# VOOM sues Dish.



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6535686



> An intra-family battle is brewing between Rainbow Media's Voom suite of high-definition services and Voom satellite owner EchoStar Satellite LLC.
> 
> Earlier this month, New York State Supreme Court judge Richard Lowe granted Voom a preliminary injunction/temporary restraining order barring EchoStar's Dish Network from moving the HD service's 15 channels to a lower-penetrated HD tier, according to sources close to both parties.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

If it weren't for Dish, just how many people would have Voom at all right now? This doesn't appear to be very well thought out on Voom's end.


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

Can't we all just get along??  

I wonder how long the current carriage contract runs - if I were Voom I'd be real concerned this action would result in E* dropping them entirely - or only agreeing to carry a few of their channels - after that contract ends. By then E* should have plenty of other HD channels up (assuming it doesn't end before December and E* actually gets the new birds in the air!) and wouldn't need Voom to keep their channel count high.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

We practically need a subforum for DISH and the courts. Wow.

The "temporary restraining order" should mean that the Voom 15 will magically appear on the receivers of anyone subscribed to Essentials. I'll have to dig into the court documents to see what is actually ordered here.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Very odd... and for as much as I'm a supporter of Voom... it says something when you need to sue to keep your channels up. This kind of thing is a bad precedent, especially when you figure Voom is kind of being done a favor to some extent with Dish carrying them anyway since it appears DirecTV is fine not touching them at all.


----------



## LinkNuc (Jul 4, 2007)

VooM is not a big draw, i could live with out it. I'll have to read into the lawsuit...but all in all, it's going to be tough now having the ability to have HD-tiers with the available nationals now, Dish better tread lightly...more options more tiers and a-la-carte..MAYBE<--- don;t bash me.


----------



## rey_1178 (Dec 12, 2007)

i don't understand. why hurt the hand that feeds you? if it wasn't for dish Voom would've been gone along time ago! i like some of the voom channels but after this stunt if i was Dish i'd dropped them!:kickbutt:


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

Dish Voom sued drop Voom and give us some real HD programs


----------



## jimborst (Jun 13, 2006)

Wild speculation here but with Voom's repeating schedule and now the lawsuit, has Voom run out of money? No budget for new shows and now this, is the folding far in the future?


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Very odd... and for as much as I'm a supporter of Voom... it says something when you need to sue to keep your channels up. This kind of thing is a bad precedent, especially when you figure Voom is kind of being done a favor to some extent with Dish carrying them anyway since it appears DirecTV is fine not touching them at all.


VOOM is acting back stabbers. As I said before in another thread as soon as Dish has room for all HBO, STARZ channels to be in HD VOOM is history. Too many repeats! Hopefully in late Spring when 1 bird is online.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

In the bigger picture...

We just saw COMCAST and the NFL nework, issue (similar thing), be sent back down to lower courts...

All of this is comming of the same issue/case, that DirecTV/HDNet did in December (That reached an out of court settlement).

Maybe... that settlement/battle on DirecTV/HDNet set a precedent... and these other combinations of companies are thinking they have a chance to change their fortunes.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

BTW: Voom has a minimum commitment to spend money on their programming. If they fail to spend enough, DISH can drop them without penalty. ($100k per year up to $500k total with a 15 year contract term.)


----------



## DBS Commando (Apr 7, 2006)

I hope Dish drops all 15 of them altogether


----------



## rtd2 (Oct 2, 2006)

DBS Commando said:


> I hope Dish drops all 15 of them altogether


Even if dish dont drop them I just DID! Got the 10.00 HD package that goes woth AT 250 - Voom and saved 10.00 a month


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

rtd2 said:


> Even if dish dont drop them I just DID! Got the 10.00 HD package that goes woth AT 250 - Voom and saved 10.00 a month


And that is precisely why Voom is suing Dish Network.

I'll assume Voom believes they are supposed to be in the minimum HD package, and that is how they are trying to get their contract interpreted. Dish Network is interpreting this differently, so they've placed the Voom channels on a different package.


----------



## LinkNuc (Jul 4, 2007)

Well now that we are in the rant mode, drop 'em all and make room for the nationals...Comcast is kicking A$$ this year, D* has made their statement by action, Dish needs to set it....and forget it!


