# Tribune dispute with Dish - Resolved



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Info channel (14) next to KCPQ (Fox) and Tribune may take the channel away. I guess this constant war will continue to go on.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

it's never ending tug-war ... money fight !


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

WGN in Chicago has the same warning. They don't have the Cubs anymore and they are giving up being the Chicago CW station so who cares.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Does this mean: http://wgntv.com/2016/05/23/wgn-tv-cw-network-part-ways/

WGN, now becoming an independent (This 1 September), could that mean dumping WGN America and replacing it with the Chicago signal nationally? One of the reasons why WGN America came to be, was because WGN was affiliated with The WB and then the CW. Which had WGN to substitute programming during prime time. Eventually causing the national and local feed to become vastly different.

Even without the Cubs, it sill will have other local sports, and variety of programming. Baseball, on local TV, has become a rarity these days, as with many sporting events.

In another article: Sports would include Black Hawks, White Sox and Bulls. prime time games which the CW prevented WGN from showing during the week. And the article was not clear on what new local programming will be available.

It would be nice to get WGN 9 O'clock News again. WGN America has so little of a Chicago element, that it is not worth watching.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

nmetro said:


> WGN, now becoming an independent (This 1 September), could that mean dumping WGN America and replacing it with the Chicago signal nationally? One of the reasons why WGN America came to be, was because WGN was affiliated with The WB and then the CW. Which had WGN to substitute programming during prime time. Eventually causing the national and local feed to become vastly different.


The differences actually started long before that. It was the syndex rules in the late 80s that caused the split. People may not have noticed unless they had both feeds available (which was really rare), but they had to drop some of the syndicated content that WGN-TV was still airing, along with switching to alternate cycles of other syndicated shows. Oddly enough, they aired Kids WB in pattern while WGN-TV didn't clear Kids WB at all and it aired on a different station in Chicago. TBS went the other route with WTBS and mostly aired content they could clear nationally, but there was still morning public affairs and E/I blocks that only aired in Atlanta. (They eventually split completely when WTBS became Peachtree TV). The old WOR national feed ended up getting a completely different schedule before it folded in the mid-90s.

WGN is mostly becoming independent because The CW was tired of the constant pre-emptions in the number 3 market. Especially now that they're building a universe with their DC shows where storylines will require them to air in order. All of the other Tribune owned CW stations were actually at risk of losing their CW affiliation too before the affiliation renewal was signed last month. (And this time they had some leverage, because CBS now has an additional station in NYC that could have picked up the CW affiliation if WPIX lost it)

And no, don't hold your breath on that happening. Tribune already set a plan to turn WGN America into a more widespread general cable network. (Prior to the latest round of renewals, they had very little cable carriage in markets that already had a Tribune owned station like NYC, LA and Philly, while most Chicago cable providers didn't carry it at all until a few years ago) And considering some of the stuff that happens on their original series like Underground, there's no way they can get away with that airing on broadcast TV. WGN also only has the local rights to the sports, so they cannot air them out of market anymore.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

As much as I would like the old WGN-9 back, I doubt Dish would add that. I still have the Supers and I feel every year, the axe might drop on those as they do not sell the package any longer. That has been a concern of mine for sometime. I have watched the Supers going back to 1985 when they were FTA on my big Dish. KTLA is my favorite. But at least if they are dropped the news is streamed, so now with the internet it would not be total loss. In fact, one night I cast KTLA's 10 O'Clock news from the laptop to the TV using Chromecast and it streams in HD, so the pq is better than off Dish. I had hoped the Supers would be in HD, but again I doubt that will happen.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Bye! The stations are down (including three superstations).


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Confirmed, Denver KWGN and KDVR are now removed, as well as WGN America.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Let's see WPIX, KWGN, KTLA, WGN, and KCPQ. Fortunately these stations do stream their news and I can get the local Fox OTA.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

*Tribune Broadcasting Company Blacks Out DISH Customers in 33 Markets; DISH Offers Free Over-the-Air Antennas to Affected Customers*

_Tribune rejects DISH offer to extend contract, including retroactive "true-up" for new rates, which would keep local channels up for benefit of consumers while negotiations continue_
_Tribune attempts "forced bundling" to gain negotiating leverage_
ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- DISH reported today that Tribune Broadcasting Company chose to black out DISH customers' access to 42 local channels in 33 markets across 34 states and the District of Columbia, intentionally harming and exploiting millions of innocent consumers in an effort to raise carriage rates and gain negotiating leverage for an unrelated cable channel with declining viewership, WGN America.

While DISH works to reach an agreement, the company is offering "over-the-air" antennas at no cost so that customers in affected markets can watch Tribune's local broadcast channels for free.

"Tribune is demanding an unreasonable rate increase for channels that are available for free over the air," said Warren Schlichting, DISH executive vice president of Programming. "Actions like Tribune's are what drive price increases and feed customer frustration for our industry. With DISH's free antenna, customers will continue to receive Tribune channels for free over the air, along with dozens of other broadcast channels not normally available to pay-TV customers."

*FORCED BUNDLING AT ISSUE*
In addition to asking for significant price increases for local channels, Tribune is attempting to "force bundle" an unrelated and low-performing cable channel, WGN America, with the media conglomerate's local broadcast stations.

"By attempting to force bundle its cable channel with its local broadcast stations, Tribune is using local viewers as leverage to raise rates for WGN America - a channel that is in decline," said Schlichting. "Tribune is seeking a significant rate increase despite decreasing viewership and recently losing access to Cubs baseball."

DISH viewership data reveals that viewership on WGN America is down on average more than 20 percent since the channel's launch as a cable network. Many of the shows available on WGN America are available on other channels carried by DISH.

"Consumers shouldn't have to pay twice for the same programming," said Schlichting.

*DISH OFFER OF EXTENSION, TRUE-UP REJECTED*
DISH was hopeful that it would come to a mutual agreement with Tribune to renew carriage of the media conglomerate's local stations. In that spirit, DISH offered a short-term contract extension to Tribune that would include a retroactive true-up when new rates were agreed upon, and would preserve the ability of DISH customers to access the Tribune local stations while negotiations continued. The true-up would ensure that Tribune was made whole at the new rates for the period of any contract extension.

"With DISH willing to grant an extension and a retroactive true-up on rates, Tribune had nothing to lose and consumers had everything to gain by leaving the channels up," said Schlichting. "Instead, Tribune chose to turn its back on its public interest obligations and use innocent consumers as bargaining chips."

DISH Network L.L.C. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQISH).

*NEED FOR RETRANSMISSION CONSENT REFORM*
Aggressive attempts to tie together cable channels and local broadcast network stations, when the market power of a local broadcast monopoly is used as a negotiation lever, is called "forced bundling." Typically, forced bundling arrangements lead to price increases out of line with market rates.

"Tribune's attempt to engineer a forced bundling arrangement of its cable channel and local broadcast stations is a prime example of why Washington needs to stand up for consumers," said R. Stanton Dodge, DISH executive vice president and general counsel.

"Broadcasters like Tribune use their in-market monopoly power to put overall profits ahead of the public interests they are supposed to serve."

"Actions like these are precisely the reason that Congress has mandated, and the FCC has opened, a formal process to investigate tactics like this," said Dodge. "We also believe the FCC has the opportunity to investigate remedies like arbitration with interim carriage which could end broadcaster blackouts while preserving the interests of all parties."

The Federal Communications Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on September 2, 2015. Read the NPRM here: http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0902/FCC-15-109A1.pdf

Along with other pay-TV companies and public interest groups that form the American Television Alliance (ATVA), DISH has asked the FCC to consider these and other tactics as violating "good faith" negotiations.

Read ATVA's comments on the NPRM filed with the FCC on Dec. 1, 2015 here: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001347759

*RISING RETRANSMISSION RATES*
Each year, the cost to carry local broadcast stations rises far beyond the rate of inflation, leading to blackouts across the country that affect millions of subscribers of various pay-TV companies. According to SNL Kagan, a leading source on the media industry, broadcast fees burdening pay-TV consumers were as low as $215 million in 2006, soared to $4.9 billion in 2014 and are expected to more than double to reach $10.3 billion in 2021.

DISH customers can visit DISHPromise.com for more information and to ask the FCC and Congress to end TV blackouts.
Tribune Broadcasting Company's action affects viewers of various ABC, CBS, CW, Fox, NBC, MyNetwork, and independent stations in 33 markets. For a list of affected stations, visit: https://dishnetwork.newshq.businesswire.com/document-library/tribune-broadcasting-company-stations-impacted


----------



## Link (Feb 2, 2004)

WGN isn't worth any price increase and I don't imagine most care if they receive it. I'm glad Dish isn't giving into Tribune's demands. I don't know why TV station groups think providers should pay outrageous increases everytime there is a new contract. Some stations warrant a decrease for their performance!


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

WGN America is a very poor substitute fro WGN, Channel 9, "Chicago's Very Own". The people at Tribune thought people would embrace a channel, because it was called "WGN America". The reason people watched Chicago's WGN was fro sports, movies, the news, and when it was on Bozo. And they watched local special Chicago programming, what little there was. But, WGN America dumped any form of its Chicago identity. Leaving a channel whose programming is no different than on a number of channels already available with Viacom, Comcast/NBC Universal and Time-Warner.

While I do not like disputes, this one DISH is really in the right. WGN America is not WGN Chicago. And it should not be part of negotiations for a re-broadcast agreement. In this mess, two Denver channels are now blocked, because of a Tribune owned duopoly. Which the FCC should prohibit. Denver has another duopoly with KUSA and KTVD, when Gannet had their dispute, both those channels went.

Congress, and the FCC, should end carriers having to pay for transmission of supposed free to air TV signals. It is obvious that broadcaster are abusing this to make extra profits. They already air 18 minutes an hour of commercials or more; they run infomercials at all hours of the day and night. And now they are in the process of selling channels above Channel 32 to make even more money.

After Sinclair, Gannet and now this, with Comcast/NBC Universal looming (retransmist fro NBC owned stations may be pulled into this); it is time our so called representatives finally do something for the citizens of this country, instead of corporate greed and abuse of the spirit of the existing laws.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

Tribune's board is already under pressure from shareholders for its refusal to take seriously a generous offer from Gannett. A bunch of angry customers complaining to the FCC and their congressman isn't likely to help the board either. Dumb managements make dumb decisions.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Here is one of those opportunities to worry your Congressperson who is up for election in November.

If you look at the list of local stations involved, this is not easy to ignore. And particularly if you consider
the number of stations acquired in 2013 from Local TV LLC, a television broadcasting company owned
by Oak Hill Capital Partners which operated 20 television stations in the United States. This seems just
doesn't seem consistent with the public interest. But I'm old and remember when the "airwaves" were
considered as owned by the public and ownership of licenses to use them were tightly limited.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

The thing that gets me is, when we lose Network channels, Dish should be able to bring in another network station from a nearby city to cover us until the dispute gets taken care of. If Dish could do that, and subscribers should be pushing for this, then this lets the hot air out of the disputing company. We the subscriber always are the losers in these disputes. The OTA channels are lucky they even get paid by Dish to carry them. If they cannot make it on advertising, then they should go off the air.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

mwdxer said:


> If they cannot make it on advertising, then they should go off the air.


Yeah, I take it you have no idea what costs are involved in operating a television station. That would cause nearly every broadcast station to either go off the air, jack up their advertising rates to the point where most local business can't afford it, or drastically reduce their operations:
- Eliminate local newscasts (the staff in front of and behind the cameras don't work for free, neither is the rent for the studio building, or the massive property taxes if you're one of the few stations who own your studios)
- Stop streaming of local programming for free (bandwidth isn't cheap, if you want more than 10 people to watch your stream, you have to pay a 3rd party like Akamai or Limelight to handle it)
- Replace most syndicated programming and newscasts with infomercials (syndicated programming isn't free, you either have to pay for them in advanced or agree to a deal where the distributor keeps most of the ad revenue)
- Get rid of their translators (the electricity and rent to operate those sites aren't free)
- Replace subchannel networks with infomercials and leased programming (like what many independents and low power stations in major markets like NYC, LA and Philly already do)

As for them managing to do it in the past, that's before there was tons of cable channels and additional networks creating bidding wars each time the rights to major events and programming are up for renewal, plus with less channels and no DVRs, ad revenue was on broadcast TV was a lot more valuable. (Even with VCRs, people still saw the products being advertised as they fast forwarded) A lot of tower sites and studio locations that were originally built in the middle of nowhere back in the 60s and 70s are also now in prime real estate locations, resulting in land lords flat out gouging stations for rent. Electric rates were a lot cheaper, you had a lot less computerized equipment, and business class internet connections weren't a thing.

You want an example of what happens when stations don't get retrans fees or have the ability to draw from their sister cable channels? Look at Canada. Stations went off the air entirely, others cancelled local newscasts and replaced them with one regional newscast that ignores everything except the main cities. (Imagine the entire Northeast and Mid-Atlantic being covered by the same newscast, and they only have a half an hour a day to cover the events in the entire region) Heck this past December, CHCH fired the majority of their news staff after the CRTC eliminated one of the local TV funds and replaced most of their programming with infomercials and 20/20 reruns (the conglomerates like Bell, Rogers and Corus make deals with entire studios, so independents like CHCH are stuck with whatever's left or on the verge of cancellation). CBC flat out lost their NHL rights, Hockey Night in Canada does air on CBC stations, but officially since Rogers keeps all the ad revenue, you weren't watching CBC, you were watching a seperate CRTC licensed network owned by Rogers who's sole purpose is producing Hockey Night in Canada telecasts.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> > The thing that gets me is, when we lose Network channels, Dish should be able to bring in another network station from a nearby city to cover us until the dispute gets taken care of. If Dish could do that, and subscribers should be pushing for this, then this lets the hot air out of the disputing company. We the subscriber always are the losers in these disputes. The OTA channels are lucky they even get paid by Dish to carry them. If they cannot make it on advertising, then they should go off the air.
> 
> 
> Yeah, I take it you have no idea what costs are involved in operating a television station. That would cause nearly every broadcast station to either go off the air or drastically reduce their operations. (i.e. eliminate local newscasts, stop streaming of local programming, replace most syndicated programming and newscasts with infomercials, get rid of their translators, etc)
> ...


The thing is the network broadcast affiliate is a anachronistic economic model. It made sense in 1958 based on a concept the included the government licensing our airwaves. It was questionable in 1996 because of cable/satellite service. But it clearly is a dead man walking in 2016.

I don't see why we have to keep subsidizing with what is essentially a tax on our satellite/cable subscriptions by corporations like Tribune. Right now if your CBS affiliate is a Tribune station and you really want to watch something on it, you can use the internet to watch on a CBS All Access subscription. And you need to use that only if you don't have OTA access.

Regarding local news coverage, for those of us who live in the far reaches of a DMA like the San Francisco Bay Area DMA, we have never had local news from a broadcast television station. What I know is that at least one broadcast channel will continue to provide news.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

I think you're underestimating what regional newscasts are like in Canada. At least the San Francisco stations are usually within 100 miles of you. In Canada it's very different. i.e. a newscast covering an entire province like what many stations do in BC and Saskatchewan. Or in the Maritimes, one newsroom serving New Brunswick, PEI, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. Back before the local TV fund was eliminated, all the commercial stations had local newscasts for these areas, and there were many independently owned stations covering local communities. Heck as part of their cuts CBC eliminated their transmitters in areas not marked for a digital conversion. (Up in Canada their digital transition wasn't nationwide, it was just for the largest cities)

As for San Francsico, if it wasn't for the fact that those stations are O&O's getting money from their corporate siblings, or as part of a larger company, they probably would have been priced out of their studios years ago or had to drastically cut back to continue to afford to operate in the city. Major markets with O&O's would be safe, it's every other market in between that would have a problem. (i.e. Philly and NYC would be fine, but surrounding areas like Scranton, Binghamton, Hartford and Harrisburg might not)


The FCC is already cracking down on duopolies and LMAs used to get around the ownership cap, but it's backfiring, instead of a 3rd party getting control of the second network and creating additional competition, since the FCC has no authority over programming decisions, companies like Sinclair are just taking the affiliation and all the syndicated programming that aired on the channel and keeping it in house on a subchannel, that subchannel gets to keep their cable and satellite placement, while the former station's new owner (many times a shell company operating at arms length from the previous owner) "voluntarily" gives up retrans consent and must carry status while they wait to cash out in the auction and shutdown entirely.


As for why they get paid, the cable companies kind of brought it on themselves. Running attack ads against satellite in the 90s bragging how they had locals and satellite didn't, and then after deregulation charging $20 or more for a package that contained nothing but locals, shopping, religious and public access when just a decade prior the same cost would get you all the basic cable channels like CNN, Nickelodeon, MTV and TNT. It gave the locals leverage in their claim that they bring something of value and should get compensated when the retrans system was setup, but now it's getting out of control.

Should they get compensated? If you look at the ratings, they still bring something a lot of viewers watch, having a popular daytime or primetime network show as a leadin helps with local news ratings, and when you look at the operational costs, even with ad revenue, it won't be free to provide unless they somehow pass laws that force other companies, not even related to the broadcast industry, to make things available for free to stations like rent for studio and transmitter locations, and electricity for both sites before you even get to the programming costs and salaries of employees. (There's a reason why even with their government funding, PBS stations still have to have month long pledge drives every few months and all those extra workers are usually volunteers)

How much is a lot more complicated. Should it be a flat rate per channel? Flat rate per market? But what about larger markets that have more than just the big 5 and PBS? Should the independents and Spanish and niche ethnic stations get the same as the station that shows NFL every Sunday in the fall or the channel that has the Super Bowl that year? Who gets to decide what is worth more? Say you do it per network, should Spanish stations in markets with large hispanic populations like NYC and LA get compensated more than the Spanish stations operating in a smaller market like Hartford? Say it's done by ratings, what do you do when Nielsen has a screwup that they correct after the fact like what happened with ABC and NBC a few years ago? Should stations that have multiple network affiliations via subchannels be able to double dip? How do the stations that currently select must carry factor in (i.e. like the bulk of the independents currently do)? Do they now get to join this flat rate system? It's a lot easier said than done.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

KyL416,

50 years ago, New York had these commercial stations: 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11. Main PBS 13. Secondard PBS 21, 25 and 31. Two Spanish 41, and 47. That was it.

