5.50 a month for the second time in the last 11 months. Not going to get into the fluctuation in gas prices for the car.

I doubt the caps will go away, given the current trend that all providers are starting to add them, they are here to stay. If you have other information would love to see links to it.

Givne the various daily shows that the kids watch that would be gone if I lowered the package anymore, the amount of daily downloads for these shows (if they where available for that - which they are not) would sky rocket and the mythical 250 GB a month would be blown in 2 weeks given all the other usage that my internet connection is taken up with.


----------



## Prince Oz (Jan 15, 2009)

paulman182 said:


> Really, my wife and I get so much enjoyment from DirecTV that this price increase is very far down the list of increases we would complain about.


Same here.:grin:


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

RAD said:


> #1, I don't see how your numbers will work out. You say pay $50 for what I get now from DirecTV and that's including an internet connection to be able to stream 10 concurrent HD streams which is what I can do now with DirecTV. It will be interesting to see if you can get the 100Mbps you invision and all this content for $50 per month.
> 
> #2, for $500 for a HTPC that does HD, DD5.1 and can access all the content and don't need a different box to be able to download from all the various content providers? Yea, hardware prices always come down but D*/E* hardware is already cheaper and does more so it should continue to be lower cost following that model.
> 
> ...





wingrider01 said:


> You may be correct IF the internet connection was there ONLY for the purpose of downloading moives. Unfortunaltey you may have that luxury but I don;t. have 3 kids that need it for school project research, a wife that needs it for her schooling, brownies, daisy scouts and various other research projects for work. I use it for VPNing into my work, utilize it for Cisco VOIP phone transfer so that I can not inconvience my employee's if they have to contact me and to play games.
> 
> Personally 3 bucks is nothing, just one less drink on friday night. Don;t pay 100 for directv at the moment, pay less then that, so your comparision is based on valid suppositions - since if I did what you said they would be paying me. 3 bucks once a year is not bad, considering the local electric company just got a 3.50 increase about 5 weeks ago and it looks like they are going to get another 4.00 increase next month by the local PSC, the water bill just went up 3.00 for the 3rd time in a year, the sewer bill just went up 5.50 a month for the second time in the last 11 months. Not going to get into the fluctuation in gas prices for the car.
> 
> ...


1. If you need 10 concurrent HD streams then satellite is your solution. Most people need far less...especially in a world of programming on demand (not having to try and capture a show at a specific time period).

2. You don't need a $500 HTPC to do all that...can be done with a $175 Popcorn Hour and you don't pay $5/month forever to lease it or have to agree to a two-year commitment.

3. No, every channel doesn't have live internet streaming. Of course, most shows you watch aren't live they're taped well in advance. In reality people want something to watch which they enjoy...the programming may be different in some cases than what is on cable/satellite TV. While you may be entertained by something on the Discovery Channel on DirecTV others may be able to watch a video streamed from NetFlix. So, the issue isn't a one-for-one matching (other than some major events which are almost always available via OTA at no charge and then later on the web), but whether there is enough interesting content available at any given point in time. TV viewership has suffered over the past decade...one of the reasons is that people find items on the web more interesting.

4. We just differ...I see DirecTV and Dish in trouble unless they figure out a way to become more interactive and responsive to viewer demands. The DVR is really a sloppy way of capturing content. Cable is already testing virtual DVRs.

5. I thought everything DirecTV was broadcasting now was in MPEG4? Not that it matters...I'm not saying they don't have the bandwidth...I just don't think they have the capability to offer a pure VoD type of service with their current model.

Wingrider:

Most of the other items you speak of use so little bandwidth and only in short bursts that they are meaningless even on today's 3mbps connections. I also believe we're going to see net connections much, much faster in the neat future. Look at where we've come from over the past 10 years...56.6 to 3mbps...I think we're loooking at 30 times that speed by 2019. Read up on DOCSIS 3.0 (which is being rolled out now in some areas). We've all heard about the speeds the phone companies like UVerse and FIOS are offering.

I wasn't complaining about the increase...just suggesting that more competition is coming....and with that consumers will have more choices and be able to still watch entertaining programming at a lower price. It's pretty obvious that the current model offers limited competition and pricing that has climbed at rates much higher than inflation.

I'm not telling anyone to drop DirecTV. It will be a long time before the type of DirecTV package goes away completely


----------



## bobbyv (Sep 29, 2007)

pjsauter said:


> Eh, it is what it is. If I was fiscally conservative, I wouldn't have the Premiere package in the first place.


Very true . . .


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

I decided to see what the exact cost would be with Comcast.

This matches what I currently have
3 HD DVRs
HBO
Max
Showtime
Starz
TMC

Keep in mind that these DVRs can only record 20hrs of HD and it's $92 more then I pay now. :eek2:

Notice the HD/DVR cost. $44.85 for hardware vs $15.97 with DirecTV. 

Mike


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

GenTso said:


> @Jay24K: What do you mean by local government ... some office in your municipality involved in consumer affairs or protection? If so, what is the name of the office, and is it common on most mid- to major-American cities?
> 
> Also, anyone have any advice on which package offers the most bang for your buck? Right now I have Premier ... mostly as a layover from the Sunday Ticket deal. I enjoy having pretty much everything, especially the premium channels. The only thing I really don't take much of an advantage of are the sports channels and all the RSNs that come with the Premier package.
> 
> I've looked through the options and they're kind of confusing. Is there any package that give you your local RSNs (I'm in Alabama and would like to get FSN South and SportSouth .... I'd also like ESPNU, FOX College Sports and CBS College Sports, but I imagine those probably come with the primo sports package)?


You should have those channels plus more with the Premier package.:sure:


----------



## idigg (May 8, 2008)

Can someone confirm my bill? I changed to Choice from Xtra + HD DVR Friday.

Choice will now be 55.99
HD access is now 10.00
DVR service is now 6.00
I have total of 3 receivers so 2 mirror fee's of 5.00 x 2 = 10.00

So 55.99 + 10.00 + 6.00 + 10.00 = $81.99 before taxes?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

idigg said:


> Can someone confirm my bill? I changed to Choice from Xtra + HD DVR Friday.
> 
> Choice will now be 55.99
> HD access is now 10.00
> ...


Looks right to me.