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

LinkNuc said:


> Well now that we are in the rant mode, drop 'em all and make room for the nationals...Comcast is kicking A$$ this year, D* has made their statement by action, Dish needs to set it....and forget it!


I was a long time Dish customer before switching sides.

Amazes me how much has changed in 12 months.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Does not seem to be a very smart move. Voom won't know what to do if they get dropped. Many are already dropping them.


----------



## lacruz (Feb 24, 2005)

I can't understand why people rip on Voom's programming but get all hyped up about Dish adding other HD Channels that are nothing more than simulcasts of their SD counterparts that we have seen for years? Nothing new here. Sure, the PQ is better, but how about some original, new channels with different programming? Voom offers programming you can't find on HBO or one of the "talky," commerical-ridden Discovery HD channels. If Dish dumps Voom, they won't be the "leader" in HD anymore and that's a debatable declaration now...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

FYI: I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but here is the exact text of what Cablevision says about the Voom HD deal with Echostar in their SEC filings:In April 2005, subsidiaries of the Company entered into agreements with EchoStar relating to the launch and operation of the business of Rainbow HD Holdings LLC, the Company's VOOM HD Networks high definition television programming service, subject to the closing of the sale of our satellite (Rainbow 1) to EchoStar which occurred in November 2005. Under those arrangements, EchoStar initially distributed in 2005 a portion (10 of 21 channels) of the VOOM HD Networks programming service and, beginning in 2006, began carrying all 15 of the channels then included in the programming service. In connection with the arrangements, EchoStar was issued a 20% interest in Rainbow HD Holdings, the Company's subsidiary owning the VOOM HD Networks, and that 20% interest will not be diluted until $500,000 in cash has been invested in Rainbow HD Holdings' equity by the Company.

Under the terms of the affiliation arrangements with EchoStar covering the VOOM HD Networks for a 15 year term, if Rainbow HD Holdings fails to spend $100,000 per year (subject to reduction to reflect permanent reductions in the number of channels constituting the VOOM HD service), up to a maximum of $500,000 in the aggregate, on its service offerings, EchoStar may terminate the affiliation agreement. Echostar has exercised its audit rights under the affiliation agreement to determine whether Rainbow HD Holdings is in compliance with these requirements. The Company has the right to terminate the affiliation agreement if the VOOM HD Networks are discontinued in the future.​
It looks like all Cablevision has to do is spend half a million dollars total on VOOM HD content to satisfy the contract, redeem the 20% ownership away from DISH, and lock DISH in to a carriage contract until 2020.

Unmentioned so far, one thing that is NOT in Cablevision's favor in the case is the fact that the initial Voom offering on DISH Network was a separate package of 10 channels for $5 that required purchase of the base "HD tier" for $9.99 . The parties know the contracts (specifically - whether or not "base tier" was guaranteed when DISH created the DishHD package in February of 2006) but allowing Voom to be an add-on initially can't help their argument.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

James Long said:


> Unmentioned so far, one thing that is NOT in Cablevision's favor in the case is the fact that the initial Voom offering on DISH Network was a separate package of 10 channels for $5 that required purchase of the base "HD tier" for $9.99 . The parties know the contracts (specifically - whether or not "base tier" was guaranteed when DISH created the DishHD package in February of 2006) but allowing Voom to be an add-on initially can't help their argument.


Yeah, that is what I was thinking... This would only be a return to the original carriage status, albeit with more than the initial 10 channels, for Voom... so unless they have an amended contract somewhere that guarantees them some preferential placement, it seems to me they have no leg to stand on and are just risking violating the contract themselves by even pursuing this.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

BTW: The status of the preliminary restraining order and injunction at the court website is showing as "open" with no decision linked. (Perhaps that is why the Voom channels are not in Essentials tonight?)

It is case 600292/2008 (for those who like to track these things) --- and as noted in the NFL thread, it is the same judge!


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> We practically need a subforum for DISH and the courts. Wow.


At this point, the subforum idea seems like a good idea.

Just how expensive is the Voom deal to Dish per HD subscriber? Anyone know?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

phrelin said:


> Just how expensive is the Voom deal to Dish per HD subscriber? Anyone know?