Commercial time was approximately 11 minutes per hour. All stations with the exception of Channel 2, signed off. WCBS, would sign off, run a quick test pattern and sign on again.

Cable TV was for those who lived far enough away from the Empire State Building, to improve the signal. You had a whopping 12 channels. Adding 3 and 30 from Hartford, 8 from New Haven. 12 was channel 21. And 6, was left for local use and sports from Madison Square Garden (Rangers and Knicks). That was it.

There was still syndicated programming, movies and even live locally produced programming, including children's programming.

There were not retransmission fees, informercials at all hours of the day or night, etc. Only 11 minutes per hours of commercials, though Channel 9 sometimes pushed that limit.

Newscasts? 2, 4, 7 had a short morning news, evening news at 6, national news at 6:30 and news at 11. Channels 5 and 11, news at 10. But, not what you see today, with an average station running 4 - 5 hours of news per day.

The interesting thing, about 50 years ago, there was more variety on the 6 New York commercial station, that was airs on many cable channels today. Hence, why those digital sub-channels are so popular.

During the years, the NAB changed the dynamic. First, by getting the right to air commercials that could last much longer than the standard 60 seconds; informercials were born. Then, getting teh right to air them all hours of the day or night. Next, get Congress to allow them to collect re-transmission fees on an OTA signal, something you can get "free" in your home. After teh digital conversion, people in fringe areas, now have a problem, before they could get a signal, now they can't So what was "free" is not free any more. Over time, the stations were able to get now close to 20 minutes an hour commercial time, nearly double that of 50 years ago. So, now they have commercials, informercials and re-transmission fees. Over time all those independently owned TV stations, or smalll groups of them, have less and less owners, as now there maybe less than a dozen companies which own all the TV stations, with some exceptions. And these media companies own cable channels. So, here we are, Tribune saying you want your local TV station, you have to pay fro WGN America too.

But, there is one more cash cow yet to come. The FCC needs more spectrum fro smart phones. so, the plan is to sell every TV station signal from 32 and up. The media companies are going to make a mint over this. And what happens? Well, the pan is to force stations either back to the VHF band and force stations to double up with others. The media companies will be able to kill two birds with one stone. Get much more money and pretty much shut down channels like MeTV. Forcing people to watch cable channels, as TV will effectively revert to what we had 50 years ago.

So, for example, in Denver, channels: 31 (32), 2 (34, 4 (36), 12 (48), 59 (44), 38 (38), 53 (45), 41 (41) 23 (47), Will all have to find new homes (there is a total of about 35 sub channels on these station). And 31, 2, 4 and 12 are FOX, CW, CBS and PBS. The rest are religious and Spanish channels. Denver only has 7, 9, 14 (15), 6 (18), 20 (21), 50 (26), 25 (28) and these have a combined 22 channles and subchannels. 10, 16, 26 (31), and 28 are low power. So, in Denver, to keep all the main channels, a lot of sub channels will vanish. And, not just in Denver. There are no plans, so far, to sell channels 14 - 31 for spectrum; but it has not been ruled out.

And Congress/FCC/NAB, cable giants, cell phone companies and media giants are planning fro a major sift with the TV spectrum.

So, OTA may become a limited species, by design. Forcing people to pay for streaming or cable. The CBS On Demand channel is a test to see if people are willing to pay for a channel they get free. How? A new "Star Trek" series which will run one episode on CBS and the rest will run on CBS on Demand. If this works, then a lot of shows people watch OTA for, will go to this model for other networks. And, not just scripted shows, but also sporting events. They will use the excuse of less OTA spectrum. And, all those cable and phone companies are chomping at teh bit providing Internet connectivity when all this begins to come together.

Sorry, fro the long post, but there is to this than just another dispute. TV, as we know it, may ironically only exist what mounts to the VHF spectrum; where it all started in the 1930s.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I think the biggest problem is the networks wanting money from the locals which caused the locals to want money from the cable Company and the networks also get money from cable in their O&O territories. It's all ridiculous.

I dont buy they need the fees or they'd be out of business. They need to change their business so they can get by without the fee which is interlude doable.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The (semi-related) problems that happened to OTA haven't really been mentioned, and usually aren't.

1. Allowing a company to own multiple channels in the same market.
2. Allowing a company to own multiple channels in multiple markets.
3. Allowing a company to own OTA and SAT/Cable networks.

Lets take these one at a time...

#1 used to be prevented by law. You couldn't own more than one channel in any market. At some point they scaled this back and allowed companies to own multiple channels in the same market. Pre-satellite/cable it was seen as a problem and rightfully so... but in the modern world it means a company can hold several channels in a market hostage during negotiations giving them significantly more power than if each local channel was owned by different companies. Different ownership means less likely for holdouts in a market because you wouldn't want your competition on while you were off... but if you are your own competition you hold more of the cards.

#2 is something that I don't know if it was ever prohibited... but it wouldn't have been as big of a deal in pre SAT/Cable days because there was no way to influence viewers across markets in a meaningful way with free broadcast TV. But, with modern SAT/Cable negotiations you can own channels in a bunch of markets and hold all of those markets as hostage during negotiations. It gives you obviously a LOT more negotiating power than if each channel in each market was a separate negotiation.

#3 is the icing on the cake, and again something I don't know if there was ever a prohibition on or not... but in modern times we are seeing an increasing number of companies owning cable channels as well as OTA channels in multiple markets and then holding all of that hostage against the other... So, FOX browbeats you to pay for FOX Business because they know you want FOX News... that's bad enough... but now they pile on with FOX-owned local stations in multiple markets and threaten you with that as well. Comcast/NBC/Universal does this too... as does Disney/ABC/ESPN and CBS and their holdings...

What we need is either a provision that prohibits ownership of multiple OTA in the same market, multiple OTA in different markets, and any OTA at all IF you own a SAT/Cable station OR a provision that requires each station, regardless of ownership, to be negotiated 100% as an individual deal on the part of the owner. Now, IF you as the other side (Dish, DirecTV, Time Warner, etc. etc.) want to buy a bundle and propose a discount, that should be allowed... but ONLY if that's the direction it flows.

Like... McDonald's can sell you a happy meal if you want it... but they also have to sell you the individual components that make up that happy meal... incidentally, that means they also have to sell you just the toy if that's all you want to pay for... The channels ought to be in that same scenario.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

With all of the extra sub channels, that does give the OTA station more revenue. That is something new in the past several years. Like radio, TV stations do have more competition that they never used to have. Like Portland, used to have 5 OTA stations. Now there are double that. So the pie is cut more ways. It is very expensive to run any broadcast station, radio or TV. TV is more expensive. It is funny that the local PBS station does not charge Dish to be carried. I never quite understood that. PBS stations generally have the best equipment as well as bottom-less pockets. In Oregon the PBS stations have more translators than the commercial networks too.They always seem to have money for about anything. At least in the NW. Seattle has two PBS stations. With the new dawning of ATSC 3.0 where an OTA station can double the number of sub channels, they may be more available revenue in the future. Of course once again people with me forced to buy a new TV or tuner that will decode ATSC 3.0. It will be interesting to see how all of this works out. More and more networks are streaming. With the Roku and the Dish subscription, most of the main cable networks are available on demand. Others like HBO, Starz, Showtime, etc can be subscribed to with the Roku, without a subscription. Dish as well as other carriers are selling streaming services, so many are already getting on the bandwagon.It is just a matter of time until the viewer can get nearly anything via streaming. More ad money for OTA TV selling their internet service. Some are already doing that.


----------



## pjsemmer (Apr 27, 2010)

I am with Dish on this one, to not cave in to the big broadcasting companies and just jack up our rates to compensate for the higher fees the broadcasting companies demand.

While it's nice that Dish is offering free OTA antennas, that's only good for those who lost their local station, in my case WPHL. I am a grandfathered-in Superstations subscriber and I lost 3 channels, most notably WPIX in NY, on which I would watch Mets games (I'm from NY and live in PA now). An OTA antenna will not pull in a signal from NYC out where I live. So what will Dish be doing for those who still have the Superstations package? We pay $7 a month but we're down to 2 channels for that $7. I don't want to get rid of the package because if the dispute is ever settled and the channels return, there is no way that you can get the Superstations package back. I think a rate reduction by a few bucks a month should be in order for those who still have Superstations.

Paul


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

At one time I had the Super Station package, was nice getting news from New York on WWOR and WPIX. Also, having WSBK (Boston) was good too. KTLA was good fro watching car chases, a regular event in LA. It is did not matter fro KWGN, I live around Denver. And WGN America pales to WGN Chicago. Network affiliations pretty much reduced the Super Station appeal.

I agree that DISH is in the right on this one. The local aspect of the Tribune stations went a way years ago. But, trying to make WGN America is premium type deal is beyond ridiculous. It is not worth the extra money, Tribune wants, for "Salem" and "Underground". Shows, that are less appealing than those which air on the CW. The rest of WGN America schedule is nothing but reruns you can watch anywhere else.



pjsemmer said:


> I am with Dish on this one, to not cave in to the big broadcasting companies and just jack up our rates to compensate for the higher fees the broadcasting companies demand.
> 
> While it's nice that Dish is offering free OTA antennas, that's only good for those who lost their local station, in my case WPHL. I am a grandfathered-in Superstations subscriber and I lost 3 channels, most notably WPIX in NY, on which I would watch Mets games (I'm from NY and live in PA now). An OTA antenna will not pull in a signal from NYC out where I live. So what will Dish be doing for those who still have the Superstations package? We pay $7 a month but we're down to 2 channels for that $7. I don't want to get rid of the package because if the dispute is ever settled and the channels return, there is no way that you can get the Superstations package back. I think a rate reduction by a few bucks a month should be in order for those who still have Superstations.
> 
> Paul


----------



## pjsemmer (Apr 27, 2010)

nmetro said:


> At one time I had the Super Station package, was nice getting news from New York on WWOR and WPIX. Also, having WSBK (Boston) was good too. KTLA was good fro watching car chases, a regular event in LA. It is did not matter fro KWGN, I live around Denver. And WGN America pales to WGN Chicago. Network affiliations pretty much reduced the Super Station appeal.
> 
> I agree that DISH is in the right on this one. The local aspect of the Tribune stations went a way years ago. But, trying to make WGN America is premium type deal is beyond ridiculous. It is not worth the extra money, Tribune wants, for "Salem" and "Underground". Shows, that are less appealing than those which air on the CW. The rest of WGN America schedule is nothing but reruns you can watch anywhere else.


WWOR and WSBK are the only 2 still available on the SuperStations. Honestly, if I could get the channels a la carte instead of a whole package, I would just get WPIX. Like I mentioned, I and my son like to watch Mets broadcasts and WPIX is the only channel that I know of that runs a Honeymooners marathon on New Years Eve! I will certainly miss that, since it's been a tradition for many years!


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Dish is the only provider left in the US that I know of that still has the Super Stations. Direct dropped them years ago and few if any cable services carry them. I know local Charter doesn't. Canada (Shaw) still offers them in Canada, except for KWGN & WWOR (Ithink), but they are harder to get. Like others, I am Grandfathered in. I am not saying anything, as if they give me a discount, we may not get those channels back. I think this will be solved in time, as most are as there are Tribune stations in most markets.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> 2. Allowing a company to own multiple channels in multiple markets.


At one time owners were limited to seven stations in different markets in the entire nation. Now they are not. It comes down to percentage of influence in each market. And the calculation includes all (what was once) major media (TV, Radio, Newspaper).



Stewart Vernon said:


> 3. Allowing a company to own OTA and SAT/Cable networks.


The prime example is the networks themselves but they have stuck with affiliation in most markets and ownership only in the top markets and a few others.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

At one time, if a news paper owned a TV station, it could only own one TV station in a market. Hence, WGN and Chicago Tribune; WPIX and New York Daily News. WFIL (now WPVI) and Philadelphia Inquirer, WBNS and The Columbus Dispatch. Are some examples of this. When the FCC lifted this rule, it laid the ground work for mess we have today.

The FCC and Congress are more responsible, as they loosened regulation. The same loose regulations which effectively wiped out virtually all local ownership of radio stations.

And, further, these lax regulations, and NAB lobbying, gave us retransmission consent, infomercials that can run any time of the day, infomercials themselves, and carriage fees.

And, like the airlines, lax regulation, and deregulation gave us less competition, and less companies owner more of the market.


----------



## dough_boy747 (Jun 18, 2004)

I don't worry about getting WGN back or not I never witch it at all.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I called Dish today and they are giving me a discount for my 5 channels lost.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

*DISH Asks Tribune to Agree to Binding, Baseball-Style Arbitration and End Blackout for DISH Customers; Touts Success of Free Over-The-Air Antenna Solution*


_Tribune blocked DISH customers from its 42 local channels, WGN America on Sunday_
_DISH proposes binding, baseball-style arbitration to reach a fair market-based deal and restore channels for the benefit of innocent consumers_
_DISH fulfills tens of thousands of free OTA antenna requests as part of overwhelmingly successful program_
ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- DISH Network L.L.C. has invited Tribune Broadcasting Company to enter into binding, baseball-style arbitration modeled on the successful arbitration procedures from the Comcast/NBCU merger to determine the fair market value of their channels. As part of the arbitration process, DISH has asked Tribune to restore its channels on DISH for the benefit of innocent consumers.
"We want to return these local stations to our customers immediately, and binding, baseball-style arbitration offers a path to reach a fair deal and to serve the best interests of our customers," said Warren Schlichting, DISH executive vice president of Programming. 
Tribune blacked out DISH customer access to 42 local channels in 33 markets early Sunday evening. 
DISH continues to distribute tens of thousands of free over-the-air antennas to customers blacked out by Tribune Broadcasting. The offer remains active and DISH continues to fulfill orders. 
"Our solution to offer free over-the-air antennas to impacted consumers has been tremendously successful, and provided consumers with a meaningful option to fight back against the unreasonable demands of broadcasters whose primary goal should be to serve the very consumers that they are using as pawns to gain negotiating leverage," said Warren Schlichting, DISH executive vice president of Programming. 
At issue is the renewal of a new multi-year carriage agreement between DISH and Tribune. Tribune has asked for significant rate increases in the face of declining overall viewership. 
In addition to asking for significant price increases for local channels, Tribune is attempting to "force bundle" an unrelated and low-performing cable channel, WGN America, with the media conglomerate's local broadcast stations. 
*About DISH*
DISH Network Corp. (NASDAQISH), through its subsidiaries, provides approximately 13.874 million pay-TV subscribers, as of March 31, 2016, with the highest-quality programming and technology with the most choices at the best value. DISH offers a high definition line-up with more than 200 national HD channels, the most international channels and award-winning HD and DVR technology. DISH Network Corporation is a Fortune 200 company. Visit www.dish.com.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

It seems to me that when a company like Tribune allows their channels to go dark they are seriously undercutting their negotiating leverage. First of all their ultimate argument is: "We're not getting enough money for our product". Well ok then you allow you channels to not be broadcast to over 13 million customers and during that period you are getting no money, so you're not getting enough money but you can afford to not be paid at all, huh? Especially when Dish offers to keep the channels on while negotiations go on and offers to retroactively pay at whatever level is ultimately agreed on. Plus of course the longer you're not available as an option to those 13 million customers they find other things to watch and start to realize that maybe your channels aren't so necessary. It seems to me whoever wrote the playbook for the channel owners needs to seriously revise it, maybe at one time the providers were so afraid of customer defections that they'd cave easier but that doesn't seem to be working any more. And most people have seen this happen enough times over multiple different providers that pretty much know it's all just BS in the name of "negotiations" where they're a pawn to be used.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

The longer this goes on, the worse it looks for Tribune, both image wise and money wise. The blackout did not affect me, directly, because I have an OTA antenna. So, I still get KWGN and KDVR. I do not get listings, but I have TitanTV for that. So, if i want to record something, I have to create a manual timer; not a big deal. I live about 50 miles from the transmitter, with hills and mesas in the way. So, I suspect anyone who has good line of sight can still get the blocked channels with a simple OTA antenna.

One other thing, some cable companies offer life lien services, that is just broadcast TV over cable fro like $10 a month.

So, this, in away, is not really working too well for Tribune, people can get their channels from multiple sources. For a company whose newspaper business is dying, and it having other financial problems, this is not going to help their bottom line.

And, WGN America was a bad idea and investment. It will be more so, when WGN Chicago goes independent in less than three months.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Tribune is the one who loses more. Anytime a channel is blacked out, the viewer will find other programming to watch often and even when the channel is returned, they have moved on to new shows. This constant blackout of channels is all about ego. If Dish does not go along with what X company wants, then we pull the channel(s). Of course they all want more money, who doesn't? But like others have said, this is a bad way to negotiate. We do have have a translator for Tribune out here, 32 Portland, their CE would love to have one out here, but according to him, Tribune is in the Midwest where they do not need translators, so in most cases they do not offer money to build them to their stations. There are a few exceptions, but not many. All of the main nets are available to us out here on the coast OTA, ABC,NBC,CBS,FOX, & PBS. But no CW 32. Which we would love to have offering us CE 32, as well as THIS & Antenna TV.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Take a look at:

http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?mktid=30

This lists all the TV stations and translators around Portland OR.

Channel 32 comes in on 33 (main channel), 5 and 15 (very low power).



mwdxer said:


> Tribune is the one who loses more. Anytime a channel is blacked out, the viewer will find other programming to watch often and even when the channel is returned, they have moved on to new shows. This constant blackout of channels is all about ego. If Dish does not go along with what X company wants, then we pull the channel(s). Of course they all want more money, who doesn't? But like others have said, this is a bad way to negotiate. We do have have a translator for Tribune out here, 32 Portland, their CE would love to have one out here, but according to him, Tribune is in the Midwest where they do not need translators, so in most cases they do not offer money to build them to their stations. There are a few exceptions, but not many. All of the main nets are available to us out here on the coast OTA, ABC,NBC,CBS,FOX, & PBS. But no CW 32. Which we would love to have offering us CE 32, as well as THIS & Antenna TV.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Tribune (32) was going to put on ch 19 out here, but no money available so it was never built. At that time to get 32 out here they had to bounce the signal from a repeater, half way. Now that a fiber line goes from Portland to Megler Mt., no need for the booster. So all Tribune would have to do is to add a lp translator. It would not cost a fortune. KOIN 6 (CBS) only runs an ERP of 638w and yet it covers well. I think the power of the translator is something like 40w, with a high gain antenna. I am 12.2 miles LOS and I get all 5 translators at 100%. They run from 538w to 5,000 watts ERP.All are located in the same area. It is nice after switching from analog to digital, we get all sub channels too. 15 OTA channels, which is really nice. One may have to change channels (34), if the FCC moves all channels above 29. Our line up is 17-NBC (KGW 8), 21-FOX (KPTV12), 23 PBS (KOPB10), 26-ABC(KATU2), and 34-CBS(KOIN6), all Portland. All translators are owned and operated by the TV stations.