I would add about another $9-$10 for taxes and fees but other then that it looks right.

Mike


----------



## Phroz (Jul 3, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> Looks right to me.
> 
> I would add about another $9-$10 for taxes and fees but other then that it looks right.
> 
> Mike


What kinds of taxes and fees are they charging you?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Phroz said:


> What kinds of taxes and fees are they charging you?


Last months bill worked out to 12.15% or $15.67. :grin:

Why, how much are yours?

Mike


----------



## Eric5676 (Feb 21, 2009)

Pretty incredible to see prices increases in an economy like this. I'm not impressed.


----------



## Phroz (Jul 3, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> Last months bill worked out to 12.15% or $15.67. :grin:
> 
> Why, how much are yours?
> 
> Mike


Current Charges & Fees	67.96
Taxes	1.35
Amount Due $69.31

That figures out to 1.99%... I guess it varies a lot by state.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Eric5676 said:


> Pretty incredible to see prices increases in an economy like this. I'm not impressed.


Not impressed with price increases in the eletcric bill, sewer bill, phone bill, gasoline, auto insurance to anme a few also


----------



## Eric5676 (Feb 21, 2009)

wingrider01 said:


> Not impressed with price increases in the eletcric bill, sewer bill, phone bill, gasoline, auto insurance to anme a few also


Agreed.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

idigg said:


> Can someone confirm my bill? I changed to Choice from Xtra + HD DVR Friday.
> 
> Choice will now be 55.99
> HD access is now 10.00
> ...


Xtra HD DVR would be $75.99 plus $10 mirror fee's for $85.99 so you're saving $4 a month but losing some channels. If you're not watching those channels then rock on and save that $4 but I just wanted to point it out.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Phroz said:


> Current Charges & Fees	67.96
> Taxes	1.35
> Amount Due $69.31
> 
> That figures out to 1.99%... I guess it varies a lot by state.


Wow, it certainly seems to. :eek2:

Anyone else know what the percentage of your total bill is taxes. Just curious. :grin:

Mike


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

i have $0.00 taxes on my bill.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> i have $0.00 taxes on my bill.


New Jersey has zero taxes on TV service. 

Wow.

Mike


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Eric5676 said:


> Pretty incredible to see prices increases in an economy like this. I'm not impressed.





wingrider01 said:


> Not impressed with price increases in the eletcric bill, sewer bill, phone bill, gasoline, auto insurance to anme a few also


I, too, agree with the responder.

Eric (and the others finding it questionable on DirecTV's part the they are instituting a price increase) - I know not everybody is actually being given a raise, but if you were offere done, have you told your company, "Thanks, I appreciate the gesture, but given the state of the economy, I can't in good conscious, saddle you with a pay increase at this time"?


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

No taxes at all in NJ (except on the Protection Plan). That's rare for one of the highest taxed states in the country.

Edit: Yet my Vonage bill of $23 has $10 in taxes (almost 50%!!!). I guess TV is more important. 


MicroBeta said:


> Last months bill worked out to 12.15% or $15.67. :grin:
> 
> Why, how much are yours?
> 
> Mike


----------



## iamqnow (Dec 26, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> As many of you know, DIRECTV raises their rates on occasion. There has been an increase in rates that will take effect March 4, 2009.
> 
> Rate change communications will start today. Some customers will receive email notifications, others will receive letters, and most via their monthly bill explaining the new prices for 2009. The form of communication is in line with how you receive your bill (i.e. if a customer receives an ebill, they are notified via email)
> 
> ...


Interesting due to Comcast just sending me a notice with my invoice for internet service that they are lowering all tv rates from $5. to up to $10. depending on your programming package.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Wow, it certainly seems to. :eek2:
> 
> Anyone else know what the percentage of your total bill is taxes. Just curious. :grin:
> 
> Mike


I just pay .25 cents tax for extra reciever,because it is a lease fee when it was a mirror charge no tax.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

gfrang said:


> I just pay .25 cents tax for extra reciever.


Dang. We're getting raked over the coals in CT. 

This is interesting. There is a big disparity in taxes by state.

Here are mine


|Price|Tax
TOTAL CHOICE|$54.99|$6.69 
HBO, STARZ!, SHOWTIME, & CINEMAX|$43.00|$5.23 
HD Access |$9.99|$1.21 
DIRECTV DVR Service Monthly|$5.99|$0.71 
DIRECTV HD EXTRA PACK|$4.99|$0.61 
Additional Receiver|$4.99|$0.61 
Additional Receiver|$4.99|$0.61 
|$128.94|$15.67
It works out to 12.15%. 

Mike


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

Yep!!
I bet 25% of the subscribers drop down to a lower package when they see the increase, with another 5% dropping out altogether.



Eric5676 said:


> Pretty incredible to see prices increases in an economy like this. I'm not impressed.


----------



## BlackHitachi (Jan 1, 2004)

dcowboy7 said:


> i have $0.00 taxes on my bill.


Me too!


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

dreadlk said:


> Yep!!
> I bet 25% of the subscribers drop down to a lower package when they see the increase, with another 5% dropping out altogether.


I bet it's no where near 25%, I'd guess maybe a couple percent. Just look at the last few financial reports, they keep adding customers and get higher ARPU, a few dollars more per month won't matter to the majority of D* customers IMHO.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

RAD said:


> I bet it's no where near 25%, I'd guess maybe a couple percent. Just look at the last few financial reports, they keep adding customers and get higher ARPU, a few dollars more per month won't matter to the majority of D* customers IMHO.


yep its like the nfl sunday ticket deal:
a) price goes up about $20 each year.
b) some people complain its finally too much and so they cancel.
c) enough people & clubs, bars etc. keep it anyway.
d) so even though directv knows they will lose some people they more than make up for it with the $$ increase from all the people that did keep it.


----------



## heisman (Feb 11, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> yep its like the nfl sunday ticket deal:
> a) price goes up about $20 each year.
> b) some people complain its finally too much and so they cancel.
> c) enough people & clubs, bars etc. keep it anyway.
> d) so even though directv knows they will lose some people they more than make up for it with the $$ increase from all the people that did keep it.