When originally added, at 10 Voom channels, it was a $5 add-on.

Later it became part of the $20 combined package for all HD.

Now it is part of the $10 difference in price for the Ultimate vs the Essentials pack... but there are 15 Vooms in there + 5 other non-Vooms.

So... all we know is that it is less than $10, since those other channels are worth something... but may be more than the original $5.


----------



## Austin316 (Dec 9, 2007)

HDMe said:


> When originally added, at 10 Voom channels, it was a $5 add-on.
> 
> Later it became part of the $20 combined package for all HD.
> 
> ...


I am sorry but everyone please let Voom Die.

Either way they loose a customer. I plan on downgrading to essentials when my free HD months are up. So voom looses a viewer ( not to say I watch voom past the first week of of having Dish HD as voom still running same crap they were back in late dec when I got dish HD)

Option 2 I cancel HD all togther and pay the 6 dollar plently fee each month for having a HD box and no hd.

Option 3 Drop Dish all together if I could not drop voom.

Either way people are going to drop voom.

HDnet is even repeative and I cant find stuff to watch on anything on the DISHHD Ultimate pack. I would trade voom for USA and SCI-fi FX and either CNN or Fox News... Comedy Central. ETC.


----------



## buzzcut (Dec 12, 2006)

i just went from HD Ultimate to HD Essentials on Feb 27th.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Austin316 said:


> HDnet is even repeative and I cant find stuff to watch on anything on the DISHHD Ultimate pack. I would trade voom for USA and SCI-fi FX and either CNN or Fox News... Comedy Central. ETC.


Couldn't ignore this part of your post... You find HDNet repetitive, and Voom as well... but don't think USA or SciFi or FX are repetitive?

I've seen nights where on FX the same movie comes on back-to-back! That's repetitive to me.

It's a fair point to complaint about repetition... but please be fair and note that many of the channels you'd trade Voom for are also just as repetitive.

Now, if you like the programming on SciFi better than a particular Voom channel, that's cool. I don't watch Ultra at all, for instance, on Voom... but to state Voom is bad because it is repetitive, and then turn a blind eye to the same kind of repetitiveness on another channel makes no sense to me.


----------



## Austin316 (Dec 9, 2007)

HDMe said:


> Couldn't ignore this part of your post... You find HDNet repetitive, and Voom as well... but don't think USA or SciFi or FX are repetitive?
> 
> I've seen nights where on FX the same movie comes on back-to-back! That's repetitive to me.
> 
> ...


Ok maybe I should put it this way

FX , Sci-fi , USA are repeative but they are repeative on shows people actually want to see. I am a big Starcraft and WoW player. But I am sorry how many times are Gameplay going to show the Blizzard world wide inventational from 07.

I like the concept of voom but really feel that the could condense channels to reduce repeative . Like take 4 of the speciality movie channels and just make it one.

Basically I shown people Voom and they are all impressed with it until they go to see what else is on and they see constant repeative content. With no real public schedule to add more.

At least I know with USA, Sci-fi , etc that they have prime time content that is in HD. Which like any broadcast network with have there season and there off season. I could really care less what is not in "Prime Time" Be it on Voom or Cable or Broadcast networks.

I do take back the comment about HDnet because while it really not a channel I got into they are no where as bad as Voom channels are.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Let's stay on the topic of the Voom vs EchoStar lawsuit, shall we? This isn't about the desire for other channels. We have a rant thread in the DISH HD forum for that.
:backtotop

FYI: Cablevision announced it's annual numbers today for 2007 ... according to the report, there were 300,000 Voom subscribers Dec 31st, 2006 and 1.8 million Sept 30, 2007. As of the end of 2007,r 2.1 million people have Voom. This includes DISH Network HD subscribers (HD Ultimate) and Cablevision subscribers.

The lawsuit was filed January 31st, before the new HD packages went into effect.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

That's interesting numbers. Wonder now many of those are from Cablevision? If it's 1/3 then that means E* only had about 1.5 million HD subs at the end of 2007. About 10% for their total subscriber base.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I'd say 1.5 million would be a fair guess ... perhaps high.
Cablevision did not begin to announce their Voom subscriber count until 2007.
Some of the 1.8 million in September were Cablevision subscribers.