----------



## mthhurley (Jan 11, 2008)

I need WGN back for one reason and one reason only....and likely Tribune knows this.
The smattering of Cubs games being missed.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

WGN Chicago (not WGN America) does not air the Cubs any more, the games are shown on a local RSN. They do show White Sox, Blackhawks and Bucks games. It was for that reason they are dropping the CW affiliation beginning 1 September.


mthhurley said:


> I need WGN back for one reason and one reason only....and likely Tribune knows this.
> The smattering of Cubs games being missed.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Right now with a Roku or computer, most of the network shows are available. Most local TV stations stream their news and weather, so with the internet we are covered, the ones that have it. Add to that local stations OTA. But the viewer that lives out in the rural areas may not the internet option.Hopefully the Feds will get involved and stop this continuing fight with TV stations wanted more money.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

*DISH: If Tribune Wants 'Fair Market Rates' It Should Be Willing to Arbitrate*


_Binding arbitration presents path to end Tribune's blackout immediately, and would ensure 'Fair Market Rates' for Tribune, says DISH_
_Arbitration proposal modeled after Comcast/NBCU consent decree_
ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- DISH Network L.L.C. responded to Tribune Broadcasting's rejection Thursday of a proposal to pursue an immediate, fair and binding solution to restore its blacked-out channels to DISH subscribers.
Tribune blacked out DISH customer access to 42 local channels in 33 markets early Sunday evening. 
The following statements can be attributed to Warren Schlichting, DISH executive vice president Programming: 
"Tribune claims that it is 'seeking nothing more than fair market rates for the value of [its] programming - the same market rates that DISH pays other local station groups, and the same market rates that [it gets] from other satellite, cable and telco partners.' 
"If Tribune is serious in its commitment to accept fair market rates, then there is no downside for them to immediately restore the Tribune channels on DISH while allowing a neutral third-party arbitrator to review DISH's agreements with other station groups, as well as the rates that Tribune receives from our pay-TV competitors and determine the fair market rates that Tribune desires on a basis that is binding upon DISH and Tribune. 
"This is especially true since DISH has offered to retroactively pay any new rates back to the date that the channels are restored to consumers." 
Among other reasons, DISH has suggested that the arbitration be modeled on the successful arbitration procedures in the Comcast/NBCU consent decree to ensure that there would not be an opportunity for Tribune or DISH to walk away from the decision of the arbitrator. 
Schlichting continued: 
"Regrettably, we can only interpret Tribune's unwillingness to participate in binding arbitration as an indication that it actually is angling for rates that are above fair market and that it wants to keep the Tribune channels off DISH as long as possible in order to continue to use innocent consumers as pawns to gain negotiating leverage against DISH." 
In the meantime, DISH continues to fight for customers by distributing tens of thousands of free over-the-air antennas to help impacted consumers regain access to the Tribune local broadcast stations. 
*About DISH*
DISH Network Corp. (NASDAQISH), through its subsidiaries, provides approximately 13.874 million pay-TV subscribers, as of March 31, 2016, with the highest-quality programming and technology with the most choices at the best value. DISH offers a high definition line-up with more than 200 national HD channels, the most international channels and award-winning HD and DVR technology. DISH Network Corporation is a Fortune 200 company. Visit www.dish.com.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

It seems that Dish really feels they have the high ground in this dispute based on their two press releases the last couple of days. You don't suggest arbitration, especially this aggressively, unless your pretty darn sure it's going to go your way.


----------



## retromzc (Sep 7, 2007)

nmetro said:


> WGN Chicago (not WGN America) does not air the Cubs any more, the games are shown on a local RSN. They do show White Sox, Blackhawks and Bucks games. It was for that reason they are dropping the CW affiliation beginning 1 September.


WGN 9 Chicago does air several Cubs games during the year along with WLS, WPWR and CSN Chicago.


----------



## JW7677 (Aug 15, 2011)

I don't think I've ever watched anything on WGN America since they stopped broadcasting local Chicago news. What I'm really missing right now is KTLA.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Something people are missing here is that it isn't greedy local stations asking for more and more money. The reason they keep asking more for money is because they have to PAY the networks to carry their content. The head of CBS estimated they'd be getting about $2/subscriber via the local stations by 2020. If that's true for all four major networks that means we'll all be paying $8 for our local stations.

Where I live that day is already here. I get Mediacom cable at home and have a $7.61 "local broadcast station" surcharge added to my bill! Now part of that may be because Mediacom is smaller than Dish or Directv and has less negotiating leverage, but maybe Dish and Directv customers are paying something like that but you just don't know because it isn't being broken out on your bill.

As for why the networks are being so greedy wanting $2 a head, that's easy. It is a combination of sports right fees (especially for football) driving up their costs, and all of us using DVRs to skip commercials driving down their advertising revenue.

Oh, and in case you're thinking maybe that $7.61 includes other stuff like RSNs, franchise fees, etc. think again. There's also a $2.37 RSN fee, a $4.31 franchise fee, and a 60 cent "local programming" fee that I guess covers the cost of producing the channels that show city council meetings etc. Plus sales taxes, of course. My expanded basic package is "only" $68.95/month, plus $1.99 for a cable card. All the rest of the nearly $91/month I pay is various fees and taxes. If it weren't for the huge oak trees in my yard making satellite impossible, I would have dumped them long ago, or at least played the switching game so I could get a better deal.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

I read on a blog, on the WGN site (going independent 1 September), that was not the case. They implied they were only on CSN Chicago. Of course the independence announce mentioned that the CW cause sport telecasts, on WGN 9 to be sent to KPWR and I think it was WCIU, but not sure.

Funny, how Tribune picked this year, when the Cubs are in first place, leading all of baseball with the best record, to pull this stunt.

Tribune needs to rename WGN America to something else, because it gets really confusing know if a person is talking about WGN 9 "Chicago's Very Own" or WGN America.



retromzc said:


> WGN 9 Chicago does air several Cubs games during the year along with WLS, WPWR and CSN Chicago.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

nmetro said:


> Funny, how Tribune picked this year, when the Cubs are in first place, leading all of baseball with the best record, to pull this stunt.


Now is when the contract expired ... and it works out that they have content to leverage. If it was an obviously losing year they couldn't use the Cubs for leverage.



nmetro said:


> Tribune needs to rename WGN America to something else, because it gets really confusing know if a person is talking about WGN 9 "Chicago's Very Own" or WGN America.


WGN9 works for the local (and is what DISH used in the EPG listing). Only one market gets WGN9 anyways ... most of the country sees WGN America as the only WGN. (Cable viewers may get WGN9 out of market as a "significantly viewed" channel. OTA reception varies.)


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

Sigh. I really, really wish Congress would step in and make hard and fast laws on networks (talking about the local networks here - local ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, PBS) and the cost to carry, to avoid these blackouts and game playing with us, the viewers, being held hostage.

That said, I have been considering moving back to Dish in August when my Directv contract runs out; however, even though both have their disputes (and I've been a subber to either Directv or Dish since 1995) Dish seems to have a lot more than Directv. And when they do let channels go black, they do it for a much longer time on average than Directv does. Yeah, I wouldn't want to let Tribune force me to carry WGN at some higher rate, but at the same time Tribune has worked out deals without blackouts for all the cables and Directv.

At the end of the day, I just want to watch TV. The rates keep going up no matter how many of these battles. I want my carrier to figure out how to keep the channels on - the last thing I want is my provider to send me an OTA (where I live, an OTA is not very effective) and tell me to get the channels that way. If I'm going to have to do that, I'll just drop you as a provider and figure out how to get everything I want without you as a provider - cutting the cord is doable, but I sub for the convenience of not having to.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

This happens in other businesses too.. it just isn't as politicized as it is with TV. Ever notice how sometimes products disappear from the grocery store shelf? OR they are there, but are harder to find than they used to be? Some grocery stores lease/rent out shelf space to companies for their products... and if the lease terms aren't favorable the next time around, you'll notice product shift to a different part of the store OR sometimes disappear entirely.

But when Coke loses the premium shelf at Target, you don't see Coke ads that say "Go to Wal-Mart and buy your Coke there because Target doesn't want Coke on the top shelf..."


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

tsmacro said:


> It seems that Dish really feels they have the high ground in this dispute based on their two press releases the last couple of days. You don't suggest arbitration, especially this aggressively, unless your pretty darn sure it's going to go your way.


I think they don't want arbitration but know no one will ever agree to it so they can claim they want it and look better to the public. No way dish or anyone else wants to set that precedent.

With that said I do think dish should never cave on this and hold out for lower rates...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> I think they don't want arbitration but know no one will ever agree to it so they can claim they want it and look better to the public. No way dish or anyone else wants to set that precedent.
> 
> With that said I do think dish should never cave on this and hold out for lower rates...


They already set that precedent, though, with at least one company that had arbitration as part of their contract.

Also, it's dangerous to ask for something you don't want hoping that the other side doesn't want it either... Charlie might be a poker player, but you don't bluff when you aren't willing to come to the table for the consequences of having your bluff called.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

He might be willing to if he has to but prefers and expects it won't happen and can win a or game that IMHO he had already won anyway. Maybe he is after the or game from the FCC standpoint....


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

In case you were wondering where things stand:

https://consumerist.com/2016/06/23/dish-network-sues-tribune-broadcasting-over-dump-dish-campaign/

Looks like this is going to take a while.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I can see this extending till September easily...


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

An easy way to fix this is for Tribune to just stream their channels to the viewer or translators to offer free OTA (I was told Tribune doesn't believe in translators), or for Dish to be able to offer another out of market network station to the viewer. But of course none of those options would not be allowed. So again the viewer is the loser here.


----------



## neilo (Aug 7, 2006)

Just the CW from DC not appearing on my Dish lineup right now. It is not really a loss until the fall season starts, then I'll have to look for it elsewhere - perhaps online. I could have sworn we had a Tribute dispute recently. 

One of the arguments about these increasing rates is all these sports auctions. I am really sick and tired of reading articles about them that only point out how much money the "network is spending" and the sport is getting. Of course the network is always spending money they don't really have - money that they are going to turn around and demand from the public one way or another. 

There is the upcoming NBA deal that is going to bring "so much" money to the NBA that they can raise their salary caps. Then, ticket prices for games will go up and cable and satellite fees will also go up even more.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Too much $$$ for sports


----------



## dennispap (Feb 1, 2007)

I see guide data added to the Tribune stations, so hopefully they will be back soon,


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

All of the "LOCAL" channels seem to be gone ... and not replaced with the real channels.

The EPG channels are coming from EPG only channels ... not feeds with Audio/Video.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

As of this moment, KWGN and KDVR, are still not live. My guess they are waiting to turn them on before prime time. Looks like, based upon the up links report this dispute is over.


----------



## bmetelsky (Mar 1, 2009)

nmetro said:


> As of this moment, KWGN and KDVR, are still not live. My guess they are waiting to turn them on before prime time. Looks like, based upon the up links report this dispute is over.


If it is, it didn't last very long. :righton:


----------



## dennispap (Feb 1, 2007)

Yes the correct guide data is showing up on my OTA Tribune stations. I have a feeling that means the stations ARENT coming back soon but at least you can set your DVR's easier. Hope im wrong though.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Putting up independent EPG channels is NOT a positive sign.

I see DISH providing antennas and now EPG to make their receivers work better with those antennas and pulling the "LOCAL" dispute channels as a sign that negotiations are over and Tribune stations are done.

(The DISH video is still playing on the Superstation channels.)


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Denver update, no EPG information and video si still running on KWGN and KDVR. Though, the uplink report did show updates fro KDVR.


----------



## comizzou573 (Aug 6, 2007)

The channels are still showing for me in the 8000 range, and on 232 and 233. It is not working like you said, it just shows the video dish has created talking about the dispute. I am curious for this dispute, what it means for those of us who subscribe to distant network superstation. Would they go away? If this is the case, I am definitely making a hop over to directv.


----------



## EdJ (Jan 9, 2007)

This is a fight that DISH has a hard time coming out ahead. If they submit to outrageous carry charges from the stations, everyone complains loudly that the monthly DISH bill increases are TOO MUCH... If they fight these stations and drop the stations until they lower their charges, people complain that they are dropping DISH and going to DirecTV...

As far as I am concerned, DROP the stations and fight the greedy money leaching stations....

In my area, Tribune is causing the CBS station to be dropped. Even Time Warner cable is getting into the fight now. TW dropped the local Tribune CBS station and put on a CBS station in another city. I assume that Tribune is trying to raise the carry charges on the cable companies also.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

comizzou573 said:


> I am curious for this dispute, what it means for those of us who subscribe to distant network superstation. Would they go away? If this is the case, I am definitely making a hop over to directv.


The superstations are confusing. Under the law that allows distants and superstations, these stations cab be delivered outside of their home market without the permission of the station. Payment is via a statutory rate that is set by the copyright office and claimed on by any copyright holder involved.

DISH would need to be careful and not deliver the superstations in their own market ... but they should not need permission to transmit them to the rest of the country. I suspect DISH pulled them out of abundance of caution - just to make sure they did not accidentally deliver them in market.

As far as their return ... they should not be a grandfathered service. DISH should be able to restore them. But with them no longer being sold (a decision made by DISH) they may not survive the dispute. Another calculated business decision.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Just curious, if you had the Super Station Pack, dropped DISH, and came back. Is someone grandfathered under those circumstances?

Also, to EdJ, iunless something changed, for the two years I was with DirecTV, they did not offer a Susperstation pack.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

It took a reset of my Carbon UI based Hopper with Sling, now the KWGN and KDVR EPG is showing up on the OTA feeds.

The new BET/MTV channels, announced yesterday, are still not showing up in the EPG.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

nmetro said:


> Just curious, if you had the Super Station Pack, dropped DISH, and came back. Is someone grandfathered under those circumstances?


Once dropped gone forever. Even if you stay with DISH.



nmetro said:


> The new BET/MTV channels, announced yesterday, are still not showing up in the EPG.


It is one of those "available" to someone statuses. DISH has changed the authorizations on the channels from the code normally used for "test" channels to another code. Receivers authorized to view that code can see that channel ... but apparently those receivers are not in the hands of mere mortals. (The authorization code assigned to all of the new viacoms and FR24EN's new feed is also not in the range normally used for "Available (Limited)" testing - which is usually used for local stations before they are released.)


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Yes, that is why I would never drop the Supers, even when I only get two of them at the moment with the dispute. . However, call Dish and ask for a discount. I did, and they and gave me $15 a month off for 6 months. I also lost two Tribune locals, so a total of 5 stations. Once the Supers are gone from Dish, there will not be anyway to get them off a US cable or satellite service. No one else carries them that I know of. Several are carried in Canada, you have to have a Canadian addy and phone number to be able to subscribe to them via their services and the person would have to have their satellite receivers and antennas. I checked around a while back, thinking if Dish ever dropped them, how can I get them. Not easy from the US. Once they are gone, they are gone. I doubt any other carrier will pick them up either. The closest thing you can get is to stream the channels news, like KTLA's. I have done that to see if it would work, and it does, but nothing else. Too many licensing rules to get out of market TV stations even streaming, except in rare occasions. Maybe that will change in the future, but who knows? But keep your Supers. You cannot get them back, once you have dropped them.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

dennispap said:


> I see guide data added to the Tribune stations, so hopefully they will be back soon,


I saw that last night for WJW. I bet this dispute is heading for a long-haul. While I'm fine since WJW's tower is only .8 of a mile from here, those in the far reaches of the DMA are not so lucky.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

I chatted to get a credit for the missing channels. They agreed to give me a $5 monthly credit for 6 months. Then Thursday a package shows up on my door, it was an indoor TV antenna.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Here, their offer for the antenna would not do me much good. I already have a high gain yagi, and the missing channels do not have translators here, so unless I was to change carriers, like Direct or Charter, I will not get them. But the ones I miss more are the Super stations. At least I can stream the KTLA & WPIX News.


----------



## AlecWest (Jul 5, 2016)

I just checked the Seattle Seahawks 2016 schedule. And most games will be broadcast in my area on DISH channel 13 (KCPQ) ... one of the channels dropped by DISH. Now, I'm personally not a football "fanatic." But I know those who are. And I'm curious whether the DISH vs. TRIBUNE dispute has also spilled over to DirecTV as well. If not, DISH might see some "defections" before the pre-season starts next month. And, the defections may not all be to DirecTV, either. I live in an area not serviced by cable. So, like it or not, satellite is the only way to get TV. But the Centralia/Chehalis area in Washington state is serviced by Comcast cable. And from what I understand, KCPQ (13), KMNT (22), and even NWCN are carried by Comcast.

I imagine most people will look at it this way. No one cuts a check to a TV station - whether it's for broadcast or non-broadcast. Checks are cut to either cable or satellite providers. And I think subscribers are getting awfully weary of the "HE SAID - SHE SAID" disputes that have taken away their favorite channels ... and are more concerned with who they should cut their check to in order to get the programming they want. Indoor antennas??? I think most people would consider that an insult since they're paying for service they're not getting.

P.S. Hehe, indoor antennas are also a bit dangerous. A few people might see what there is for free over-the-air ... and just "cut the cord" with their cable and/or satellite providers. I'd like to do that. But sadly, I live in a "rural" area surrounded by hills (sigh).


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

The bottom line for most average subscribers is they don't really care about the "why" of these disputes, they just know they pay a big bill to watch TV and if they can't watch their local networks they feel they aren't getting what they pay for. They don't read forums like this or scour the internet for info. They just want to watch TV. They see their bill go up every year anyway. In fact, my guess is most subscribers would rather see their bill go up, say, $2 and watch the channels they watch than their bill not go up $2 and lose channels.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I wonder how high the bill would be if cable and satellite providers gave in to every channel's demand?