Standard practice for any business moving from a growth model to a profitability model. We make 90% of our profits from 10% of our customers. The increases will continue and the bargain hunters will continue to jump ship.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

I just dropped $25 in premium channels yesterday. Didn't change my package, though, but I am seriously considering killing the special HD package as well (the one with Smithsonian and HDNet movies).



dreadlk said:


> Yep!!
> I bet 25% of the subscribers drop down to a lower package when they see the increase, with another 5% dropping out altogether.


----------



## IcedOmega13 (Mar 3, 2008)

wah! :crying:

most packages went up 10 cents a day. I could potentially gather that increase out of my couch.

and just IMO if I launched a satellite for millions of dollars to be able to provide hd I seriously doubt I'd give it away free. Perhaps a great business plan you may have ( spend millions then give away for free) but I imagine you'd have a hard time convincing your investors.

Digital is the new standard, not HD. HD is just a very cool plus and if you want free HD ota is waiting for you, but your never gonna pick up the Smithsonian channel no matter how hard you try.



jeffreydavisjr said:


> I am so ticked off!
> 
> $3 last year, $3 this year.
> 
> ...


----------



## IcedOmega13 (Mar 3, 2008)

babzog said:


> Because it's $15.97 more than it should be... regardless of what another company might do.
> 
> Why on earth should I pay to use features of the machine that are built in? Why should I pay for extra receivers on the same account? It's like the old phone company practice of charging per jack... thankfully, long since gone the way of the dodo.


remember before directv had additional boxes on one account. each box was its own account. It could be worse. If it doesn't matter what other companies might do then I suppose your argument would be with every company.

hmm why charge a dvr free? same reason tivo can. I have an idea for ya though. Develop your own digital video recording software, fully capable of prioritizing, series link, and EPG. Then build a digital satellite receiver. 
Then again that may be a little time consuming, but if its your cup a tea I say go ahead.

Me though, 6 bucks might be worth my time.


----------



## gitarzan (Dec 31, 2005)

For the first time in 25 years with my employer, all employees are asked to take a two week furlough before the first of June. Also, no merit raises until further notice. This is after I made it past a large round of laysoffs. This is going to cost me about $6000 (before taxes) in 2009. 

I will likely cut my DirecTV service as much as I can. I can't blame DirecTV for the increase and I think they offer a great product. But I think there are a lot of people in similar situations as mine who will be trying to reduce discretionary spending. I am also cutting spending on insurance (higher deductibles), energy, food, travel, clothing, phone, and other entertainment expenses.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

idigg said:


> If I wasn't under contract for another 10 months, I would cancel today.
> 
> I would go with OTA, Hulu streaming to PS3, internet, and my 3 at a time netflix with streaming to my PS3 via PlayOn, but alas I have a wife


I love HULU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Bofurley (Oct 11, 2006)

Exactly what is included in the Plus HD DVR Package $75.99?
Does it include the HD Extra Pack $4.99?
HD Access Monthly $9.99?
DVR Monthly Service $5.99?
I have not been able to figure it our from the web.
Thanks for any information.
Also, if any of the above aren'g included, what are the new prices?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Bofurley said:


> Exactly what is included in the Plus HD DVR Package $75.99?
> Does it include the HD Extra Pack $4.99?
> HD Access Monthly $9.99?
> DVR Monthly Service $5.99?
> ...


It does include HD Access & DVR Service but does not include HD Extra.

Mike


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

Bofurley said:


> Exactly what is included in the Plus HD DVR Package $75.99?
> Does it include the HD Extra Pack $4.99?
> HD Access Monthly $9.99?
> DVR Monthly Service $5.99?
> ...


1) Some of the above.
2) No, HD Extra Pack is still extra.
3) Yes.
4) Yes.
5) Most base packages are going up $3.


----------



## cweave02 (Oct 12, 2007)

So - if we have a 24 month committment, and D* raises its prices during that time, do we get to cancel without penalty?


----------



## Bofurley (Oct 11, 2006)

Mike, thanks for the information, I really appreciate it.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Bofurley said:


> Mike, thanks for the information, I really appreciate it.


No Problem


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

cweave02 said:


> So - if we have a 24 month committment, and D* raises its prices during that time, do we get to cancel without penalty?


Jump to this thread. It has your answer already.

The quick answer, though, is no, you will have a cancellation fee.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

cweave02 said:


> So - if we have a 24 month committment, and D* raises its prices during that time, do we get to cancel without penalty?


I don't believe you can cancel without penalty.

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.jsp?assetId=P400042



> 4. CHANGES IN CONTRACT TERMS
> 
> We reserve the right to change the terms and conditions on which we offer Service. If we make any such changes, we will send you a copy of your new Customer Agreement containing its effective date. *You always have the right to cancel your Service, in whole or in part at any time, and you may do so if you do not accept any such changed terms or conditions. If you do cancel, you may be charged an early cancellation fee if you entered into a separate programming agreement or a deactivation fee.* You will be issued a credit, if any, in accordance with Section 5. If you elect not to cancel your Service after receiving a new Customer Agreement, your continued receipt of Service from us will constitute acceptance of the changed terms and conditions. If you notify us that you do not accept such terms and conditions, then we may cancel your Service as provided in Section 5, as we cannot offer Service to different customers on different terms, among other reasons.


http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.jsp?assetId=P500014



> PROGRAMMING AGREEMENT. Within 30 days of provision of DIRECTV equipment to you, or on the date that the professional installer has installed or is prepared to install your DIRECTV equipment, whichever is sooner, you agree to activate each and every DIRECTV Receiver ordered by you or provided to you with any DIRECTV® base programming package (valued at $29.99 per mo. or above); Jadeworld; or, any qualifying international service bundle, which bundle shall include either the DIRECTV® BASIC programming package (valued at $9.99 per mo.) or the DIRECTV PREFERRED CHOICE™ programming package (valued at $29.99 per mo.) together with any WorldDirect™ international-language service. DVR service activation ($5.99/mo.) required for DVR leases; HD Access fee ($9.99/mo.) required for HD Receiver leases; and, both DVR service and HD Access fee payment required for HD DVR leases. In certain markets, programming and pricing may vary. *DIRECTV PROGRAMMING AND PRICING SUBJECT TO CHANGE AT ANY TIME*.


I would suggest you read both these agreements and decide for yourself.

However, it would seem you would still be subject to the Early Termination Fee.