I hope we will see better numbers in court documents ... the one positive thing about everybody suing DISH Network is the disclosures in court documents of numbers that DISH (and DirecTV) do not normally give out.


----------



## peak_reception (Feb 10, 2008)

I have to say that for me there is content I like on the VOOM networks. However, as everyone else often notes, there is not enough NEW content. I'll probably drop down to HD Essentials come May when my 10 months of 1/2 off HD offer ends.


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

Is Voom really worth ten dollars more a month, not for me I decided I would rather have STARZ instead.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

If offered the 1 cent deal on Voom like Cinemax I wouldn't take it if it means fewer nationals with new primetime programming. And right now, that's what it means.

However, I want Universal HD and HDNet Movies, so I'll pay the $10 with or without the Voom channels.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

Cablevision did announce their HD sub count and it was over 1 million giving cablevision HD penetration 
of 33 percent. SO E*'s HD subs is slightly over 1 million for a penetration of about seven percent. Why is E*s penetration so low? E charged 20 for HD and 5 for locals and only provided 4 HD locals in 35 markets and does not have HD rsns for many large markets. Cablevision does not charge for HD or locals. and cablevision provieds at least 7 HD locals and 4 HD rsns to all subs. cablevision provides YES HD which E* does not even have carriage agreement.


----------



## rey_1178 (Dec 12, 2007)

phrelin said:


> If offered the 1 cent deal on Voom like Cinemax I wouldn't take it if it means fewer nationals with new primetime programming. And right now, that's what it means.
> 
> However, I want Universal HD and HDNet Movies, so I'll pay the $10 with or without the Voom channels.


yeah same here. i want the unhd and hdnet so i have topay the $10. voom alone isn't worth that. besides the fact that voom isn't investing much for new programming they decide to sue dish is incredible to me! they should do this to dish :gott:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

phrelin said:


> If offered the 1 cent deal on Voom like Cinemax I wouldn't take it if it means fewer nationals with new primetime programming. And right now, that's what it means.


That's not what it means. Voom is absolutely NOT preventing new HD channels from launching on Dish. Follow the uplink reports and you'll see some empty transponders, space for channels on others, and a few channels already "uplinked" but not yet active for subscribers.

Unless and until all that is full and active, you can't even begin to "blame" Voom for keeping channels off Dish. It simply is not true.


----------



## rey_1178 (Dec 12, 2007)

HDMe said:


> That's not what it means. Voom is absolutely NOT preventing new HD channels from launching on Dish. Follow the uplink reports and you'll see some empty transponders, space for channels on others, and a few channels already "uplinked" but not yet active for subscribers.
> 
> Unless and until all that is full and active, you can't even begin to "blame" Voom for keeping channels off Dish. It simply is not true.


that is correct but in my opinion for the way voom is acting against dish and the poor effort they put towards new programming they are not worth even $10
as far as them preventing dish from adding channels you are 100% correct that this is not the case. :new_cussi


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

HDMe said:


> That's not what it means. Voom is absolutely NOT preventing new HD channels from launching on Dish. Follow the uplink reports and you'll see some empty transponders, space for channels on others, and a few channels already "uplinked" but not yet active for subscribers.
> 
> Unless and until all that is full and active, you can't even begin to "blame" Voom for keeping channels off Dish. It simply is not true.


What everyone is assuming is that if Dish were not carrying Voom they wouldn't have used those 15 channels for other HD last October. I find that hard to believe.


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

I do not understand according to James Voom has to produce a certin # of new program hours. Voom is not doing this so why is Dish still keeping Voom?? Why not drop them and add more popular HD Channels???


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

tomcrown1 said:


> I do not understand according to James Voom has to produce a certin # of new program hours. Voom is not doing this so why is Dish still keeping Voom??


I thought it wasn't the "# of new program hours," but the amount of money spent to acquire programming. And that is why there is a lawsuit.