There has to be a limit.


----------



## Blowgun (May 23, 2008)

fudpucker said:


> In fact, my guess is most subscribers would rather see their bill go up, say, $2 and watch the channels they watch than their bill not go up $2 and lose channels.


And, there's part of the problem. When these types of disputes happen I don't care if the channel goes away. What I do care about is my bill going up yet again.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

It is like everything else. People want the programming, so we pay for it. The programmers dictate to Dish what channels will be in the package I wish we could buy more tailored packages, ones without the Sports channels. That would lower our bills a lot. The people that wanted sports, then could get them in a separate package. A big chunk of our cost comes from channels like ESPN. My only way to get around sports channels, would be to buy the Welcome Pack and add some movie packs, but I would lose a lot of other great channels. So if we want the majority of what we have, we are stuck to pay for sports and other channels we may not want. Pricing goes up like with everything. Friends in Canada that have Shaw satellite, they get I think one of or two basic sports channels in their opening pack, and then they can add smaller packs of programming, like 6-7 channels. There are sports packs, along with other cable channel packs, so the viewer can sub to a good amount of channels without paying for sports and other channels they do not want.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

fudpucker said:


> The bottom line for most average subscribers is they don't really care about the "why" of these disputes, they just know they pay a big bill to watch TV and if they can't watch their local networks they feel they aren't getting what they pay for. They don't read forums like this or scour the internet for info. They just want to watch TV. They see their bill go up every year anyway. In fact, my guess is most subscribers would rather see their bill go up, say, $2 and watch the channels they watch than their bill not go up $2 and lose channels.


Bills already go up somewhere around $2 because just like for everyone costs go up to DISH even with trying to hold the line on programming costs. So you mean you are willing to pay $4 or $5 every year or two more for them to just pay what is asked.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

We all have a choice. If our bill is too high, we can move to a smaller package or switch to Direct or Cable. As consumers many of us want more choices. That costs money. Grocery prices sure are not cheap these days, so why should anything else be. My mother who died in 1987, would be shocked by what we pay these days.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Local channels are in the smallest package. You can subscribe to a package without ESPN easier than you can subscribe to a package without locals.

Changing to another carrier just lines you up to pay higher prices or lose the same channels when their turn at the negotiation table comes up. It is a lose lose game.


----------



## neilo (Aug 7, 2006)

Well, the CW just signed an exclusive streaming deal with Netflix to show their shows 8 days after the season finale. So, for all those Tribune CW channels if you want to wait to the end of the season and then binge, you have an opportunity.


----------



## AlecWest (Jul 5, 2016)

I don't really think DISH is at fault. But I don't think that Tribune Broadcasting is at fault, either. I think they're both trying to get away with as much as they can because the FCC didn't "mandate" a-la-carte programming (remember the promises???). Cable and satellite providers prefer "bundles" and "packages." They want you to pay a flat-fee for the stations *they* want you to watch ... as chosen by bundle or package.

I'm just shy of 66 years old and have the "basic" DISH service (no premium channels). But out of all the channels in that basic package, I only watch about 8 of those channels. Three of those channels - NWCN (formerly channel 2), KCPQ (13), and KMNT (aka KZJO, 22) - have been dropped by DISH. I tend not to watch channels that air infomercials as valid programming. I tend not to watch channels where a good percentage of their programming consists of so-called "reality" shows ... especially shows that appeal to those with a 3rd-grade education ("Duck Dynasty," "Party Down South," "Sister Wives," "Honey.Boo.Boo," etc., etc., ad nauseum). And I never watch the Jesus channels. Why should I pay for a whole slew of channels I never watch?

No channel should have to be "dropped." In an a-la-carte choice system where people pick just the channels they want to watch, it would be a simple matter to pass on station-based increases to the customer ... who would see it on their bill and decide whether or not to keep watching it. The technology already exists to do this. Every cable box and satellite smart-card is programmable to block out some stations and allow others. Cable and satellite providers should be "forced" to give people a list of all the channels they carry - with a monthly charge next to each channel. Sure, they could still offer bundles or packages to people who "really" want them. Who knows, some people might actually like bundles and packages. But I don't.

So, basically what I'm saying is that the FCC is to blame for this DISH vs. TRIBUNE mess. Or maybe "blame" is too strong a word. Think of DISH and TRIBUNE as being competing bank robbers (with customer wallets being their target "banks") ... and the FCC as the people who look the other way and, by doing so, end up being no better than the drivers of their getaway cars.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I agree pretty much with you as Ala Carte would be nice as the prices would fit what the programmer is selling them for plus a bit of a mark up from Dish/Direct/Cable. Let's say the Tribune station is $1 and they want $1.25 for it, then we can decide if we want to pay the extra quarter. Tribune would soon get the idea that the subscriber would or would not pay the extra. The channels also would not be dropped with a dispute as there would be no dispute. The subscriber would decide if they wanted the channel or not. Dish/Direct/Cable would just be the middle man carrier. Great idea, but I doubt we would ever get that. The FCC is a money making machine and I doubt cares little about the viewer these days. Why else would they sell off everything above channel 29 to the cel phone industry? There are still about 20% that watch OTA TV and they do count. The FCC feels we can just stream what we want, but many do not have high speed, so what are they supposed to do? ATSC 3.0 is being introduced to more stacking can be done and still have good pq OTA, but again it will cost the TV industry as well as the consumer more money as they will have to get new TVs or converter boxes, as the current ones will not work at 3.0. But what we the consumer wants and what we will get are two different things. The programmer wants to sell all of their channels, so they are offered in a package along with the not too popular ones. Otherwise a programmer would never sell some channels. They own the programming so they have the final say. At least at this time. I doubt the Feds will change much as it all comes down to free enterprise. We have the choice to chose what carrier we want. I know people that switch back and forth from Dish, Direct, & Cable. They stay with them for a couple years until their contract runs out and then another carrier will offer them a better deal for a year, so it is back and forth. that would be nuts. I have had Dish for over 17 years and I like their line up. True, I do not like the disputes, but all carriers have them and as noted, jumping skip doesn't solve the problem as Direct has dropped a lot of channels through the years and has not gotten them back.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

AlecWest said:


> I don't really think DISH is at fault. But I don't think that Tribune Broadcasting is at fault, either. I think they're both trying to get away with as much as they can because the FCC didn't "mandate" a-la-carte programming (remember the promises???). Cable and satellite providers prefer "bundles" and "packages." They want you to pay a flat-fee for the stations *they* want you to watch ... as chosen by bundle or package.
> 
> I'm just shy of 66 years old and have the "basic" DISH service (no premium channels). But out of all the channels in that basic package, I only watch about 8 of those channels. Three of those channels - NWCN (formerly channel 2), KCPQ (13), and KMNT (aka KZJO, 22) - have been dropped by DISH. I tend not to watch channels that air infomercials as valid programming. I tend not to watch channels where a good percentage of their programming consists of so-called "reality" shows ... especially shows that appeal to those with a 3rd-grade education ("Duck Dynasty," "Party Down South," "Sister Wives," "Honey.Boo.Boo," etc., etc., ad nauseum). And I never watch the Jesus channels. Why should I pay for a whole slew of channels I never watch?
> 
> ...


with an a la crate price structure most of the less watch channel would go extinct and the ones that do survive will cost a lot more. and by the way, Jesus pay to be watched.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

As a former Dish customer that has "cut the cable" let me add that it is easier than you think. There are significant benefits such as no commercials and being able to binge watch in the case of Netflix. And of course, a substantial cost saving. The best way to "complain" about the Dish prices is to walk.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

nmetro said:


> And, WGN America was a bad idea and investment. It will be more so, when WGN Chicago goes independent in less than three months.


So WGN is going independent, huh? I wonder if it's possible for them to negotiate their own deal to be added as their own, independent, standalone channel to DirecTV's lineup. That way, the tens of thousands of Illinoisans and Chicagoans who fled that economic hell hole can still watch their beloved sports teams or Weather God Tom Skilling of WGN News. I know I'd pay extra for it.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

Lord Vader said:


> So WGN is going independent, huh? I wonder if it's possible for them to negotiate their own deal to be added as their own, independent, standalone channel to DirecTV's lineup. That way, the tens of thousands of Illinoisans and Chicagoans who fled that economic hell hole can still watch their beloved sports teams or Weather God Tom Skilling of WGN News. I know I'd pay extra for it.


Get bell or shaw to get that in parts of the usa.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

AlecWest said:


> No channel should have to be "dropped." In an a-la-carte choice system where people pick just the channels they want to watch, it would be a simple matter to pass on station-based increases to the customer ... who would see it on their bill and decide whether or not to keep watching it.


Simply stated ... but there needs to be an understanding that many programmers would close their channels or fill with even cheaper programming if they lost subscribers due to an a la carte structure. (So more of the stuff that you listed as stuff you didn't like.)

One could have the "so let the channels die" attitude ... which works until one of the channels that dies is one of your favorites. (If all of your favorites are over the air you already have a la carte - within the capabilities of your antenna and TV.)

Simple math: Some channels being distributed to 80 or 100 million homes for 10c or 25c per home. But their viewership is not 80 million homes. Give people the choice to save money by not having several of those channels and the distributors would need to charge $1 or $2.50 per home ... or more if the larger cost cared off more potential viewers. Or cut costs on programming. Likely both.

The economy of scale ... being able to reach 80-100 million homes for 25c per month.. Perhaps getting one hour of viewership in each home per week. At least having the potential to reach those subscribers if they added new and innovative programming. That is what makes the package plans work.

The FCC has some influence ... in the name of fairness they (by Congressional mandate) all local channels must be offered carriage. If a station refuses to be carried for the price that is within the law, but cable and satellite cannot sell a local station to some customers and not to others within the home market. There are also the "public interest" channels that are required to be carried ... with the channels paying the base cost of transmission instead of being paid (on satellite most of the paying channels are religious - they must be non-commercial and most successful non-commercial feeds are religious).

But selling channels in packages and tiers is a market driven decision. Congess coud interfere with the marketplace and require a la carte but it will not lower bills and will lead to channels going away. Not a good thing.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

Except for the Denver and LA Superstations I can't say we've missed anything during this outage and Chicago stations are our locals. WGN doesn't offer much we would watch and we never watched WGN America. Tribune management take note -- you are not bargaining from a position of strength. But then Tribune management hasn't been making great decisions in any of their businesses lately. For that reason, I don't expect a settlement any time soon. I'm with DISH on this one. I'll accept reasonable increases as normal inflation but some carriers think their programming is gold when it is no better than anyone else's. Or in Tribune's case not even as good an everyone else's.


----------



## AlecWest (Jul 5, 2016)

Just one thing to clarify my situation. I live in a rural area not served by cable. If I want to watch television, satellite is my only option. Because my rural area is surrounded by hills, digital OTA television via antennas are not an option. Also, in my rural area, my only Internet option is CenturyLink DSL. And because the speeds I get are terrible, streaming isn't an option either.

P.S. Just a curiosity question for this forum's operators. How much money do you earn from VigLink? When you look through this forum and see words underlined in blue, it's an "advertising link" provided by VigLink. Not that I mind (grin). Free television broadcasters are advertiser supported. So, it makes sense that free message boards should be advertiser supported, too.


----------



## Link (Feb 2, 2004)

I take it Dish hasn't seen a demand for WGN America since the channel went off, so Tribune using it to bargain with didn't work...Tribune should restore their local channels and forget more money for WGN America. Tribune is lucky if Dish would even be willing to pay the same amount for it since nothing on it is any good anymore since they took off their Chicago local news broadcasts.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

Tribune has been using their local stations to pimp, I mean promote WGN America's original programming (such as "Salem"). They ran "news stories" on WJW FOX 8 news about the series, encouraging people to tune into WGN America. The problem here is all these original shows aired at the same time as FOX 8's 10 PM Newscast! They did run a few episodes after the news on FOX 8 to try and get people interested in these shows.

Now Tribune resorted to the "Dishgusting" campaign. It's Tribune, not Dish that's disgusting!


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

I'm actually having KTLA withdrawal; luckily they stream the Morning News in HD on their website, so that's been a viable alternative.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Yes, I cast the KTLA 10PM News in HD via Chromecast to the TV. It works very well. Thank goodness for the internet.


----------



## medziatkowicz31 (Dec 16, 2012)

Lord Vader said:


> So WGN is going independent, huh? I wonder if it's possible for them to negotiate their own deal to be added as their own, independent, standalone channel to DirecTV's lineup. That way, the tens of thousands of Illinoisans and Chicagoans who fled that economic hell hole can still watch their beloved sports teams or Weather God Tom Skilling of WGN News. I know I'd pay extra for it.


You can watch it on wgntv.com online and I'm sure they have an app for apple and android.


----------



## satcrazy (Mar 16, 2011)

fudpucker said:


> The bottom line for most average subscribers is they don't really care about the "why" of these disputes, they just know they pay a big bill to watch TV and if they can't watch their local networks they feel they aren't getting what they pay for. They don't read forums like this or scour the internet for info. They just want to watch TV. They see their bill go up every year anyway. In fact, my guess is most subscribers would rather see their bill go up, say, $2 and watch the channels they watch than their bill not go up $2 and lose channels.


I'd be willing to bet most subs not into "sports" would rather not pay for any of those channels they do not watch.

Sports need to be a separate package. Yeah, I know. Never happen.

Would love to have a base package with music and adult movies as the theme. [ minus ESPN ] I guess Netflix is still your best bet.


----------



## satcrazy (Mar 16, 2011)

mwdxer said:


> It is like everything else. People want the programming, so we pay for it. The programmers dictate to Dish what channels will be in the package I wish we could buy more tailored packages, ones without the Sports channels. That would lower our bills a lot. The people that wanted sports, then could get them in a separate package. A big chunk of our cost comes from channels like ESPN. My only way to get around sports channels, would be to buy the Welcome Pack and add some movie packs, but I would lose a lot of other great channels. So if we want the majority of what we have, we are stuck to pay for sports and other channels we may not want. Pricing goes up like with everything. Friends in Canada that have Shaw satellite, they get I think one of or two basic sports channels in their opening pack, and then they can add smaller packs of programming, like 6-7 channels. There are sports packs, along with other cable channel packs, so the viewer can sub to a good amount of channels without paying for sports and other channels they do not want.


If "Shaw" Sat can do it, why can't Dish? [ sell small chunks of channels]


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

medziatkowicz31 said:


> You can watch it on wgntv.com online and I'm sure they have an app for apple and android.


That's nowhere near the same as watching it on TV. I hardly ever watch TV shows on a phone, and rarely on my iPad.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

satcrazy said:


> If "Shaw" Sat can do it, why can't Dish? [ sell small chunks of channels]


DISH can ... they just have to convince the content providers to let them do it without losing access to that content completely. The market in the United States is still package based. It is beginning to change ... but there is a risk to being the first provider without a major channel or with much higher prices due to content providers who are fighting for their lives to remain sold in a package based environment.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

The Canadians have a different set of rules too. They rarely drop a channel or have disputes. They are paid differently. I wish we had a system like that here. It is much more stable. Some Americans have Shaw down here, but the subscriber has have access to a Canadian addy and phone number. Some Americans do have homes in Canada as well as relatives or friends. I don't know of anyone that installs the Canadian dishes & receivers in the states, so in most cases the person has to do it themselves. Also Shaw or the retailer do not ship to the states, so if a person would want Shaw, they would have to physically go across the border, purchase the equipment and bring it back or have a friend or relative ship it to them. They do bill via a credit card, but there are a lot of hoops to jump through to get Shaw in the U.S. Once you have it, you are on your own as Shaw does not make service calls. I believe the receivers as well as the dishes are purchased and not leased. I have a customer on the Oregon Coast that lives in Victoria and has a house here. They have Shaw being Canadians, but had to set up their own system.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I like having the Chromecast stick as I can "cast" anything I can browse on Chrome to the TV. I get KTLA's news in HD that way. It looks pretty sharp. I could never watch TV on a computer or phone. But casting works very good in HD.


----------



## AlecWest (Jul 5, 2016)

This dispute is going to play out in a manner both parties will agree to - regardless of how DISH customers feel about things. So, I suppose there no sense in discussing it anymore. But before I go, I just wanted to leave a "personal experience" behind in regards to "cutting the cord." This would apply to DISH customers or customers of any other subscription service.

A few years ago I was a subscriber to Vonage. But issues with them left me wanting to move to another VOIP provider. When I signed up with them, their contract said I had to remain with them for one year or suffer an early cancellation fee. After the year, however, I could leave with no issue. I’d been with them for 18 months. In addition, I’d “bought” their VOIP box that connected to my router – to avoid the monthly rental charges.

Problem? I don’t trust too many “subscription” services. They always seem to “equivocate” on matters when you try to leave. Subscription fees were charged to one of my credit cards. So, a month before my chosen time to quit, I waited until that charge came through. Then, I contacted the credit card issuer telling them I’d “lost” the card. They immediately blocked the card and sent me a new one. At that time, I followed Vonage’s terms of service and submitted the appropriate notice of cancellation.

The next month shortly after I dumped Vonage, I got a notice from them telling me my credit card denied their monthly charge – asking me to update my credit card info. I reminded them of my cancellation. Then they told me I was subject to an early cancellation fee and that I had to return the VOIP box. I reminded them that my 12-month contract was satisfied 6 months earlier and gave them proof I'd bought the VOIP box and, therefore, had nothing to return to them.

This went back-and-forth for about a week – with them continuing to ask me to update my credit card info. So, I sent them a rather long letter with proof I owed them nothing – along with a threat to file formal complaints with the Better Business Bureau and my state’s consumer protection people if they didn't stop hassling me. Finally, they relented.