Mike


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

cweave02 said:


> So - if we have a 24 month committment, and D* raises its prices during that time, do we get to cancel without penalty?


I don't necessarily blame you, but AGAIN with this question???

The agreement you entered into (if you are still under the programming commitment) is to maintain a minimum level of programming. You did not agree to any particular package price. And the agreement, in fact, as others have posted, specifically states that DirecTV can change prices at any time.

No easy out because of a small price increase.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

You do have the option of changing your programming package though. Anyone impacted with the price increase has the ability to go to a lower package.

If the answer is that you don't want to lose channels then I think that answers if it's worth the extra $ to you.


----------



## gitarzan (Dec 31, 2005)

Looks to me like the minimum package to meet committment requirements of an HD DVR customer is the family package, plus HD access ($9.99), plus DVR access ($5.99). How much is the family package now?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

gitarzan said:


> Looks to me like the minimum package to meet committment requirements of an HD DVR customer is the family package, plus HD access ($9.99), plus DVR access ($5.99). How much is the family package now?


Here are the prices I pulled of DirecTVs site.


FAMILY™ - Locals Included |$29.99 
Select CHOICE™ - Locals Included |$52.99 
Select CHOICE XTRA™ - Locals Included |$57.99 
Select PLUS DVR™ - Locals Included |$62.99 
Select PLUS HD DVR™ - Locals Included |$72.99 
Select PREMIER™ - Locals Included |$104.99
You can comapare packages here.

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/compare/compareChannels.jsp?_requestid=1891920

Mike


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> Here are the prices I pulled of DirecTVs site.
> 
> 
> FAMILY™ - Locals Included |$29.99
> ...


Those are the prices before the price increase set to occur on Wednesday.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Kheldar said:


> Those are the prices before the price increase set to occur on Wednesday.


Here's from the announcement(link in post#1).



BASIC|$32.99
SELECT|$48.99
PREFERRED CHOICE™|$35.99
CHOICE™|$55.99
FAMILIAR ULTRA™|$57.99
CHOICE XTRA™|$60.99
PLUS DVR™|$65.99
PLUS HD DVR™|$75.99
PREMIER™|$109.99
I don't know about the names. Does anyone know about the package names and channels.

Mike


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Im sure its been said but anyone that wants to counter act the raise just bundle with AT&T and it will save $5. It was a great time for them to pair with AT&T. Now my bill will not be going up $5.


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

joshjr said:


> Im sure its been said but anyone that wants to counter act the raise just bundle with AT&T and it will save $5. It was a great time for them to pair with AT&T. Now my bill will not be going up $5.


AT&T told me that because I am a current D* subscriber that they cannot bundle. How are you getting around this? All I have with AT&T currently is my CrackBerry.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Tallgntlmn said:


> AT&T told me that because I am a current D* subscriber that they cannot bundle. How are you getting around this? All I have with AT&T currently is my CrackBerry.


They dont want to bundle cell phone with DirecTV for some reason. I dont know why. Most cell plans are more then any home phone plan. I bundled my home phone and D* for the $5 discount.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

Well may be D* will catch me NEXT month. You see my billing date is March 4th. I didn't have a price increase on my package  You can believe I had a price increase on my bill because I had to make the 1st of the MLB EI payments.


EDIT: I think may be I'm one day lucky  I bet I get my billing information on the 4th of the month, but the service time runs only up to the 3rd of the month. It is the only thing I can figure out that it could be :shrug:


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

We keep concentrating on what happens if we cancel the contract - in that case the Customer Agreement is clear that we will be charged an ETF.

But the user agreement also clearly provides for another approach: Simply notify them that you do not accept the changes. According to the Customer Agreement, they may cancel your account at that point, and that section makes no reference to an ETF. (It only mentions charging a deactivation fee, which can be no more than $15.)

[Keep in mind that I don't necessarily have an issue with the increase, I am just clarifying the misunderstanding and misinformation re: the Customer Agreement that keeps coming up.]


> 4. We reserve the right to change the terms and conditions on which we offer Service. ... *If you notify us that you do not accept such terms and conditions, then we may cancel your Service as provided in Section 5*, as we cannot offer Service to different customers on different terms, among other reasons.





> 5(c) Our Cancellation. We may cancel your Service at any time if you fail to pay amounts owing to us when due, subject to any grace periods, or breach any other material provision of this Agreement, or act abusively toward our staff. In such case, you will still be responsible for payment of all outstanding balances accrued through that effective date, including the deactivation fee described in Section 2. In addition, *we may cancel your Service if you elect not to accept any changed terms described to you*, as provided in Section 4.





> 2(c)(9) Deactivation Fee: If you cancel your Service or we deactivate your Service because of your failure to pay or for some other breach on your part, *we may charge you a fee the lesser of (i) up to $15.00 ; or (ii) the maximum amount permitted by applicable law. *


http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.jsp?assetId=P400042


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Dolly said:


> Well may be D* will catch me NEXT month. You see my billing date is March 4th. I didn't have a price increase on my package  You can believe I had a price increase on my bill because I had to make the 1st of the MLB EI payments.
> 
> EDIT: I think may be I'm one day lucky  I bet I get my billing information on the 4th of the month, but the service time runs only up to the 3rd of the month. It is the only thing I can figure out that it could be :shrug:


I think the new prices take affect on the 5th


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

I just stepped outside to make sure....the sky is not falling.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I just stepped outside to make sure....the sky is not falling.


That's not the sky - it's [what's left of] my 401k!


----------



## Wizz (Mar 4, 2009)

jeffreydavisjr said:


> I am so ticked off!
> 
> $3 last year, $3 this year.
> 
> ...


I hear you, it sucks when over the years you're almost paying $80/month with no Premiums. Do what our fmaily does, whenever they raise their prices...we drop a service with Dtv.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

Boston Fan said:


> We keep concentrating on what happens if we cancel the contract - in that case the Customer Agreement is clear that we will be charged an ETF.
> 
> But the user agreement also clearly provides for another approach: Simply notify them that you do not accept the changes. According to the Customer Agreement, they may cancel your account at that point, and that section makes no reference to an ETF. (It only mentions charging a deactivation fee, which can be no more than $15.)
> 
> ...