----------



## rey_1178 (Dec 12, 2007)

Greg Bimson said:


> I thought it wasn't the "# of new program hours," but the amount of money spent to acquire programming. And that is why there is a lawsuit.


correct. it's the amount of money


----------



## ClaudeR (Dec 7, 2003)

I know I dropped to the HD Essentials the first day it came out. I bet if there was a poll, we would see a HUGE percentage like this. Another dying company pissed becaused they are going down. QUICK - CALL THE LAWYERS! :money: :money: :money: :money:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

tomcrown1 said:


> I do not understand according to James Voom has to produce a certin # of new program hours. Voom is not doing this so why is Dish still keeping Voom?? Why not drop them and add more popular HD Channels???


It is money, not hours, that is the benchmark for Voom ...


James Long said:


> Under the terms of the affiliation arrangements with EchoStar covering the VOOM HD Networks for a 15 year term, *if Rainbow HD Holdings fails to spend $100,000 per year* (subject to reduction to reflect permanent reductions in the number of channels constituting the VOOM HD service), *up to a maximum of $500,000 in the aggregate*, on its service offerings, *EchoStar may terminate the affiliation agreement*. *Echostar has exercised its audit rights under the affiliation agreement to determine whether Rainbow HD Holdings is in compliance with these requirements.* The Company has the right to terminate the affiliation agreement if the VOOM HD Networks are discontinued in the future.


Emphasis added on the important parts. Apparently DISH believes Cablevision isn't spending enough on Voom programming -- or there would not be an audit underway.

The bad part is if Cablevision fails the worst case scenario is DISH gets out of the contract. DISH loses content.


----------



## racton1 (Nov 7, 2007)

tomcrown1 said:


> Dish Voom sued drop Voom and give us some real HD programs


AMEN!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

An update from the 2007 10K filed by Cablevision (made public yesterday):
In 2005, subsidiaries of the Company entered into agreements with EchoStar by which EchoStar acquired a 20% interest in VOOM HD and agreed to distribute VOOM on its DISH Network for a 15-year term. The affiliation agreement with EchoStar for such distribution provides that if VOOM HD fails to spend $100 million per year (subject to reduction to the extent that the number of offered channels is reduced to fewer than 21), up to a maximum of $500 million in the aggregate, on VOOM, EchoStar may seek to terminate the agreement under certain circumstances. On January 30, 2008, EchoStar purported to terminate the affiliation agreement, effective February 1, 2008, based on its assertion that VOOM HD had failed to comply with this spending provision in 2006. On January 31, 2008, VOOM HD sought and obtained a temporary restraining order from New York Supreme Court for New York County prohibiting EchoStar from terminating the affiliation agreement. In conjunction with its request for a temporary restraining order, VOOM HD filed a lawsuit against EchoStar asserting that EchoStar did not have the right to terminate the affiliation agreement. That lawsuit is pending, as is the court's decision on VOOM HD's motion for a preliminary injunction. Separately, on February 1, 2008, EchoStar began to distribute VOOM in a manner that the Company believes violates EchoStar's obligations under the affiliation agreement. On February 4, 2008, VOOM HD notified EchoStar of its position that this new distribution constitutes a material breach of the affiliation agreement and reserved all its rights and remedies.​Apparently DISH didn't like the audit!

The oddest part of this, is the paragraph quoted previously is from Cablevision's 3rd quarter report - and it gives $100k and $500k number. Now in the annual report it is $100 million and $500 million.


----------



## rey_1178 (Dec 12, 2007)

racton1 said:


> AMEN!


+1:cuttle:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

phrelin said:


> What everyone is assuming is that if Dish were not carrying Voom they wouldn't have used those 15 channels for other HD last October. I find that hard to believe.


There are apparently 7 uplinked HD channels right now that are not available to us... Voom is not preventing those from being turned on... so it is a reasonable leap to say that even if Voom was not on Dish at all 6 months ago, we would still not have SciFi, USA, etc. at this point.

We don't know what is preventing some of the new HD channels launching on Dish... but right at this moment it isn't lack of bandwidth because of having Voom that is preventing.


----------



## gargoyle8 (Mar 1, 2008)

i wish i had read this sooner. i just switched to D* because i did not appreciate how dish rearranged thier hd packages. the total hd package for $29.99 was a good idea except you are not allowed to add any SD packages to it. i felt dish was punishing everybody that was demanding a complete hd package. i will regret leaving dish, but i have cnn hd and twc hd to help me get over it. the voom chennels (even though they suck) is what gave dish the advantage over D*. they should be part of the basic hd package, without them, i dont see how dish can continue to make their bogus claim "we have the most hd channels available" dish owes voom some respect.