Moral of the story? The person who has the money in their pocket is always in a position of strength when a financial dispute like this comes up. So, make sure they have no access to your money BEFORE you leave a subscription service.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

The thing that both Tribune and Dish knows is that Dish will have to eventually pay for the local networks that Tribune offers. They simply can't be the provider that doesn't provide locals in those areas, as they would lose a huge number of subscribers in those areas, plus they would probably not get many new subscribers in those area. Heck, I was a Directv subscriber for 15 years straight back in 2009, when I moved to a new city and I switched to Dish at that time because Directv didn't have the local networks in HD. They HAD them, but not in HD (at that time) and so we switched. When I talked directly to a couple of Directv reps at the time, they told me they were working hard to get the local networks in HD, and the one rep just flat out said they were bleeding customers to Dish and cable who had started broadcasting the local networks in HD "which is why getting the deal done to carry all of them in HD is a top priority." So - Directv was "bleeding customers" when they actually CARRIED the local networks, just not in HD. Imagine what it would have been like had they not carried them at all.

There's a reason Dish was sending out OTA antennas. They know the average subscriber expects local ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox channels.

Tribune is known for its nasty fights with providers. Dish and Tribune are both multibilliion dollar companies, neither wants to give up any profits. My opinion is that the FCC should not allow any one individual/company to own numerous locals - Tribune owns 43 local TV stations, in addition to the nationals they own. But that genie can't be pushed back into the bottle.

I've had a bad taste in my mouth for the owner of Dish back from the AMC battles, but in this case, without knowing the actual details of the negotiations (and without knowing that, we can only speculate) I'd suspect Tribune is being the ass because they have that reputation.

While I feel bad for the Dish subbers who no longer have their locals, I wish this would go on and on so that it forced the FTC to step in and set some new rules. There really needs to be a different set of rules for local networks in terms of pricing for retransmission. Some kind of index, for example, that says OK, this is the index that determines what the local networks can get, and there is no dispute from either side. And it is the same for everyone (cable, satellite, etc.)


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

fudpucker said:


> There really needs to be a different set of rules for local networks in terms of pricing for retransmission. Some kind of index, for example, that says OK, this is the index that determines what the local networks can get, and there is no dispute from either side. And it is the same for everyone (cable, satellite, etc.)


The Supreme Court could have fixed this a long time ago by not granting copyright protection to unedited retransmissions. But they decided otherwise and granted "protection". Congress stepped in and "fixed" the problem by creating a set of guidelines that would allow retransmission ... either with permission (for locals) or without permission (for distant network stations where no local was received).

Distants have been operating under a statutory license. The rate is set by the Copyright Office and anyone with a copyright claim to the rebroadcast can make a claim against the fund. No negotiation between carriers and stations needed.

Locals do not have a statutory rate ... a station can choose to say no to rebroadcast and charge whatever they can negotiate. Which wasn't too bad when stations would negotiate for pennies and dimes per subscriber ... but the fees have risen and there seems to be no end in site.

Which is why I believe locals should go on a statutory rate. ALL locals, not just the popular ones that hold the carriers hostage. After all - if the whole concept of allowing stations to charge is based in copyright shouldn't the copyright for ALL stations be honored? End all negotiations and move to a statutory rate.

Maybe that will happen some day ... but it will not be easy with the broadcasters lobbying against it. They want their negotiated rates and leverage to charge more and will not be giving that up easily.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Of course, the FCC, holds all the licenses and commercial television stations are owed in the public trust. That is the government, and public, own the TV stations, but not its content. The TV stations could go the th CBS On Demand model charging people $.5.99 a month (this fall to see the new "Start Trek", for example), and place lesser programming on OTA. Of course, they will not only charge for content, but air commercials. Would people pay $6 per commercial TV station (networks), for something that has been "free:" since the 1940s?

Growing up in the days when cable TV was to to extend the range of TV stations, because one lived too far from the transmitter or interference of buildings affected reception. We paid $10 a month to get the new York City channels, and a couple from Connecticut, for signal quality. A whopping 11 channels, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 13 (NYC), 3, 8, 49 (CT) and 21 (Long Island). In those days, the stations wanted on cable. 13, 21 and 49 were NET (now PBS and had to be carried). Eventually 49, was replaced with 30 (CT). This meant two CBS (2, 3), two NBC (4, 30) and two ABC (7, 8).

Of course, in the 1960s, most stations were locally owned, or owned by small companies (11 New York, ironically was owned by Tribune, which had less then 10 stations across the country). Because of more "local" control, it fit that the stations wanted to extend their reach.

Over the year much of that local control is gone. Now, most of the TV stations, like radio, are owned by very few media companies. In the world of TV, today, broadcast and cable TV stations are treated the same, revenue wise. So, in essence, now these companies expect the same amount per subscriber for broadcast TV, as they do fro a cable channel. Never the mind, that programming per hour has declined from about 54 minutes per hour in 1965, to 40 minutes today. And, never the mind, that informercials occupy much of late night and weekend programming on commercial TV, and late night on most cable channels. Compared to the "golden age of cable" 1980s and early 1990s, to today, the variety and content has gotten very limited, full of so called "reality shows", and reruns mostly since the late 1990s forward.

So, the media giants, like Tribune, are cutting their own throats. People have gotten sick of sitting through commercials, with limited content. TV antenna technology is much better than it was 50 years ago. I get OTA here, fro the normal powered stations 40 miles away, this being in an area with a lot of hills, and mesas. Thanks to Amazon Prime, I can get access to other programming. I now have a number of sub-channels that actually offer more content than many cable channels. I keep satellite today, for live sports and news. And channels like TCM.

Media companies are run by people who use a model that was developed in the 1940s; it has not worked for the past 20 years. And, this dispute, among other things, are driving viewers to streaming. One this country can provide many urban and suburban areas with true high speed network access, cable/satellite TV will go the way of black and white, tube based, TV. And the broadcasters? They will either have to change their model, and the concept of their audience, or they will also become insignificant.

Finally, CBS's plan of charging people fro the new "Star Trek" series, may be too early for it to succeed properly. Like "WGN America", why pay extra, fro a channel, for what amounts to is one program? If CBS moves all their programming to that model, the other networks will gain at their expense. Finally, while most people do not realize they pay for their locals over cable or satellite, they will not be willing to pay for something they can get OTA.

Corporate greed and mergers have made TV even more a of great wasteland, than when Ralph Nader said that many years ago.


----------



## AlecWest (Jul 5, 2016)

This is neither here nor there. But I've always wondered why free OTA stations charge *anything* for cable/satellite providers to rebroadcast their stations. Except for PBS and other "public" stations, free OTA stations are advertiser-supported. Because cable/satellite gives these stations access to a broader marketplace, it would allow the stations to ask advertisers for more money (more viewers = more advertising exposure). To me, it would make much more sense if the cable/satellite providers *charged them* for the benefit of being rebroadcast.

There needs to be legislation that (1) "forces" cable/satellite providers to provide access to all local stations, but at the same time, (2) tells local stations that they cannot charge *anything* to be rebroadcast by cable/satellite providers.

I know it's an election year but think it might be time to start peppering my Senators/Representatives with this thought ... and, after the elections, hit them up with calls to make the FCC honor their a-la-carte promise made a few years ago.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

This "Pay Per View" stuff for OTA TV, I doubt will fly. As mentioned, the viewer is being hit by so many ads, that why would they pay for programming on top of more ads. Now if the TV program is offered ad free like on Netflix, it would fly. TV stations are making money off the ads and now making money on re transmission. With so much variety out there for free, especially streaming, I doubt most will be willing to pay for OTA TV. I wonder if Dish sold the locals in a separate package like in AT250, how many would opt out to save the money? I remember a TV broadcasting telling me many years ago that will be the future of OTA TV. If you want the news you pay so much, if you want a TV show you pay so much. With my Roku, 95% up there is free. Why would be pay for something when it is streaming for free? Tribune is the loser here, as they are losing valuable viewers. Hopefully it will affect their ratings. Tribune does not even offer OTA translators in most cases as they are too cheap to set them up. The other main Portland stations have them out here, but no CW/Tribune. It is not the station, but Corporate. The station would love to offer OTA out here in the coast, but Tribune will not pony up the money.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

AlecWest said:


> There needs to be legislation that (1) "forces" cable/satellite providers to provide access to all local stations, but at the same time, (2) tells local stations that they cannot charge *anything* to be rebroadcast by cable/satellite providers.


The first part of that is in place ... cable and satellite are forced to offer carriage to all local stations. The caveat is that local stations can refuse carriage - and many stations refuse carriage unless paid a ransom. (Cable is required to offer carriage to local channels as a percentage of channels carried - but systems are large enough that all local stations must be offered carriage. Satellite is required to offer carriage to all local channels within each market if they carry any local channel in that market.)

The second part of that has been the challenge. "No charge" would be the best fee but I do not see Congress changing the law that much. Generally Congress looks at carriage issues every five years when the law that allows carriage of distant stations comes up for renewal. The local station carriage part of the law does not need to be renewed, but that five year clock gets Congress thinking about TV carriage and pushes the issue.



nmetro said:


> The TV stations could go the th CBS On Demand model charging people $.5.99 a month (this fall to see the new "Start Trek", for example), and place lesser programming on OTA.


TV Networks have had that option for decades. We call them cable channels. Networks make the choice to sell a show via their OTA affiliates or directly via regular cable channels or premium cable channels. OTA reaches the most people (directly OTA and via cable/satellite) so it usually gets the best programming. In the past if CBS thought a program was worth extra money or didn't fit broadcast standards it could end up on Showtime.

Now that streaming is an option CBS is trying that marketplace. Not much different than putting the content on Showtime and hoping people would pay $10-$15 per month to see it.

CBS still has an obligation to their affiliates ... I doubt if OTA will become the home of "lesser programming". If CBS does that expect an affiliate shuffle as CBS affiliates look for better programming.

I suspect "Star Trek" will do no better than any other stream only series available on Netflix, Amazon or other streamers. It is too early to describe it as the best programming and I suspect it will be the lesser programming compared to what remains on the CBS network.


----------



## AlecWest (Jul 5, 2016)

Because of where I live (rural), free OTA via antenna is not an option. And because our only local ISP (CenturyLink) provides lousy speeds, streaming is not an option either. But I've always wondered about the "future" of streaming. A lot of ISPs are gravitating toward bandwidth caps. And I'm wondering how many people who stream movies and shows end up getting warning notes from their ISPs - that they're streaming too much and might have their service either "cut" or, at the very least, "throttled." This would be especially true for people who use other bandwidth heavy things like VOIP phones & Skype video-conferencing.


----------



## KevinRS (Oct 9, 2007)

When was the last news or press release on this? At the beginning it seemed Dish was constantly releasing updates, but lately, nothing since June 17?

At some point does dish just say forget about it, and wait for Tribune to call them back to the table with a reasonable offer or willingness to go to arbitration? Maybe this is what has happened.
I don't have any idea what provider is up next for contract negotiations with Tribune, but if it isn't resolved by that time, things may start to change if multiple providers refuse to pay what tribune is trying to charge.

It's like Time Warner making a sports station in Los Angeles, negotiating to have the Dodgers games on it, then only offering it to other providers at an excessively high price. It's not like the Sportsnet division is charging the cable division that price or something, it's No one took it, so now they just advertise as the exclusive place to watch the games. I'd think it could be possible the Dodgers could sue them for damages, since TW can't arrange an agreement with ANY provider to carry it, and so they could have less ticket sales etc. At the very least, I'd expect the price the team wants from them to go up when the contract ends. TW basically has a vertical monopoly, and anyone else wants in on the distribution end, they have to pay big.

This is where ala cart would help. If you pay a base $15 for service, that includes the channels that pay dish to carry, and then pay per channel something like what dish pays plus a percentage, most people who get a notice that the local station they usually watch the news on(but that is one of 7) is going up in price, say from $1 to $3, will be weighing whether it's worth it.
Really broadcast locals should be free within their market. The government has granted them exclusive rights to broadcast within their DMA the content they are getting from the network, and advertisers are expecting all viewers within the DMA to be able to view it, so they should be responsible for providing feeds to cable and satellite, or put up translator stations. Here, there are no translators, half a million people on this side of the mountains, but the transmitters are on a peak on the other side, so 75% are in the shadow. Nearly no one uses an antenna, and those that do, it's hit or miss what channels they can even get. Half of them can get 2 networks form another DMA better because they are ironically too close to mountains that are in the way.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

KevinRS said:


> At some point does dish just say forget about it, and wait for Tribune to call them back to the table with a reasonable offer or willingness to go to arbitration? Maybe this is what has happened.


I believe we are already there.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

Tribune is gambling that if they hold out long enough, Dish will start losing significant subscribers and be forced to move their direction. While I don't like what I perceive to be Tribune's stance in this game of chicken, I do believe that Dish will indeed start losing significant subbers if they can't get their locals. They'll switch to Directv or cable. In our area, the local CBS and Fox stations had a dispute, and there were quite a few people who switched. They didn't read forums or take sides, they just felt like hey, I pay somebody for TV, but I can't watch anything on CBS or Fox, that's ridiculous, so I'll move to somewhere where I can get all my local networks. Period.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

Ever wonder what local TV would be like if it was a la carte, and stations had to really compete against each other for eyes? Nah, would never happen, too capitalistic :rotfl: .


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

DISH won't lose enough subscribers to make that much of a difference. I don't have Fox or CW at the moment but if I were to switch and after new customer discounts,I would then have to learn new equipment, have to be home to have a tech come to install, etc etc I would then be privileged to pay more than I do know. With Directv $26 a month more with Cable more a than that. I don't invision that locals would be off for months because at some point either DISH or the Tribune will get the FCC involved or an arbitrator. NFL Network is a different story, no idea how that will work out.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

The Tribune stations in some markets have a very small percentage of viewers, depending on the network. Some have OTA antennas to view their local Tribune station, so the effect this has for many is little. Dish's comments about Channel "X" does not have the ratings/viewership that warrants the big rate increase. They have their point. Like here Dish had the NW Cable News channel. The company that owns several TV stations in the NW wanted the same money for their local news channel that they did for their network stations. It is not worth it. As much as I miss have NWCN on Dish, I can understand why we do not still have it. The company took the channel off and would not lower their price. So, because of the companies attitude, they cut their own nose from their face. They no longer are on Dish adding many more viewers, nor do they get $$$ by being on Dish. In my book, I do not think they care about the viewer. They care only about their own pocketbook. Tribune is the same thing. We have more trouble with the local TV channels than we do with the big companies like Viacom. I think if the TV station wants the viewers, then they come on for free and they can sell more ad time. All local stations should be treated as the PBS station is. Or maybe the FCC should come up with a flat rate per station. Down the road, if that TV station wants an increase they need to submit it to the FCC for review, just like most of the other utility companies do with some sort of review board. Something needs to be done, as we viewers that the ones that lose out. A channel that can be viewed OTA for free, why should that station be making more off being on another carrier? I would think having a local station increase its' viewership would be enough.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Wilf said:


> Ever wonder what local TV would be like if it was a la carte, and stations had to really compete against each other for eyes? Nah, would never happen, too capitalistic :rotfl: .


What are you talking about? Local TV is essentially a la carte via OTA... You have access to everything and choose what to watch. IF you mean "a la carte" but you could choose to watch a non-local "local" station... then, that was never possible with OTA. IF you can receive it, you can watch it... if you can't, you can't... now that they can be delivered via broadband, satellite, or cable, some argue they want to be able to buy an out-of-market local... but that doesn't make sense for ANY of the locals if you think about it. IF you buy a local that isn't your local, what is the point? They wouldn't be a local in their market if there were no more local stations... It's no different than not being able to get the Virginia McDonald's to deliver food to you in South Carolina. The food is mostly the same, but might have a different regional specialty... but you have to go there to get it.


----------



## DBSSTEPHEN (Oct 13, 2009)

nmetro said:


> Of course, the FCC, holds all the licenses and commercial television stations are owed in the public trust. That is the government, and public, own the TV stations, but not its content. The TV stations could go the th CBS On Demand model charging people $.5.99 a month (this fall to see the new "Start Trek", for example), and place lesser programming on OTA. Of course, they will not only charge for content, but air commercials. Would people pay $6 per commercial TV station (networks), for something that has been "free:" since the 1940s?
> 
> Growing up in the days when cable TV was to to extend the range of TV stations, because one lived too far from the transmitter or interference of buildings affected reception. We paid $10 a month to get the new York City channels, and a couple from Connecticut, for signal quality. A whopping 11 channels, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 13 (NYC), 3, 8, 49 (CT) and 21 (Long Island). In those days, the stations wanted on cable. 13, 21 and 49 were NET (now PBS and had to be carried). Eventually 49, was replaced with 30 (CT). This meant two CBS (2, 3), two NBC (4, 30) and two ABC (7, 8).
> 
> ...


 half hour TV shows are actually only 10 minutes long and the shows that air for 60 minutes long 20 minutes the rest of that time is all commercials


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DBSSTEPHEN said:


> half hour TV shows are actually only 10 minutes long and the shows that air for 60 minutes long 20 minutes the rest of that time is all commercials


Not quite that bad ... 16 minutes per hour of commercials would be closer. There are a few cable channels that manage to do more.


----------



## oldanbo (May 20, 2004)

Just like our friend from Vader, Wa. , I too exist in a spot where locals cannot be viewed OTA with a tv antenna.
People in more highly populated areas can use an OTA for locals.

Somehow the playing field needs to be equalized. Why should I have less opportunity than other Americans? I am sure that
Dish knows how to come out on top of this for clients. 

I don't think gov't can help as everything they touch is FUBAR'd. Maybe if we donate to the Clinton Foundation, I trust them. :barf:


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Since the advent of digital TV, often long distance reception is not possible. I guess if you lived like between Philly and NYC or DC and Baltimore MD, the viewer probably could get both markets. Out of market TV is not easy to get OTA, especially in the NW where we have a lot of mountains.
Licensing is keeping your local station from streaming openly. Many do stream their local news and public affairs programming though. There are the odd TV station that does stream, like KKLA LA, in Spanish, or a "local" station in an area. I think there is a TV station in the North Bay (SF) that streams. Many University stations do stream like UoW.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

Still fully supporting DISH in this dispute but I finally asked them what they would do to compensate me for losing 1 local and 3 superstations. They're giving me $5/month credit for the next three months. Fair enough. Hope things are settled by then but Tribune doesn't seem to understand the reality they face so who knows.


----------



## maf113 (Feb 21, 2005)

I live in the Seattle area and like some others, do not get OTA (unless I want to put up a huge antenna outside). Currently WGN and local Fox channels our blacked out. As for me right now, I can get whatever programing I am missing via the internet, some times the same night. Except for the local news, which I liked as it was at 10PM. Our local NBC channel has a sub-channel with the news at 10pm so I have been watching that.