If you read carefully, this doesn't let you out of the commitment. First of all, a price change is not a "change in contract terms", since the contract specifically allows price increases (section 1(d)):



> (d) Our Programming Changes. Many changing considerations affect the availability, cost and quality of programming and customer demand for it. Accordingly, we must reserve the unrestricted right to change, re-arrange, add or delete our programming packages, the selections in those packages, our prices, and any other Service we offer, at any time. We will endeavor to notify you of any change that is within our reasonable control and its effective date. In most cases, this notice will be about one month in advance. You always have the right to cancel your Service, in whole or in part, if you do not accept the change (see Section 5). If you cancel your Service, a deactivation fee (described in Sections 2 and 5(b)) or other charges may apply. Credits, if any, to your account will be posted as described in Section 5. If you do not cancel, your continued receipt of our Service will constitute acceptance.


Since you agreed to the contract, you agreed that D* has "unrestricted right to change, re-arrange, add or delete our programming packages, the selections in those packages, our prices, and any other Service we offer, at any time."

Therefore, a price increase is not a "change in contract terms".

Also notice in section 1(d) quoted above that if you chose to cancel due to a price increase than that is "you cancel your Service" section 5(b), not "our cancellation" 5(c).

Section 5(b) states:


> (b) Your Cancellation. You may cancel Service by notifying us. You may be charged a deactivation fee as described in Section 2 and issued a credit as described below. Your notice is effective on the day we receive it. You will still be responsible for payment of all outstanding balances accrued through that effective date. *In addition to any deactivation or change of service fees provided in Section 2, if you cancel Service or change your Service package, you may be subject to an early cancellation fee if you entered into a separate programming agreement with DIRECTV in connection with obtaining Receiving Equipment, and have failed to maintain the required programming package for the required period of time.*
> 
> For Services sold only in blocks of one month or multiples of one month, if you cancel such Service, we will credit you only for full months not used. For example, if you subscribe for a year of such Service from January through December but cancel on March 10, we will credit you for the subscription fees for April through December. However, we will not credit any fees for January through March. Additionally, we will not credit seasonal sports subscriptions after the season starts.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

I'm holding my $3 hostage until we get *Travel Channel HD* 

Out


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

Kheldar said:


> If you read carefully, this doesn't let you out of the commitment. First of all, a price change is not a "change in contract terms", since the contract specifically allows price increases (section 1(d)) ...
> 
> ... Also notice in section 1(d) quoted above that if you chose to cancel due to a price increase than that is "you cancel your Service" section 5(b), not "our cancellation" 5(c).


No - that section simply states that they can change the terms, and that this change may include a price increase. They are of course correct in stating that if you choose to cancel, you will be subject to an ETF. But if you refuse to accept the change, it is their right to cancel you account on that basis, therefore limiting their fees to no more than $15.


----------



## satjay (Nov 20, 2006)

Just an FYI, I called Directv today to find out if I went to family and added sports pack would I still be able to get my local RSN (for Tiger baseball) I know it may be a stupid question, but I just wanted to make sure. They said yes. I may look into it. Spring/summer we dont watch a whole lot of TV, it also saves me a few dollars from my current bill.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Boston Fan said:


> That's not the sky - it's [what's left of] my 401k!


You have one left?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Hutchinshouse said:


> I'm holding my $3 hostage until we get *Travel Channel HD*
> 
> Out


Hey, is that Hutchinshouse over there clutching $3 and holding his breath?

:lol:

Mike


----------



## Wizz (Mar 4, 2009)

wingrider01 said:


> You have one left?


Ditto....I went from, "Now I'm finally getting somewhere" ...to, "Now I gotta start over" :eek2:


----------



## ehilbert1 (Jan 23, 2007)

For me $3 a year is a welcomed change. I've been with D* for about 4 years now and they have never nicked and dimed me like Time Warner did. They would raise my package price by $3 then raise the box rental fee $2 and then DVR fee $2. It would never ever end. D* has its faults, but $3 a year I can live with.

Also I'm wondering why Cable raises the prices of their box rentals every year.(Yea Yea I know because they can.) Every year those boxes get cheaper and cheaper to make and they just raise the rental prices of them.


----------



## Wizz (Mar 4, 2009)

ehilbert1 said:


> For me $3 a year is a welcomed change. I've been with D* for about 4 years now and they have never nicked and dimed me like Time Warner did. They would raise my package price by $3 then raise the box rental fee $2 and then DVR fee $2. It would never ever end. D* has its faults, but $3 a year I can live with.
> 
> Also I'm wondering why Cable raises the prices of their box rentals every year.(Yea Yea I know because they can.) Every year those boxes get cheaper and cheaper to make and they just raise the rental prices of them.


Probably b/c as more people become familiar with HD they dump cable for satt thus losing profits. I notice that mainly 'old school' people use cable still, seems like it's a household name/term for them. I got my parents to switch to Dtv a few years ago and they love it over cable, PQ is much better on all channels as well as sound. My wife's parents still won't switch over from COX even though they have an HD TV. I could never have cable again, the PQ doesn't compare and their HD channel lineup is very weak imo.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

Stupid move by Directv. If even .5% of the owners get the increase notice in the mail and decide to drop the service it will be much more costly than the $3 they hope to make. In these economic times you can bet that .5% might just do that.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Faulty math



dreadlk said:


> Stupid move by Directv. If even .5% of the owners get the increase notice in the mail and decide to drop the service it will be much more costly than the $3 they hope to make. In these economic times you can bet that .5% might just do that.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

dreadlk said:


> Stupid move by Directv. If even .5% of the owners get the increase notice in the mail and decide to drop the service it will be much more costly than the $3 they hope to make. In these economic times you can bet that .5% might just do that.


u lost me:

- 0.5% is 1 out of 200 people.
- so they lose $100 a month from that 1 person.
- they still get $3 a month from the other 199 which = $597.
- so $597-$100 = $497 directv still gets extra now.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Plus the fact that the cable companies in my area went up $5-$7 and Dish went up more as well. There is no escape unless you just go OTA only.