As others have stated there are many ways to get network programing, some legal and some not so legal. For example, if Dish will authorize it there is SLING. Problem for me is I was given SLING but have never been able to get it working. Dish says it is a Sling problem and Sling says Dish did not properly authorize it. Doesn't matter, I get my Fox programs now without commercials. And since I time shift everything anyways, watching it the next day or so is not a problem.

I agree with those that the OTA stations should not be allowed to charge carriers a fee provided the carrier paid the cost for the equipment at the local station to provide that signal to us. Now, if the station provided the signal by providing all the extra equipment for the carrier than that is a different situation.

Now all I have to do is figure out how to get the Seahawk games live, if this dispute continues into football season. 

BTW: I fully support Dish on this, and if anyone thinks going to another provider will solve your problem, it won't. I was with Directv and they had blackouts also during disputes.


----------



## camo (Apr 15, 2010)

I take issue when people blindly say they fully support Dish on these unnecessary blackouts. Do you see this happening in other areas of our market driven economy? Very seldom do you hear of this bully attitude of negotiating Dish uses and in the end no one except maybe Dish makes out.

Ten of thousands of contracts are successfully negotiated monthly across this country. I can only imagine the chaos if every contract was negotiated like Dish does.
And in the end the packages between Directv and Dish are very similar in cost even though Directv has a huge overhead of equipment, I'll be it also has more subscribers but still this technique Dish uses is so immature kindergarten like and totally unnecessary.


----------



## AlecWest (Jul 5, 2016)

oldanbo said:


> Just like our friend from Vader, Wa. , I too exist in a spot where locals cannot be viewed OTA with a tv antenna.
> People in more highly populated areas can use an OTA for locals.
> 
> Somehow the playing field needs to be equalized. Why should I have less opportunity than other Americans? I am sure that
> ...


Friend from Vader here (grin). Back before I was born, FDR instituted a "rural electrification program" to bring electricity to ruralites at a fair price. What we need now is a "rural mediafication program" to bring TV programming to ruralites at a fair price. FWIW, I've already contacted my congressional rep suggesting we also need a "rural netification program" to bring *real* broadband internet to ruralites at a fair price. On the latter, I pay $80 a month to CenturyLink DSL for a "promised" download speed of only 10mbps (in reality, closer to 3mbps ... with upload speeds about twice that of a dialup connection).

Needless to say, streaming (without intense buffering) is not in the cards for me. And OTA via antenna is out of the picture, too.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

With a Roku, if the person has high speed, then most of what you are missing is available up there. All of the networks have apps. There are private channels that offer some streaming TV signals. Some are in HD and others in SD. Even with the loss of Tribune, there are ways around it for many. What bothers me here on the Oregon Coast, Tribune refuses to pay for a translator out here to cover us. The engineer at CW32 said, he is more that willing to install one, so we would have it OTA. The other main Portland stations have them 2-6-8-10-12, with sub channels. With CW (Tribune) off dish, there is no way to view CW32 out here, unless I want to jump ship and go to cable or Direct. But I am happy with Dish and Direct does not have some of the programming I watch. Let alone I own my own equipment and have since the Dish 2700 receiver in 1999. I have the 211k now. True that Dish fights for a better deal and we pay less for more channels. I do not like disputes anymore than anyone does, but do we want to pay anything the programmer wants to charge? Is there a limit? The rules need to change to stop companies like Tribune from removing the channel from any carrier. Sure, fight it out, but leave the viewer out of it. Or if the programmer pulls their channel, import one in from another market to cover the loss until the issue gets solved. That would move Tribune to the table a lot quicker, knowing that another CW or Fox channel is being imported to cover the loss. Now, it is the consumer that loses out.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

mwdxer, while this will add to your bill, a number of cable companies offer life line, basic services which provides all the locals, at about $10 or so a month. At least they do that here. Also, if your internet is coming from your cable company, chances are that the very basic cable also works. You won;t get HD, but you at least get CW32, if indeed they offer that service.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Yes, Charter does offer that, as I do have their high speed internet. Charter also has many of the sub channels Dish doesn't have, included in the low price package. Unfortunately, no THIS or Antenna TV, even though they do carry CW32. It has crossed my mind to add the basic service. I do not watch much on 32 anyway, except for their news.


----------



## Jon J (Apr 22, 2002)

James Long said:


> Not quite that bad ... 16 minutes per hour of commercials would be closer. There are a few cable channels that manage to do more.


Exactly why the DVR is so valuable.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

camo said:


> I take issue when people blindly say they fully support Dish on these unnecessary blackouts. Do you see this happening in other areas of our market driven economy? Very seldom do you hear of this bully attitude of negotiating Dish uses and in the end no one except maybe Dish makes out.
> 
> Ten of thousands of contracts are successfully negotiated monthly across this country. I can only imagine the chaos if every contract was negotiated like Dish does.
> And in the end the packages between Directv and Dish are very similar in cost even though Directv has a huge overhead of equipment, I'll be it also has more subscribers but still this technique Dish uses is so immature kindergarten like and totally unnecessary.


You're assuming Dish to be the bully. Why do you assume that? It takes two to tango. The channels often start running "you're going to lose your favorite channel" banners the week before the channel drops, trying to bully Dish into a deal using viewers as a pawn. The channel also always has the option of letting Dish keep broadcasting under the current contract for the current rates and then getting back-pay if they negotiate a higher rate... but most channel providers do not want to do that. Instead, they want you the viewer to be pissed at Dish for "losing" your channel... They know that if viewers aren't mad, Dish has less incentive to pay more. So who is the real bully?


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Dish is not the bully here. They aren't. Tribune wants a lot more per subscriber and Dish does not drop the channel, Tribune blocked them. Like with utilities, there is a commissioner that decides rate increases. The company has to go through them. since the cable & satellite industry today is considered a utility, then before any programmer can get a rate increase, it has to go before them. Otherwise, where does this go. $89.95 a month for AT250, 5 years from now $150? Then everyone loses as people will not pay that much. People already are cutting the cord left and right, going to streaming. I have a Roku and I get a ton of channels for free, plus many many that Dish, Direct, or cable do not have. International streaming TV that I never knew about as no one offer those channels here. Add to that the many streaming network on channels. It is amazing.


----------



## dlt (Feb 21, 2007)

FYI, I am going to simply repeat what a customer service rep at DISH told me today when I called about our local WPMT FOX 43 in central PA she said, " The channel should be back up on either Friday the 15th or Monday the 18th" I let them know I have not had any access to FOX network for over 3 weeks and they gave me a $10.0 credit on my account.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

Cable and satelite are between a rock and hard place these days. This clip from http://goo.gl/OZWGAk surprised me how far we have come from only a few years ago:


> Then there's TV news's demographic cliff. People who regularly watch cable news are old. According to statistics compiled at the end of last year, CNN's prime-time audience was the youngest in cable news - with a median age of 59. The median age of Fox News's prime-time audience is 68. (TV news isn't alone here. The median age of a subscriber to The New York Times's digital edition is 54; for print subscribers, it's 60. But of course, we all know that with age comes sophistication.)


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I have a Roku, and I stream a lot of programming and it is wonderful as there are no middlemen to cut you off. With satellite or cable, a person never knows if their fav channel will be there tomorrow, but with streaming, unless your internet is off, the apps are always there.


----------



## KevinRS (Oct 9, 2007)

It isn't just dish, it is also directv and the cable companies getting channels blacked out. For a while I saw a banner on one channel saying it was going to be blacked out by time warner. 

For TV stations, as far as I know, the vast majority of their income is still from advertising. It used to be all advertising before they started collecting these fees from cable and satellite providers. I don't get how they can charge anything beyond a reasonable fee to pay for the equipment and maintenance on it to get the feeds to the provider. Even beyond that, the stations should be losing more in advertising revenue than the fees would be, since blacked out customers don't see the ads.

And of course the cable companies prices are always well above what they advertise, because they charge separately for receivers(and you generally need 1 per TV, or a more expensive multiroom one) franchise fees, dvr fees, and even remote controls. I've tried looking at going with them, and even with their "discount" for bundling TV and internet, by the time you add a second TV, and a DVR, the price goes up well over Dish, even for their most basic package. And then you also have to pay attention to the fact that their quoted prices include a discount for new customers, but only for the first year, and what it will go up to is hidden.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

Caveat emptor! If you don't think the product is worth it, walk. If you don't want to walk, then I guess the product is worth it for you and you will pay.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

dlt said:


> FYI, I am going to simply repeat what a customer service rep at DISH told me today when I called about our local WPMT FOX 43 in central PA she said, " The channel should be back up on either Friday the 15th or Monday the 18th" I let them know I have not had any access to FOX network for over 3 weeks and they gave me a $10.0 credit on my account.


I got a $5 credit per month for the next 6 months. Additionally they sent me an antenna. That makes me thing this Tribune dispute is going to take awhile.

I checked my online bill, they did give me the $5 "courtesy" credit plus a "one time charge" of "$0.00" for the antenna. While the antenna did work at my location, they sent the same antenna to a friend's house the next county over. The antenna could not pick up the missing channel, or most of the other desired channels at his home. It did pick up all the religious channels and ION since those are all "rim shots".


----------



## Superabound (Oct 10, 2008)

I got a $10 credit, but was told they "no longer" have the antenna credit or that "it doesn't work with my box". Anyone else heard this? Antenna still going out?


----------



## jamelar (Dec 30, 2010)

Superabound said:


> .... "it doesn't work with my box". .....


what box do you have? I have the VIP722K that I, some years ago, installed the optional MT2 Antenna Tuner. Dish owns the 722, I own the antenna tuner.
The FOX station here, Grand Rapids, MI, is part of the dispute, but no problem here. I've had an outside antenna for years and for the most part I view locals off the antenna instead off satellite.
That the guide shows for off air is a nice touch.


----------



## neilo (Aug 7, 2006)

Well, it is the 19th and I am still see a Dish video about not getting the CW.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

I'll never understand the allure of streaming live television. Do I do it? Yes, but only when I have to or choose to (like when MLB At-Bat is the *only *way to watch a baseball game), knowing full well that it's never as good quality-wise (video or audio) as OTA or satellite broadcasts. Even with fiber optic Internet and 1GB up/down speeds as I have, live streaming of Tribune programs, sporting events, etc. isn't anything like the superior quality of a normal HD broadcast. Even with no buffering or latency, the video and/or audio quality just isn't the same.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

The Roku has some fantastic 720p and 1080i video. It rivals some of the HD on Dish. OTA HD is better as they have more bandwidth, but streaming has improved a lot over the past year or so.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> I'll never understand the allure of streaming live television. Do I do it? Yes, but only when I have to or choose to (like when MLB At-Bat is the *only *way to watch a baseball game), knowing full well that it's never as good quality-wise (video or audio) as OTA or satellite broadcasts. Even with fiber optic Internet and 1GB up/down speeds as I have, live streaming of Tribune programs, sporting events, etc. isn't anything like the superior quality of a normal HD broadcast. Even with no buffering or latency, the video and/or audio quality just isn't the same.


I'm curios what device you use to watch it? Amazingly I'm finding the appletv to be amazing in quality. Better than my roku for sure. Which I wasn't expecting.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

If Apple is better, then it much be really good. My Roku gives me a great pictures, if the streaming service has it. Streaming is our future. I am waiting for the local TV stations to get the licensing in order and start streaming 24/7. Right now the network holds the content control. Once 24/7 on local stations start, translators will not be needed as much. From an IP address, I would think the technology is there. If a viewer is in the DMA, then they should have access to all OTA TV no matter where they are. I bought my Roku LT in 2014 and wow has things changed in the past two+ years. It is amazing what is on Roku. The Chromecast stick is good too, being able to stream about anything from a computer to the TV screen.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

I have a Roku 3 and a Roku 2, and neither is as good as my DirecTV signal; and I'm on a 1GB fiber optic system, too.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

Lord Vader said:


> I have a Roku 3 and a Roku 2, and neither is as good as my DirecTV signal; and I'm on a 1GB fiber optic system, too.


You must have a configuration issue somewhere. I have used Roku's wired and wireless, with PQ as good as it gets.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

If the HD quality is being streamed, I have a beautiful HD picture. Sky News from the UK streams 24/7 and they look great.Streaming is indeed our future. One nice thing, there are no disputes to deal with. If it is free, fine, if it is a paid service, you pay it and it is there.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

The problem for streaming is going to be so many people who have internet bandwidth caps these days. Plus, while super fast internet speeds are becoming more available, there are still MANY MANY areas where higher speeds just aren't offered (my area JUST now started offering 100 Mbps down/3 Mbps up.)


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Looks like they are back!!


Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

But no WPIX



Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Just got off the phone with a CSR. I asked him why WPIX channel 11 totally disappeared from the guide when the other Superstation (KTLA & KWGN) that were part of the dispute with Tribune came back. He said that they are still in negotiations with Tribune over WPIX?

Seems kind of odd that it is completely gone from the guide with no recurring tape giving Dish's position on the dispute.


Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

It looks like the Super Stations are back, but not the Seattle Tribune stations. I saw the WPIX logo on their newscast, so I have no idea what is going on.


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

Maybe the dispute is now limited to the local Tribune station, which in my case, is WPIX. It is gone from the Superstation group and is no longer on my regular guide.


Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

mwdxer said:


> It looks like the Super Stations are back, but not the Seattle Tribune stations. I saw the WPIX logo on their newscast, so I have no idea what is going on.


Yep. Just the Superstations are back (6:17pm ET).

I was surprised that they left since DISH doesn't need the station's permission to carry Superstations. DISH has placed regional restrictions on the restored channels so perhaps DISH has decided to take the risk of delivering the channels without accidentally delivering them to in-market subscribers?

If the rest of the Tribune channels were coming back I suspect they would already be on.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

Just want to Thank James for his timely Uplink reports.
It had occurred to me that the Superstations are treated differently but when they didn't come back I just thought I was wrong. This indeed appears like it could be DISH decided they don't need Tribune's permission as long as they are not on in the Market they serve. Very interesting and if that is the case I am waiting to see if there is any response from Tribune.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Even with my complaints, Dish carrying the Super Stations, I guess they are carried by the different set of rules. Good! I have missed the Supers, as I watch the KTLA LA News at night, so I have had to stream their news. Thank you Dish!


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Now, with the Super Stations back, how do I update the guide, as an hour in advance it says, Tribune removed KTLA, WPIX, KWGN. Thanks.


----------



## KevinRS (Oct 9, 2007)

That's pretty weird, some people can get channels like KTLA out of area, while if it's local, it's not even in the guide anymore?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

mwdxer said:


> Now, with the Super Stations back, how do I update the guide, as an hour in advance it says, Tribune removed KTLA, WPIX, KWGN. Thanks.


The guide will update overnight after you turn off the receiver.



KevinRS said:


> That's pretty weird, some people can get channels like KTLA out of area, while if it's local, it's not even in the guide anymore?


Yep. Under the law stations can choose "consent to carry" within their own markets. If they choose that option they can deny carriage within their market (generally such stations allow carriage for compensation). But outside of their market the rules change. Superstations can be carried without permission. Copyright holders are paid a statutory rate for the rebroadcast of that content.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

It is too bad more stations are not Super Stations. Years ago, we had others like KTVT Dallas TX, but they changed to a network.Then WSBK was added.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

#239 where WGN America now shows TNT. It looks like this dispute may go on for sometime. I do not know when that happened, but tonight while checking out the Super stations I found TNT there as well as 138


----------



## n0qcu (Mar 23, 2002)

TNT has been on 239 since WGN America was pulled by Tribune. 


Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


----------



## Don M (Jul 1, 2006)

Any idea when WGN might return? I watch Underground, Outsiders, and Salem. I would hate to miss any episodes when they begin airing again.


----------



## KG4KBU (Mar 28, 2014)

The local businesses in Tribune markets need to pull their ads off those stations unless they make a deal with dish. That would have them back in no time

Sent from my SM-J700P using Tapatalk


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

Very definitely Superstations but not the locals back.

Wish as part of it Tribune had insisted on them being 16:9, if not HD.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I asked Dish some years back about offering the Super Stations in HD, and the CSR said they had no plans to make them HD, even though HD in the local packs. I guess since Dish no longer sells the Supers, getting them in HD is probably never going to happen. I also wonder how long we will continue to receive them too.


----------



## BobCulp (Dec 21, 2013)

KTLA WPIX and KWGN back.on.

239 still has TNT on , not sure what if there is a delay or what is going on.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

BobCulp said:


> KTLA WPIX and KWGN back.on.
> 
> 239 still has TNT on , not sure what if there is a delay or what is going on.


WGN is what the whole dispute is about, if it were back so would all the locals.


----------



## TheDigitalOne (Aug 1, 2016)

NFL is back on 154 as of today, wonder if we'll get Tribune back at some point?


----------



## levibluewa (Aug 13, 2005)

Mwdxer...that's why I left Directv back in the late '90s...no superstations. And a couple of years ago I cut DISH back to the minimum pkg because the supers weren't switched to the HD feed.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

As much as I like HD, I would rather have the channel than not. I have friends in Canada that also have some Super stations, and except for WGN9, the rest are still in SD. I do not know what feed they get them from, but it may be the same one Dish gets them. According to my friend who lives in Alberta, he gets KTLA, WPIX, WSBK, and WGN. Again only WGN is in HD. During the dispute, one night I used Chromecast to stream the 10 PM News from KTLA, and it is in HD! An amazing picture, but other than their news, they do not stream CW programming.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

BobCulp said:


> KTLA WPIX and KWGN back.on.
> 
> 239 still has TNT on , not sure what if there is a delay or what is going on.


WGN America on Ch. 239 is NOT a superstation. It's the only national cable network that Tribune owns and is a part of the current dispute. It used to be a superstation, is right next to the other superstations, but is a different feed than WGN 9 seen in the Chicago DMA.

BTW: Tribune is playing hardball with Dish. I get one of their stations OTA (FOX 8 WJW Cleveland). They are now running ads prompting Dish subscribers to switch. They were sending this message on the net even before the blackout began. Something has to be done to end this B.S. I'm not affected as much as others since my OTA reception is actually better than satellite.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

Michael P said:


> WGN America on Ch. 239 is NOT a superstation. It's the only national cable network that Tribune owns and is a part of the current dispute. It used to be a superstation, is right next to the other superstations, but is a different feed than WGN 9 seen in the Chicago DMA.
> 
> BTW: Tribune is playing hardball with Dish. I get one of their stations OTA (FOX 8 WJW Cleveland). They are now running ads prompting Dish subscribers to switch. They were sending this message on the net even before the blackout began. Something has to be done to end this B.S. I'm not affected as much as others since my OTA reception is actually better than satellite.


Yeah, I've been with Dish in the past when my CBS and Fox was being threatened by a dispute with Dish (guy that owns the locals threatened with a large number of locals across the area.) It didn't take long before the locals were running banners and ads urging Dish subscribers to switch to Directv, local cable companies, etc. I think that's pretty standard in these macho battles.

We really need something to happen to force the FCC/Congress to pass a law setting up arbitration panels and rules for these disputes. At least for the local networks where the FCC has to license the owners.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Since this dispute started, I am glad I set up an OTA antenna; if not, I would have been without KWGN (CW) and KDVR (FOX) all this time. Now it is summer, but footballs season is coming up.

By the way, the show "Containment" was cancelled due to low ratings. Part of those low ratings is that Denver, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York, who have DISH subscribers, lost access to their CW affiliate. This also affects viewership, for their already low rated, WGN America. Lets; face it, the top three TV markets. In the end, this is hurting Tribune, more than it is hurting DISH.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

Michael P said:


> BTW: Tribune is playing hardball with Dish. I get one of their stations OTA (FOX 8 WJW Cleveland). They are now running ads prompting Dish subscribers to switch. They were sending this message on the net even before the blackout began. Something has to be done to end this B.S. I'm not affected as much as others since my OTA reception is actually better than satellite.


I had to laugh the other day I was watching one of those Tribune stations via my antenna and I saw one of their propaganda commercials threatening no football no superbowl, blah, blah, blah. And I'm sitting there wondering how this commercial is helping their cause? After all since Tribune has decided not to allow Dish to rebroadcast their signal, there's pretty much close to no Dish customers watching this commercial other than the handful like me who have an antenna and of course those of us w/ antennas don't care about the dispute because we get their signal OTA for free. So basically they're taking up ad space they could be selling and running their own ad targeting Dish customers who can't see the commercial anyway, sure why not.


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

fudpucker said:


> I think that's pretty standard in these macho battles.


Standard yes. I question the good faith effort when they do it though.


----------



## KevinRS (Oct 9, 2007)

When is the last time there was ANY news, any press release by either side?

A whole other issue with it, but what other market has 500,000 to 1,000,000 people not in ota coverage for all the major local channels?


----------



## joetex (Mar 29, 2007)

One thing that both sides may be minimizing is the fact that viewer habits may change permanently as a result of these disputes. I am a case in point. I used to use the Superstations on a daily basis for morning news. When they went off as part of this dispute with Tribune, I turned to the Roku and found a couple of really good news stations that I am enjoying to the point that I do not watch KTLA and KWGN in the mornings anymore even though the Superstations have returned.


Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Yes, I think streaming will replace satellite & cable in time for many. Of course there are places high speed internet is not a reality. As soon as your "local" stations start streaming 24/7 and not just the news, game over. The dispute situation will end as the station will be broadcasting directly to the viewer like OTA. But until the licensing gets worked out and the stations can do that, we still have to put up with disputes.Like here we do not have Antenna TV as the Tribune station does not have a translator here, but we do have ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, & FOX OTA and their sub channels.


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

Locals would need a way to limit viewers to the DMA they are licensed for. Perhaps an address based subscription service. Such models are easily abused, and other stations would take issue with any attempting to so.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

IP address? But there are ways around that. But with Dish, some use different addresses to get an adjacent market.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The locals do not own the streaming rights to most of their content. They have purchased broadcast rights, not streaming rights. They may be able to work out a deal with the owner of the streaming rights to be able to brand the owner's streaming with the local station's identity. But I do not expect 24/7 streaming.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I am wondering if that will change in the future, as there are OTA rights as well as satellite and cable rights?


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

James Long said:


> The locals do not own the streaming rights to most of their content. They have purchased broadcast rights, not streaming rights./quote]
> 
> There were no streaming rights when most of the agreements were developed.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

STDog said:


> Locals would need a way to limit viewers to the DMA they are licensed for. Perhaps an address based subscription service. Such models are easily abused, and other stations would take issue with any attempting to do so.


There seems to be a lot of non-local stations streaming their news broadcasts now - my wife watches it all the time. NewsOn makes this easy for select stations. And there are few if any ads. I don't see why this would be a problem. Isn't competition suppose to be good?


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

Wilf said:


> There seems to be a lot of non-local stations streaming their news broadcasts now


Station produced content, like news, is theirs to do with as they please.

Network content (like prime time shows) is different. The station only has the right to show it in the assigned DMA.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Remember when you could get newspaper access for free, on the Internet? Now, most newspapers have a pay wall. Give it time, all those "free"streams available today, will also end up behind a pay wall and limited to viewing area. CBS is "experimenting" with streaming for $6 a month; the new "Star Trek" series being the "carrot". While free to air TV will always have a purpose, broadcasters may start forcing paying for streaming content.

Think about it in these. In the early to mid 1980s, you could install a large satellite dish in your yard, and get everything fro free. By, the mid 1990s, most channels were encrypted, ending free satellite TV. I mentioned free newspapers; not any more. Then, came Hulu; free no more. Now, it is TV broadcaster streaming.

Welcome to America if there si a buck to be made, someone will figure out how to do it.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> The locals do not own the streaming rights to most of their content. They have purchased broadcast rights, not streaming rights. They may be able to work out a deal with the owner of the streaming rights to be able to brand the owner's streaming with the local station's identity. But I do not expect 24/7 streaming.


Yes, that's the case. There have been some disputes where this has been brought out, in fact.

The locals will NEVER be granted streaming rights for network content. The networks will maintain control over that, because they want to resell it themselves! If someone wants to stream local channels they need to talk to the local station for their own content like news, and to the network for network content. That still wouldn't cover the locals 24x7, as they broadcast other content they likely don't own streaming rights to, such as syndicated reruns like Seinfeld or SImpsons.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

nmetro said:


> Remember when you could get newspaper access for free, on the Internet? Now, most newspapers have a pay wall. Give it time, all those "free"streams available today, will also end up behind a pay wall and limited to viewing area. CBS is "experimenting" with streaming for $6 a month; the new "Star Trek" series being the "carrot". While free to air TV will always have a purpose, broadcasters may start forcing paying for streaming content.
> 
> Think about it in these. In the early to mid 1980s, you could install a large satellite dish in your yard, and get everything fro free. By, the mid 1990s, most channels were encrypted, ending free satellite TV. I mentioned free newspapers; not any more. Then, came Hulu; free no more. Now, it is TV broadcaster streaming.
> 
> Welcome to America if there si a buck to be made, someone will figure out how to do it.


Well, to be fair, the newspapers and networks and affiliates are not charities. They are in it to make a buck. That's not evil. They have to pay their payrolls and bills.

The newspapers are a very good example. I used to do a lot of professional freelance writing and got to know the editors of some major newspapers (Chicago Tribune, KC Star, Houston Chronicle, etc.) Newspapers do carry and sell ads, and they used to make a small amount of money on those, and they do get subscriptions. But the vast majority of money that newspapers made and counted on was the classified ads. Especially the Sunday classifieds. If you're old enough to remember when you got a newspaper every day and the huge paper on Sundays, you'll remember how huge the Sunday classifieds were. That was where you looked when you were looking for a house, a car, a job, a used refrigerator, etc. And that's where newspapers got the vast majority of their income.

Well, guess what? When's the last time you looked in a Sunday paper's classifieds for a house or car? Or.... anything? Wonder why so many papers have gone out of business? The internet. So yeah, they can put up the newspaper online and let you read if for free. Now they get no money for subscriptions. They originally thought if they put it up for free they might get more people reading their classifieds again and they might rejuvenate the number of people paying to advertise in the classifieds. Nope. So the only choice they have is to put up a paywall. Even with that, most newspapers are losing money.

Owners of networks face a similar problem, though in a different form. As more and more people use DVRs, fewer and fewer people watch commercials. The big companies that advertise on TV know that. Read the advertising business insider journals and sites. The big national real estate companies have cut most of their television ads in favor of targeted internet ads. There's a reason you see so much more product placement inside TV shows these days; some shows even poke fun at the obvious placement. As more and more people skip commercials, we're moving closer to something I dread: Those banner ads that are splashed on the bottom third of the screen in the middle of a show. Today they are mainly ads for another show on the network, or a movie. But you know that it won't be long before those are car ads, etc. And there will be no way to skip over them. But the point is, networks and locals are facing a budget squeeze. So they will, as newspapers have, look for ways to make that up.

The issue that I think gets overlooked sometimes as people talk about trying to get all of their content from streaming: data caps/overage charges. From a recent WSJ article:



> Regulators have expressed concern about the lack of competition in the broadband market. Last year, the Justice Department noted that 70% of all homes in the U.S. have access to only one or no broadband provider that meets the FCC's definition of high-speed service.
> Sling TV executives say many former customers tell the company they dropped the $20-a-month streaming service because they were being charged so much in extra broadband fees that it was cheaper to simply go back to cable TV. The over-the-top service-meaning it is delivered over the Internet-offers a slim bundle of pay-TV channels, such as AMC and CNN.
> Broadband companies' "incentive is to sabotage over-the-top services, and data caps is a primary tool in order to accomplish that," says Jeff Blum, deputy general counsel at Dish Network Corp., which owns Sling TV. "It's competing with their bundle."


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

nmetro said:


> Remember when you could get newspaper access for free, on the Internet? Now, most newspapers have a pay wall. Give it time, all those "free"streams available today, will also end up behind a pay wall and limited to viewing area. CBS is "experimenting" with streaming for $6 a month; the new "Star Trek" series being the "carrot". While free to air TV will always have a purpose, broadcasters may start forcing paying for streaming content.


Some of us come from when the internet had no ads, and everything was free. The original purpose was for the free exchange of info among academia and government labs. The commercialization is an intrusion - nobody asked for this. As to paywalls, most are easy to get around without breaking any laws. In fact, the Chrome Browser makes it fairly easy.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

Wilf said:


> Some of us come from when the internet had no ads, and everything was free. The original purpose was for the free exchange of info among academia and government labs. The commercialization is an intrusion - nobody asked for this. As to paywalls, most are easy to get around without breaking any laws. In fact, the Chrome Browser makes it fairly easy.


Of course, if everyone gets around paywalls, the sites that depend on income from the pay go under.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

I called directv this morning to check my contract end date, prepping a potential move back to Dish. Wasn't ready to negotiate/discuss the move with Directv this morning, but I did say, when she inquired as to why I was asking for my end date, Dish was making a nice offer. The first thing she said was I hope you know Dish has local channels all over the country blacked out, while Directv and everyone else has the occassional dispute, no one is willing to let their customers' channels go dark and stay dark like Dish does, and she quoted the number of subscribers impacted by the Tribune blackout and length of blackout, etc.

So clearly Directv is instructing their retention people to use this.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

STDog said:


> As I understood it, the stations have exclusive rights to distribute the content in the DMA, period. Method of distribution doesn't matter.
> 
> That's why retransmission for cable/sat goes through the station not the network (other than network owned stations).


You understand incorrectly. The affiliation agreements are for first television broadcasts in market ... not other methods.

Retransmission is separate from content. Stations choose whether they are "must carry" or "consent to carry". If they choose "must carry" then satellite must carry their signals. If they choose "consent to carry" the station can negotiate a price or other compensation - and the satellite carrier can say no. (The station can also say NO to carriage.) That is the way the law is written (roughly).


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

With all of these rules mentioned, I can see why people are getting fed up with watching commercial TV. OTA stations are losing a lot of viewers, along with disputes, etc.. I know people that just subscribe to movie channels or stream Netflix. Some have OTA for free, but with all of these rules, disputes, broadcast TV is killing itself, when a person can watch OTA and get Hulu or Netflix for less than $10 a month. As far as DVRing everything, that is the only way to watch TV now. For instance I have been watching a show I liked as a kid, Silver Spoons. Logo is running the later episodes, not on DVD. I tried watching an episode the other night. A 30 minute show loaded with ads, so I DVR it to check the show is being run for 19.5 minutes, for 10.5 minutes in ads and promos. Without the DVR, I would never watch commercial TV. I would gladly pay extra for a non-ad version. When I was young, 5 minutes of ads for a half hour show was the norm. The ads were not generally offensive, and I could sit through them or grad a bite of something. Now with double that, watching TV without a DVR would be impossible. Stations can control their streaming, as FOX stations have done with the Roku. In the beginning anytime a FOX station was added, anyone across the country could view their local news. FOX apparently did not like that, so if your IP address in out of market, the message on the screen says to call the station. So far the rest of the stations have not done that. I would think they would love to have anyone watch their local news. I like having access to 150 OTA stations from over 40+ states now on the Roku. If something big happens in the news, I can easily watch it live. ONTV is also nice as mentioned. I enjoyed catching the different morning newscasts from ME to FL one morning I was up early here on the West Coast. By the local stations not getting on the bandwagon in offering their channel for streaming, whatever the reason, they are missing a lot of viewers. I would love to have all Portland OTA stations streaming 24/7 along with the sub channels. I still feel that is coming, but it may be sometime in the future.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

fudpucker said:


> Owners of networks face a similar problem, though in a different form. As more and more people use DVRs, fewer and fewer people watch commercials. The big companies that advertise on TV know that. Read the advertising business insider journals and sites. The big national real estate companies have cut most of their television ads in favor of targeted internet ads. There's a reason you see so much more product placement inside TV shows these days; some shows even poke fun at the obvious placement. As more and more people skip commercials, we're moving closer to something I dread: Those banner ads that are splashed on the bottom third of the screen in the middle of a show. Today they are mainly ads for another show on the network, or a movie. But you know that it won't be long before those are car ads, etc. And there will be no way to skip over them. But the point is, networks and locals are facing a budget squeeze. So they will, as newspapers have, look for ways to make that up.


They networks did "look for ways to make that up", and they found it. They charge local stations to carry their programming. That's why we have these fights, because the local stations are asking for more and more money. Not because they are greedy, but because the networks are making them pay more to make up for the shortfall in advertising revenue due to some people skipping ads with DVRs (amazingly, according to CBS only half of those with DVRs routinely skip ads!) and because the networks' costs keep going up for sports rights.

We're already there with banner ads, occasionally you will see a little animation in the area where the 'bug' is to advertise some upcoming programming. I've seen a few programs where they had subtitles (i.e. a scene where you have Yakuza speaking Japanese and they show English subtitles) and they're blocked by the animation. I haven't seen them do that for third party advertisers yet, but just because I haven't seen one where they are pushing a Galaxy Note or F150 pickup doesn't mean no one has done it.


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

James Long said:


> You understand incorrectly. The affiliation agreements are for first television broadcasts in market ... not other methods.


I'd love to see some hard documentation either way.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the networks don't have the full streaming rights, otherwise the big 4 would have all their primetime content available.
Instead it's delayed, often by days, limited markets, tied to other services, etc.

I'm not talking about on-demand stuff (that's a whole other can of worms). I mean live streaming at the time of regular, first-run broadcast.
My understanding was that the stations had exclusive right to that. If they wanted to broadcast it over IP they could, as long as they limit it to the DMA they have the rights for.

Radio figured this out. I can pull up iHeartRadio or the station's app and stream my local stations or stations 1000s of miles away.
Practically all content, not just locally produced stuff. (pro and college sport are the only exceptions I've noticed)

Why can't they get video right?


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

I didn't see this mentioned in the thread (may have missed it though).

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/local-tv/tribune-tv-division-revenue-5-467m-2q/158706


> An increase in retransmission consent revenue of $13.2 million, or 19%
> An increase in carriage fee revenue of $8.8 million, or 41%
> Tribune reported those gains were partially offset by a decrease in core advertising-local national ads excluding political-of $8 million, or 2%.


19% increase in retransmission fees? Yikes!

I guess the carriage fees are mainly for WGN America? I don't see their Superstations increasing revenue much.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

This is pure greed on Tribune's part. They are not going to win any sympathy with viewers. It is ironic that they claim political ads are helping their revenue stream.

Maybe some consumer advocacy group should start running ads, on broadcast competitors, in each of the affected markets targeting politicians, in Congress, for allowing companies like Tribune, who violate the spirit of retransmission consent.

This article just show the pure lie of broadcasters supposed serving the public interest.



STDog said:


> I didn't see this mentioned in the thread (may have missed it though).
> 
> http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/local-tv/tribune-tv-division-revenue-5-467m-2q/158706
> 19% increase in retransmission fees? Yikes!
> ...


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

STDog said:


> I didn't see this mentioned in the thread (may have missed it though).
> 
> http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/local-tv/tribune-tv-division-revenue-5-467m-2q/158706
> 19% increase in retransmission fees? Yikes!
> ...


That means their total retransmission fees are about $69.5 million. A bit over $1.5 million per station (42 stations) on average.

It looks like the $13 mm increase in retransmission fees is a bit more than they lost in advertising (their advertising income dropped $8 MM.) And that includes about $9 MM extra in ads they got for the political season. So without that, they would have dropped in advertising income by about $17 MM. My guess is this is what they are trying to offset with the retrans increases.

Thanks for the link, it's a good insight to the financials of a company like this.

EDIT: If their total retransmission fees are about $69 MM for every provider, I wonder how much of that is Dish? Directv? Each cable company?


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

fudpucker said:


> EDIT: If their total retransmission fees are about $69 MM for every provider, I wonder how much of that is Dish? Directv? Each cable company?


They are careful not to itemize that much.
And the $8M lost in core advertising doesn't include the political ad gains.

The gains from WGNA make up for the core ad losses.