----------



## nickg2 (Nov 28, 2005)

the cost of DTV is something i've been considering a lot lately. i've thought about dumping it but my wife doesn't want to, and besides, where am i going to get my baseball games during the season without it? :nono2:


----------



## clotter (Apr 12, 2008)

nickg2 said:


> the cost of DTV is something i've been considering a lot lately. i've thought about dumping it but my wife doesn't want to, and besides, where am i going to get my baseball games during the season without it? :nono2:


Opposite situation here, my wife (who watches more then me) is constantly after me to dump DTV. This most recent raise in pricing will add more fuel to her fire. I'm finally starting to think she's right though.

Today I start my search for an over the air only DVR for my satellite-less future.

Wow, I still find it hard to fathom this price increase taking effect at THIS time considering the economic pressure many and most likely most of us will face now or in the near future.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

clotter said:


> Opposite situation here, my wife (who watches more then me) is constantly after me to dump DTV. This most recent raise in pricing will add more fuel to her fire. I'm finally starting to think she's right though.
> 
> Today I start my search for an over the air only DVR for my satellite-less future.
> 
> Wow, I still find it hard to fathom this price increase taking effect at THIS time considering the economic pressure many and most likely most of us will face now or in the near future.


can't fathom why

gas shot up 22 cents a galleon this morning
my electric bill went up 5.00 last month
my gas bill went up 13.00 a month on this bill
my childerns tuition will go up 35.00 a month with the next payment
local newspaper went up 25 cents a issue for daily and 50 cents a issue for weekend

Cost of business goes up, all companies factor in a churn rate if they have to raise prices.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> can't fathom why
> 
> gas shot up 22 cents a galleon this morning
> my electric bill went up 5.00 last month
> ...


You are so right.

The fact is these companies have to pay their bills/payroll which are rising just like they are for the rest of us.

They(all of them from what I've seen) pass some of that on the customers.

Mike


----------



## clotter (Apr 12, 2008)

wingrider01 said:


> can't fathom why
> 
> gas shot up 22 cents a galleon this morning
> my electric bill went up 5.00 last month
> ...


Point taken but I can't totally agree. Gas prices have fallen dramatically this past 6 months. Transportation costs have fallen with fuel prices. Raw material costs at least in the industry I work in have fallen. Interest rates are down.

I don't want to give anyone a free pass to raise prices on anything at this point. We are in a major recession if not the start of a depression. If DTV thinks this is a great time to raise prices all I can still say is WOW.

BUT my local newspaper chose to raise their subscription rates and I'm getting less for my money. They are becoming close to being obsolete.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

clotter said:


> Point taken but I can't totally agree. Gas prices have fallen dramatically this past 6 months. Transportation costs have fallen with fuel prices. Raw material costs at least in the industry I work in have fallen. Interest rates are down.


Aisde from maybe interest rates, the other stuff you cited really has very little to nothing to do with satellite broadcasting. I imagine the bulk of their expenses have to do with personnel/benefits and programming costs, which as far as I know are not going down at all.

I am certainly not looking to DirecTV to help me make my expenses and I don't hold them to having any obligation to their customers to help them pay their bills. I don't expect that of my phone company, my energy company or anyone else with whom I do business.

I will never understand why anybody could think that DirecTV somehow owes it to the customers to not raise rates "because of the current economic times". :nono2: I certainly don't want them coming in later and raising rates 25% because economic times are good, either (not like we'll need to worry about that any time soon).


----------



## clotter (Apr 12, 2008)

JLucPicard said:


> I will never understand why anybody could think that DirecTV somehow owes it to the customers to not raise rates "because of the current economic times". :nono2: I certainly don't want them coming in later and raising rates 25% because economic times are good, either (not like we'll need to worry about that any time soon).


Definitely two different mind sets at work here. I guess most of us work in an extremely competitive environment which unfortunately doesn't always apply to the cable/satellite business. Competition would normally determine any price adjustments in good times or bad.

I work in the advertising/manufacturing industry and we have let many good people go to reduce overhead. We have drastically lowered markups to put us in a more competitive situation. Wages are froze for the foreseeable future. 401k matches were eliminated. I'm sure in the past few months this has become a tired story to most out there and a tragedy for far too many.

I'm still not going to defend a price increase from a company I have no ownership in.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

clotter said:


> Definitely two different mind sets at work here. I guess most of us work in an extremely competitive environment which unfortunately doesn't always apply to the cable/satellite business. Competition would normally determine any price adjustments in good times or bad.
> 
> I work in the advertising/manufacturing industry and we have let many good people go to reduce overhead. We have drastically lowered markups to put us in a more competitive situation. Wages are froze for the foreseeable future. 401k matches were eliminated. I'm sure in the past few months this has become a tired story to most out there and a tragedy for far too many.
> 
> I'm still not going to defend a price increase from a company I have no ownership in.


clotter makes a good point.

Many businesses have found a competitive advantage in holding the line on price increases, or in many cases actually lowering them. In my company we have decided to do this, and have made a big deal of notifying all of our customers about this fact. As another example, nearly all of the grocery stores in our area have lowered prices on a large number of items as a way to stay competitive.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Boston Fan said:


> Many businesses have found a competitive advantage in holding the line on price increases, or in many cases actually lowering them.


And has been mentioned some companies that haven't raised prices have reduced the amount of their product (like Lays potato chips going from 13oz to 11oz packages). Would you prefer that DirecTV remove some channels and keep the price the same?

I don't like price increases but I'm realistic, they're going to happen in most cases, and if you don't like the increase move to a different product.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

clotter said:


> Definitely two different mind sets at work here. I guess most of us work in an extremely competitive environment which unfortunately doesn't always apply to the cable/satellite business. Competition would normally determine any price adjustments in good times or bad.
> 
> I work in the advertising/manufacturing industry and we have let many good people go to reduce overhead. We have drastically lowered markups to put us in a more competitive situation. Wages are froze for the foreseeable future. 401k matches were eliminated. I'm sure in the past few months this has become a tired story to most out there and a tragedy for far too many.
> 
> I'm still not going to defend a price increase from a company I have no ownership in.


Sounds all well and good but as has been pointed out countless times, please find me a multichannel provider that didn't raise prices this year. They *all* did, just as they all do every year. I guess you can get on DirecTV all you want but they just followed the rest of the industry.

One also forgets that many of these contracts with companies like ESPN and HBO call for escalators every year. So ESPN cost DirecTV say $2.50 a sub in 2008 and now in 2009 it costs $2.60. Most of the contracts are like that. So unless they want to start losing money DirecTV and Dish and cable raise rates every year to cover the increase in costs to them.

You may have missed that DirecTV did cut a ton of capital projects, scuttled a sat build/launch and laid people off just a few months ago to help keep costs down.

Oh, tell my garbage pick up company to stop charging me "high gas recover fee" now that gas prices are way down. I'd like to stop paying that $7 extra. 

I don't want to pay the extra $3 any more then you or anyone else. I haven't seen a raise in 5 years and in fact took a huge cut in pay 3 years ago. Luckily I'm still employed. I cut out one bagel and juice a month and I've just paid my DirecTV bill increase.


----------



## renbutler (Oct 17, 2008)

RAD said:


> And has been mentioned some companies that haven't raised prices have reduced the amount of their product (like Lays potato chips going from 13oz to 11oz packages). Would you prefer that DirecTV remove some channels and keep the price the same?


Can I pick the channels?


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

RAD said:


> Would you prefer that DirecTV remove some channels and keep the price the same?


Um...no? 

The used car salesman must drool when they see you coming - you do half of their work for them! :lol:


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Boston Fan said:


> Um...no?
> 
> The used car salesman must drool when they see you coming - you do half of their work for them! :lol:


Have you noticed that car manufactures have kept raising their price but removed some things like passenger side door key locks, ash trays/lighters and things along that line? Costs go up, it happens, so prices also go up.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Boston Fan said:


> Um...no?
> 
> The used car salesman must drool when they see you coming - you do half of their work for them! :lol:


Dude, that doesn't make any sense. :scratchin


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

How so? If you walk in expecting to get taken (and accepting of that), you are an easy mark. Dude.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

renbutler said:


> Can I pick the channels?


Only if all other 17 million plus customers agree with your choices


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Boston Fan said:


> How so? If you walk in expecting to get taken (and accepting of that), you are an easy mark. Dude.


There is a difference between being "an easy mark" and understanding how things work.

Mike


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

bonscott87 said:


> So ESPN cost DirecTV say $2.50 a sub in 2008 and now in 2009 it costs $2.60.


ESPN is more than that:

*2009 - What Cable Networks Get From Carriers:*
(Per Subscriber, Per Month)

*ESPN $3.65*
RSNs: $0.20-$2.15
Big Ten Network $0.70-1.10 ($0.10 outside Big Ten territory)
TNT $ 0.93
Disney Channel $0.86 (commercial free)
USA $ 0.52
ESPN2 $ 0.52
CNN & Headline News $ 0.47
TBS $ 0.46
Nickleodeon/Nick at Nite $0.45
Fox News Channel $ 0.42
FX $0.37
MTV $ 0.32
Versus $ 0.27
Discovery $ 0.26
A&E $ 0.25
Golf $ 0.25
ABC Family $0.24
Lifetime $0.24
AMC $ 0.23
E! $ 0.22
History Channel $0.21
National Geographic $ 0.20
SciFi $ 0.20
Spike $0.20
Speed $ 0.19
Bravo $ 0.17
The Learning Channel $ 0.17
ESPN Classic $ 0.17
ESPN News $ 0.16
BET $ 0.15
MSNBC $ 0.15
Soap $ 0.14
Style $ 0.14
VH1 $ 0.14
Comedy Central $0.12
Fox Business Network $0.12
Hallmark Channel $ 0.12
WGN $ 0.12
BBC America $ 0.11
Game Show Network $ 0. 11
HGTV $0.11
Weather Channel $ 0.11
Biography $ 0.10
Travel $0.10
TV Land $0.10
Oxygen $ 0.09
Lifetime Movie Net $ 0.09
truTV $ 0.09
CMT $ 0.08
Fuse $ 0.08
G4 $ 0.08
Animal Planet $ 0.07
Food Network $0.07
Military $ 0.07
Hallmark $ 0.06
VH1 Classic $ 0.06
Great American Country $ 0.02


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Boston Fan said:


> How so? If you walk in expecting to get taken (and accepting of that), you are an easy mark. Dude.


No I walk in with a price that I'm willing to pay for the car, if I don't see what I want I walk. If you don't like the price that DirecTV is charging for thier product then you can do the same, or lower your expectations.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

RAD said:


> Have you noticed that car manufactures have kept raising their price but removed some things like passenger side door key locks, ash trays/lighters and things along that line? Costs go up, it happens, so prices also go up.


More to the point at hand, have you noticed the deals that you can get on cars right now due to the economy? And they aren't yanking things out of the car as they're dropping those prices either.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

RAD said:


> No I walk in with a price that I'm willing to pay for the car, if I don't see what I want I walk. If you don't like the price that DirecTV is charging for thier product then you can do the same, or lower your expectations.


I never said that I had a problem with it - in fact I have stated the opposite. I recognize that I am getting what I am paying for, and am pleased with their product and customer service, and plan on remaining a customer.

What we are talking about is the larger issue of how businesses are responding to the current economic situation.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> There is a difference between being "an easy mark" and understanding how things work.
> 
> Mike


Clearly. And I think the approach on display in the comment I was responding to was much more of the former.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

dcowboy7 said:


> ESPN is more than that:


I was just using a number out of thin air for example.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

bonscott87 said:


> I was just using a number out of thin air for example.


Guess you were too thin 

By the way, thanks for the reminders of escalators in the contracts.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Boston Fan said:


> More to the point at hand, have you noticed the deals that you can get on cars right now due to the economy? And they aren't yanking things out of the car as they're dropping those prices either.


Have not seen the manufacturer dropping the base sticker price of the car either. Car still comes into the dealership at the same price, they are just adding incentives to intice the purchaser into the dealership, notice the finance offers as a example they have the caveat - IF YOU QUALIFY, same thing with the "customer loyalty" programs they are offereing - hell the dealer I have been leasing from for the past 30 years called me and wanted to know if I wanted to trade up my currently leased car for a new one (only low sales bvolumnes models, like gas guzzlers) with no penalty - and I am only 15 months into a 36 month lease..


----------



## EricRobins (Feb 9, 2005)

dcowboy7 said:


> ESPN is more than that:
> 
> *2009 - What Cable Networks Get From Carriers:*
> (Per Subscriber, Per Month)


I certainly do not doubt the accuracy of these numbers, but can you tell us where you got them? Also, are all RSN's the same?