The $13M increase in retrans fees and the $9M in political ads go straight to the bottim line.
That's how they had a $22M increase in revenue (up 5%, $444M to $467M)


----------



## Blowgun (May 23, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> We're already there with banner ads, occasionally you will see a little animation in the area where the 'bug' is to advertise some upcoming programming. I've seen a few programs where they had subtitles (i.e. a scene where you have Yakuza speaking Japanese and they show English subtitles) and they're blocked by the animation. I haven't seen them do that for third party advertisers yet, but just because I haven't seen one where they are pushing a Galaxy Note or F150 pickup doesn't mean no one has done it.


The Travel Channel has this expanding bug reminding the viewers how annoying they can be, that would often enough cover permanent on-screen subtitles until they told the shows to move their subtitles out of the way. Discovery Channel keeps their new big obnoxious bug in view on the bottom-right and places a banner advertisement (such as Bass Pro Shop) on the left during programming. Their new black hole graphics, made to look like a text message, periodically suck the life out of the program you are now watching by covering a large portion of the screen with upcoming programming reminders.

I can't remember offhand, but one or perhaps two of the big Networks are completely covering the bottom-third with an animated upcoming programming advertisement. And not to feel left out, the local channels are inserting their ads for the 11pm news with a headline banner during network programming. And, when you do watch for breaking news they like to referrer you to follow their Facebook page or use their stupid app to get updates on the story rather then breaking into programming and serving the whole community.

And of course the ID bug isn't about ID at all, if it was the bug would be there during commercials. The phallic symbol does nothing to impede someone recording the program as they don't care. It is as if it's sole purpose is to annoy the people legitimately watching the program. Whether it is cable news or some other channel filling the screen with as much animated nonsense as they can, it's not as bad as this example:






At least not yet. And for those that claim to ignore the on-screen graphic mess, marvelous, you're part of the problem.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

STDog said:


> Radio figured this out. I can pull up iHeartRadio or the station's app and stream my local stations or stations 1000s of miles away.
> Practically all content, not just locally produced stuff. (pro and college sport are the only exceptions I've noticed)
> 
> Why can't they get video right?


Radio really just can't be compared to video. Radio went down a different path than tv did and tv will never follow the same path. I look at all the streaming options for radio as things that have hurt sales of cds and such not as a way of changing how over the air radio works. Very very different.


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> Radio really just can't be compared to video. Radio went down a different path than tv did and tv will never follow the same path. I look at all the streaming options for radio as things that have hurt sales of cds and such not as a way of changing how over the air radio works. Very very different.


Not talking about music. Talking about nationwide, syndicated shows that are aired live or tape delayed.

They are generally on single stations in a given market.

Early on stations couldn't stream them, all they could stream were locally produced shows. But radio figured out that letting the stations stream the shows was good for business.

So I now have many ways to listen to a given show, from a plethora of stations on iHeartRadio, the stations own streaming app/website, to the show's own app/site.

Previous shows are paywalled, for a few days in some cases, after a few days in other cases, sometimes never. They keep the commercials intact, offer narrated by the show host. Local station commercials are missing from the show's archive, but local station archive keep local ads.

Video could follow a similar model.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Here in NW Oregon we have little variety of talk radio. I am not a fan of Rush. The distant stations that run talk, fade and have noise. A few years ago I bought a wifi radio. I can listen to nearly every talk show in the World. It is a blast. I may listen to a talk station out of the UK, or Australia, New Zealand, or anyway in US or Canada. I wish TV would have gone in the same direction. Even though with the Roku, where TV channels are available Worldwide, we still do not have what we have with streaming radio.I love streaming. It has opened up a world I never knew existed and it improves daily. New streaming channels are available all of the time.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

Blowgun said:


> The Travel Channel has this expanding bug reminding the viewers how annoying they can be, that would often enough cover permanent on-screen subtitles until they told the shows to move their subtitles out of the way. Discovery Channel keeps their new big obnoxious bug in view on the bottom-right and places a banner advertisement (such as Bass Pro Shop) on the left during programming. Their new black hole graphics, made to look like a text message, periodically suck the life out of the program you are now watching by covering a large portion of the screen with upcoming programming reminders.
> 
> I can't remember offhand, but one or perhaps two of the big Networks are completely covering the bottom-third with an animated upcoming programming advertisement. And not to feel left out, the local channels are inserting their ads for the 11pm news with a headline banner during network programming. And, when you do watch for breaking news they like to referrer you to follow their Facebook page or use their stupid app to get updates on the story rather then breaking into programming and serving the whole community.
> 
> ...


Thanks for reminding this cord cutter how awful cable/satellite can be. From what you are describing, it has become a lot worse since I was last connected.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

To be fair, John Oliver's graphics were mocking Indian TV. But there are American channels who can't stop putting banners up.


----------



## oldanbo (May 20, 2004)

hijacked :nono2:


----------



## KevinRS (Oct 9, 2007)

At this point, with both sides essentially having said the other side was intransigent and unwilling to negotiate, one side claimed to want arbitration, the other claimed to want to go before a judge, and nothing since, it may be that the tribune stations aren't coming back any time soon.
Yes some people will switch providers over it, but others won't, and will eventually basically forget about the stations, especially since they are not listed in the guide(maybe that's why). The stations will be marginalized in the minds of those who don't switch, and will lose value. Tribune is losing re-transmission fees over this from the beginning, as well as advertising revenue. 
What happens when the negotiations come up between tribune and direct, or comcast, or time warner? Those companies may see a reason to take a harder line in negotiations than they would have otherwise.

At this point, I was trying to remember just what if anything I was watching on KTLA, and couldn't remember. Looking it up, there are 5 scripted shows I was watching, they have all been between seasons, and the first don't start up until mid October. They've been off since April or May. I guess if it's not back I have less recording conflicts to worry about.
At this point, I can still watch those shows past 5 episodes at the network's site anyway, so maybe I'll keep watching them.
There's another suicidal issue for shows like the adding more and more commercials. Since when is it a full 6 months between one season and the next. By the time a show comes back, I've half forgotten about it, and watch or record something else in that time slot. It's also irritating when some networks split seasons, so there's a season 5.1 and 5.2, then even worse when you look at the season start dates, each year started later, so they spread 5 seasons over 6 years.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Yes, there used to be that 3 month Summer break and then the new season would begin. TV programs seem to start their new seasons at about any time now.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

KevinRS said:


> At this point, with both sides essentially having said the other side was intransigent and unwilling to negotiate, one side claimed to want arbitration, the other claimed to want to go before a judge, and nothing since, it may be that the tribune stations aren't coming back any time soon.
> Yes some people will switch providers over it, but others won't, and will eventually basically forget about the stations, especially since they are not listed in the guide(maybe that's why). The stations will be marginalized in the minds of those who don't switch, and will lose value. Tribune is losing re-transmission fees over this from the beginning, as well as advertising revenue.
> What happens when the negotiations come up between tribune and direct, or comcast, or time warner? Those companies may see a reason to take a harder line in negotiations than they would have otherwise.
> 
> ...


For me I "lost" my local FOX station which normally would be a big deal. However I only live eight tenths of a mile from their transmitter and can pick them up with a paper clip or coat hanger if I wanted to and my DVR has an OTA module. I needed OTA anyway to get the "netlet" sub-channels.

Fortunately Dish is providing the guide data for the "lost" station in the EPG. Ironically Tribune is the company that provides the EPG guide data.


----------



## neilo (Aug 7, 2006)

The CW shows I watch come back the first week in October. I really hope this is resolved before that.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Talks have resumed ... so there is some hope.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Talks have resumed. At least that is good.


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

That is good because there aren't any OTA modules available for the Hopper. The Tribune negotiation caused a scramble and all of the online sites say backorder and end of September.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

Having a 211k for several years now, aren't most of the newer Hoppers/Joeys able to get OTA?


----------



## n0qcu (Mar 23, 2002)

OTA requires an optional part that DISH is currently out of stock 


Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

Nope, not without this: https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Over-Air-Tuner-Receiver/dp/B00B4X2JHY



mwdxer said:


> Having a 211k for several years now, aren't most of the newer Hoppers/Joeys able to get OTA?


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

No other Dish receivers has any built in OTA module except the 211k? That is odd. I guess that was a good investment and having the DVR function with the outboard HDD is also very nice. Is the 211k still available? Maybe I should pick up a spare and put it away increase mine dies. However, as many years that I had the 2700, it never died either. I retired it when I bought the 211k.


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

You can still buy them. Lots if refurbished and used ones out there.

The newer 211z doesn't have the builtin OTA tuner.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

In the meantime I did do some checking and Dish Depot still has them for $99, so not a bad price. I may buy one as a back up, but I presume Dish would replace mine, if they are available at the time, but who knows if they will be available then. I paid $169 back when I bought mine years ago. I guess keeping a new one in the box, if I ever need one, would not be a bad idea. However, by the time I might need it, Dish may have changed to some other transmission form. I bought the 211k at the time as it is HD and several new channels I could not get with the old 2700, being MPEG2, I bought it and then discovered the HDD option and the OTA tuner. The OTA tuner did not do much much good until our translators finally went digital. But it sure is a nice receiver all in one package, but I do wish it would to Dish on Demand, but no streaming option, so that it why I am glad I do have the Roku.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

Got an install scheduled for today (Hopper 3, two 4K Joeys) - I was interested in getting a module for OTA, but thinking about it, such a module would be of very limited capability for me, since it only allows viewing/recording one channel at a time. We've got a thin square OTA antenna we use to watch the locals live if we've got bad weather interfering with our satellite reception, but I never hooked up my AM-21 for the Genie, we just connect the antenna directly to the TV.

If we could hook up an OTA to the Hopper that allowed us to record more than one OTA channel at once (we tend to record everything we watch and then watch at our leisure) I'd actually consider a good outside OTA antenna - our indoor one has to be oriented in different directions to get different channels. But for OTA to be a true option for us, it sounds like we'd have to spend money on some kind of Tivo option and a good outdoor antenna. A real PIA. Which is why having Dish work out deals with our local network providers is a Really Big Deal for us.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

mwdxer said:


> No other Dish receivers has any built in OTA module except the 211k? That is odd. I guess that was a good investment and having the DVR function with the outboard HDD is also very nice. Is the 211k still available? Maybe I should pick up a spare and put it away increase mine dies. However, as many years that I had the 2700, it never died either. I retired it when I bought the 211k.


The VIP 612 has a built in OTA module.


----------



## fudpucker (Jul 23, 2007)

It's really interesting that the newer equipment doesn't have OTA built in. My old Directv IRD/DVR back in 2007/8 had OTA capabilities built in; I was shocked when I plugged in a digital OTA antenna in it, did a scan, and suddenly had a plethora of KC locals and sub-stations in the guide!


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

Most likely a cost savings. Only those who want it get and DISH produces/pays for less of them. In fact some TV's are coming out without an ATSC (OTA) tuner and you can buy an outboard unit if you want it.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

A combination of cost savings, especially since it appears the majority of Dish customers don't buy/use the add-on OTA module AND the fact that OTA tuners have still been an evolving and improving technology. Also, with the potential to introduce MP4 and also UHD broadcast via OTA at some point, it will be a whole lot easier to offer new OTA modules for their 4K receivers than to have to swap out an entire receiver.


----------



## Tiki God (Sep 3, 2007)

Excuse my technical ignorance, but are some suggesting that I can record the CW with my Hopper 3 using an OTA antenna? Funny I just returned to Dish after a horrible year with DirecT and as soon as I return they get into a dispute with the only major network I actually watch. I'm just hoping they get all of this straightened out by the time the Flash returns.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Off topic ATSC 3.0 discussion moved to it's own thread ...
http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/222639-atsc-30/


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Tiki God said:


> Excuse my technical ignorance, but are some suggesting that I can record the CW with my Hopper 3 using an OTA antenna?


If you can find one of the USB tuner models and can receive your CW OTA you would be good to go.
The first hard part is finding the module.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

mwdxer said:


> P.S. I guess if I wanted to buy a spare 211k for a backup, I will be safe. I like having the OTA tuner built in.


There seems to be an interesting result with having a Dish OTA tuner built in or the module or the dongle for some reason when the TV signal drops down to 58%,the lost signal warning appears. 

But with the OTA tuner built in my TV, the signal can drop to 10% before I lose the picture?


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I gather the tuner in the 211k is not the most sensitive, dropping off at only 58%. Here, I am close enough to the translators I get 100% on all but one and that one 94-95%. Even my more sensitive tuners still will not lock on any distant signals. Digital does not like multipath. Gone are the days of the snowy picture being acceptable. Either I get it, or I don't. No in between here these days.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

Depends on the base for the percentage. The TV could be basing it as 0 is where the TV can no longer decode the signal where the 211K tuner is basing 0 off of complete lack of any signal.


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

The DISH USB OTA tuner has some weird issues.

1. Lack of shielding; it can be affected by electronic around it.
2. Scanning. It scans at about 2 seconds per channel. My TV does about 4 seconds,and I get more channels through my TV.
3. The inability to scan fro a specific channel.
4. String channels sometimes don't scan, hence why #3 would be nice.
5. As other's have pointed out, only one tuner. If you have Joeys, one one TC can watch OTA. While Super Joeys do have a USB port; as probably other Joeys, none support the USB OTA tuner.

For me, I do not have to worry about the multiple TV or viewer issue. But, fro families, it could be a problem. Especially, with broadcaster disputes occurring almost constantly.

One would think that a firmware update would allow at least Super Joeys to also support an USEB OTA module.

Of course, trying to find one, since the Tribune dispute started, is an issue.

Finally, if you buy one, it should not cost above $39.99. I saw one on E-Bay for well over $100.

Of course, it could be worse. DirectTV this box, about the size of a hopper, for OTA. It will only scan in channels that it has in a database which has not been maintained fro at least 5 years. Even if it gets a signal; it ignores it. To get around it, you keep have to put in secondary zip codes to allow it scan fro missing channels at the same frequency. For a place like Denver, it takes about 8 or 9 zip codes to do it. In the end, you have a frequency, and the channel will have the wrong ID. For example, RF 15 on Houston has all the same subchannels as RF 15 in Denver, but RF 15 Houston was religious channels, but in Denver they are a Spanish channel plus three general sub channels.

Finally, OTA is provided as a "convenience", but DISH would rather have you watch satellite.



Jhon69 said:


> There seems to be an interesting result with having a Dish OTA tuner built in or the module or the dongle for some reason when the TV signal drops down to 58%,the lost signal warning appears.
> 
> But with the OTA tuner built in my TV, the signal can drop to 10% before I lose the picture?


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I am sure Dish would have the viewer watch satellite, but at least at this time, most of the sub channel fare is not available on Dish, so having that OTA tuner is a real plus.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I do not believe DISH cares how you watch (or if you watch) as long as you are paying your subscription.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

Resolved short time ago.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Here's the immediate news release:

*DISH and Tribune Broadcasting Reach Agreement on Carriage and Retransmission Consent*​*Comprehensive Contract Covers 42 Local Television Stations and Cable Net WGN America*​
CHICAGO and ENGLEWOOD, Colo., Sept. 3, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Tribune Broadcasting, a subsidiary of Tribune Media (NYSE: TRCO), and DISH Network L.L.C., a wholly-owned subsidiary of DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH), today announced a long-term, comprehensive agreement on carriage and retransmission consent. The agreement restores DISH carriage of Tribune Broadcasting's 42 local television stations in 33 markets, and Tribune's cable network, WGN America.

The companies issued the following joint statement:

"We want to thank our viewers and customers for their patience and support as we worked through this lengthy process. We're pleased to move forward and again be able to provide the content of Tribune's local stations and WGN America for years to come."

Both WGN America and Tribune's local stations are expected to again be available to DISH customers later today. Terms of the agreement were not disclosed.


----------



## STDog (Mar 22, 2007)

I got an email from Dish at 7pm (CDT) telling me that my one Tribune owned local is back.

Also a code for a free PPV movie


----------



## david91722 (Oct 10, 2010)

inkahauts said:


> I can see this extending till September easily...


Good call. Can you give me next week's winning Powerball numbers? :righton:


----------



## david91722 (Oct 10, 2010)

I'm pleasantly surprised that both sides negotiated during a holiday weekend! Especially at this stage of the dispute. They could have easily taken the weekend off and returned to the bargaining table on Tuesday.


----------



## John79605 (Feb 10, 2007)

We lost WPIX on 916 when the dispute started. We lost the message from Dish on 916 when the EPG changes happened. WPIX hasn't been restored for us. Should I expect it? I'm in Abilene, and WPIX filled in for CW not uplinked.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

Amazing how this happened. September 1st WGN Chicago ceased being the CW station in town and began doing their own independent programming. Could it be that Tribune finally figured out they needed those local Chicago viewers in their hometown? Might be the first intelligent thing they've done in months.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Gee, I wonder how many tribune stations air college football and how many calls they got ripping them when the morning games wherent on?


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

inkahauts said:


> Gee, I wonder how many tribune stations air college football and how many calls they got ripping them when the morning games wherent on?


In Cleveland the Tribune station is our FOX affiliate. They were running ads on FOX 8 during the dispute about Dish subscribers losing NFL & College Football. The funny thing is unless a Dish subscriber had OTA access they would never see the spots.

I get the impression we were the exception, not the rule. The affected locals appear to be mainly CW affiliates in other markets.

I take back my previous statement. I forgot Tribune "inherited" the "New World" stations that for a time were FOX O&O's. All networks were affected, but it's FOX by far that they have the most of, not CW.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Tribune owns and/or operates 14 Fox stations (including Seattle home of the NFC Seahawks), 12 CW stations, 6 CBS stations, 3 ABC stations, 3 MyNetworkTV stations, 2 NBC stations along with 2 independents.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

Michael P said:


> They were running ads on FOX 8 during the dispute about Dish subscribers losing NFL & College Football. The funny thing is unless a Dish subscriber had OTA access they would never see the spots.


Yeah same thing where I live, I went to their facebook page and asked them why they were running ads asking for Dish customers to call Dish to demand their football back when Dish customers couldn't see the ad anyway, of course they didn't respond, not that I expected them to.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

They do that to target people watching at friend's homes or bars & restaraunts, as well as subscribers to other providers who might have been thinking of switching to Dish.


----------



## neilo (Aug 7, 2006)

Just noticed that the CW was back on my Hopper. With the fall season coming up, it is no big surprise that they finally came to an agreement. I am glad I really didn't get any noticeable impact from this dispute so far. Of course, we don't know the actual agreement and next February our bills may reflect the impact.


----------