----------



## Que (Apr 15, 2006)

1998 Total choice PLATINUM 47.99
1999 Total Choice $29.99
2000 Total Choice $31.99
2003 Total Choice $33.99
2004 Total Choice $36.99
2005 Total Choice $41.99
2006 Total Choice $44.99
2007 Total Choice $47.99
2008 Total Choice $50.99
2009 Total Choice $53.99


----------



## Que (Apr 15, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I've already planned for this (like every year)


Every year from 2003 for me.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> Have not seen the manufacturer dropping the base sticker price of the car either.


You consider the sticker price to be the value of the car? :sure:


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

I just saw in our morning newspaper where our power company wants an 18.5% increase this year, a 14.5% increase next year, and a 13.2% increase the year after that. Now those are price increases I'm willing to complain about. And yes you can cut your service with D* or you can leave D* completely, but can you manage to get by without electricity? And our power company is perfectly willing to ask for those increases in the time of this bad economy.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

Que said:


> 1998 Total choice PLATINUM 47.99


Total Choice Platinum was _way_ different back then.

Check out this old D* page on the Wayback Machine.

Total Choice Platinum didn't include HBO, Cinemax, or Showtime, and included about 114 channels total (and no locals, of course).

For fun, check out the 1998 NFL Sunday Ticket page


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Boston Fan said:


> You consider the sticker price to be the value of the car? :sure:


Yes, that price is what the car sells for without any incentives. What do you cnsider the cost of the car with out incentives,rebates, grovelling and begging on hands and knees money?


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> Yes, that price is what the car sells for without any incentives. What do you cnsider the cost of the car with out incentives,rebates, grovelling and begging on hands and knees money?


And there it is - another easy mark! 

I'll tell you this - I have NEVER paid sticker price for any car, new or used. Until your post, I honestly had no idea that anyone did. :lol:


----------



## Upstream (Jul 4, 2006)

Que said:


> 1998 Total choice PLATINUM 47.99
> 1999 Total Choice $29.99
> 2000 Total Choice $31.99
> 2003 Total Choice $33.99
> ...





Kheldar said:


> Total Choice Platinum was _way_ different back then.
> 
> Check out this old D* page on the Wayback Machine.
> 
> ...


Total Choice Platinum may have been very different. But Total Choice hasn't really changed that much, depending on what channels are important to you (some deleted, some others added).

Changes to Total Choice channel line up from last year's version of this thread


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

Upstream said:


> Total Choice Platinum may have been very different. But Total Choice hasn't really changed that much, depending on what channels are important to you (some deleted, some others added).
> 
> Changes to Total Choice channel line up from last year's version of this thread


Going from 75 (1998) channels to 165 channels isn't changing much?


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 18, 2006)

Yeah - there's STILL nothing on!


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

EricRobins said:


> I certainly do not doubt the accuracy of these numbers, but can you tell us where you got them? Also, are all RSN's the same?


1. from a post on the avsforums site.
2. RSN price the same ?


----------



## Upstream (Jul 4, 2006)

Kheldar said:


> Going from 75 (1998) channels to 165 channels isn't changing much?


The link I provided shows the actual channel changes for Total Choice from 1999 to 2008.

DirecTV removed 7 channels and added 31 channels. 15 of the 31 added channels are shopping, religious, and public interest channels, leaving 16 added channels (or a net gain of 9 channels) with what most people would consider valuable content.

So, yeah, "Total Choice hasn't really changed that much, depending on what channels are important to you."


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Boston Fan said:


> And there it is - another easy mark!
> 
> I'll tell you this - I have NEVER paid sticker price for any car, new or used. Until your post, I honestly had no idea that anyone did. :lol:


Really? Interesting. How does one become a "easy mark" when pointing out this out. I guess you are Assuming that the said person paid full price on a car. The debate was NOT what you paid for a item, but the BASE PRICE of the item without any incentives and/or groveling.

Think you missed the mark on that one - that is unless you can document where it was stated the base price list was what was actually paid. Sorry but never stated I PAID that price


----------



## turey22 (Jul 30, 2007)

You dont want to live in FL, taxes there at 13.17% for the programming.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Boston Fan said:


> And there it is - another easy mark!
> 
> I'll tell you this - I have NEVER paid sticker price for any car, new or used. Until your post, I honestly had no idea that anyone did. :lol:


When I buy a new car I just walk in and buy the thing... Why [negotiate] them down, that just gives me a headache, unless of course you are trying to buy a car you really can't afford.... Maybe it's just me but I'd rather overspend than be known as cheap, or worse poor.... 

[mod edit: offensive term removed]


----------



## mtnsackett (Aug 22, 2007)

here in Montana it is 0% as well


----------



## sabex (Sep 16, 2006)

Q: I see a package "CHOICE XTRA™ + HD DVR — Locals Included"
Does anyone know if this package includes the $6 DVR fee, $10 HD Access and $5 primary receiver i currently have to pay separately?


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Yes it does.

You should never have to pay $5 for the first receiver. It is included in all packages. It may be a separate line item but if it is there should be a credit to offset it.



sabex said:


> Q: I see a package "CHOICE XTRA™ + HD DVR - Locals Included"
> Does anyone know if this package includes the $6 DVR fee, $10 HD Access and $5 primary receiver i currently have to pay separately?


----------



## Que (Apr 15, 2006)

Looks like it's $3.03.

$53.99 (Was $50.99)
$6.00 DVR (round up was $5.99)
$5.00 Additional Receiver (Was $4.99)
$5.00 Additional Receiver (Was $4.99)

=$69.99 was $66.96


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

Que said:


> Looks like it's $3.03.
> 
> $53.99 (Was $50.99)
> $6.00 DVR (round up was $5.99)
> ...


since they bumped .99s to .00s wonder why they didnt bump the $53.99 to $54.00 as well ?


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

dcowboy7 said:


> since they bumped .99s to .00s wonder why they didnt bump the $53.99 to $54.00 as well ?


Probably because they never advertise all the extra fees/charges just the base packages so people still just see $53 not $54 when looking at prices.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

I am not sure you can make any kind of statement based on those price increases unless you adjust them for inflation, and at that point I bet they would be pretty much in line.


----------