----------



## rey_1178 (Dec 12, 2007)

gargoyle8 said:


> i wish i had read this sooner. i just switched to D* because i did not appreciate how dish rearranged thier hd packages. the total hd package for $29.99 was a good idea except you are not allowed to add any SD packages to it. i felt dish was punishing everybody that was demanding a complete hd package. i will regret leaving dish, but i have cnn hd and twc hd to help me get over it. the voom chennels (even though they suck) is what gave dish the advantage over D*. they should be part of the basic hd package, without them, i dont see how dish can continue to make their bogus claim "we have the most hd channels available" dish owes voom some respect.


:smoking:


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

James Long said:


> The oddest part of this, is the paragraph quoted previously is from Cablevision's 3rd quarter report - and it gives $100k and $500k number. Now in the annual report it is $100 million and $500 million.


The larger number strikes me as much more believable. I don't expect the lower number would pay for very many new productions at all.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

$100k would barely pay for a single episode of a program like Dirty Jobs.


----------



## racton1 (Nov 7, 2007)

HDMe said:


> There are apparently 7 uplinked HD channels right now that are not available to us... Voom is not preventing those from being turned on... so it is a reasonable leap to say that even if Voom was not on Dish at all 6 months ago, we would still not have SciFi, USA, etc. at this point.
> 
> We don't know what is preventing some of the new HD channels launching on Dish... but right at this moment it isn't lack of bandwidth because of having Voom that is preventing.


Perhaps E has not come to terms with the networks you have mentioned. I have contacted out local CW station and they say we are in discussions with E to carry the station in HD.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

One thing. Maybe rather than engaging in shinanigans leading to a lawsuit, Dish should try this approach to getting HD content - pay for it.

Surely Voom's Rave would have carried this if Dish paid for it:



> *DirecTV to Air South by Southwest Concerts in HD*
> U.S. satellite-TV leader DirecTV will broadcast 24 shows in high definition from the South by Southwest festival in Austin, Texas, between March 13 and March 15, the company says. X, Daryl Hall and the Lemonheads are among performers appearing at the Austin Convention Center that will be broadcast on DirecTV's The 101 channel.


And then there's this _Friday Night Lights_ renewal DirectTV marketing coup using content that could have appeared on WorldSport if Dish had paid for it (_*emphasis*_ added):


> The answer came in a deal with DirecTV, now owned by John Malone's Liberty Media. _*Clearly Malone is looking to distinguish DirecTV from its rivals on a content as well as price basis.*_ "It's an innovative deal where NBC found a partner who will share costs and exhibition windows," an insider explained to me. So both NBC and DirecTV will be airing Friday Night Lights across multipurpose platforms.


Dish may have its hands, as well as transponders, full competing with a content oriented DirectTV. Neither of these items can compete with a Charlie Chat, of course, but....


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

phrelin said:


> One thing. Maybe rather than engaging in shinanigans leading to a lawsuit, Dish should try this approach to getting HD content - pay for it.
> 
> Surely Voom's Rave would have carried this if Dish paid for it:


Dish *DID *pay for it, not that specific programming, but much other programming. They invested in Voom to the extent of a 20% ownership. VOOM is responsible for securing programming for the service, not Dish. That was part of the agreement when Dish bought in. It would be rather hard for Dish to start a service that would compete with Voom at this point, and I am sure there is a clause in their contract saying that they won't so long as the ownership agreement is in place. I wouldn't be surprised if this flap between them is Dish's attempt to free themselves from Voom and the various restrictions in their contract. IF Dish gets out of Voom Voom will quickly disappear. I would miss Rave, but, hopefully something will come along to replace it in the near future.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> In 2005, subsidiaries of the Company entered into agreements with EchoStar by which EchoStar acquired a 20% interest in VOOM HD and agreed to distribute VOOM on its DISH Network for a 15-year term.


How much money did Echostar pay into Voom for that 20%?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It is undisclosed.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> It is undisclosed.


So we don't know if they paid anything or just agreed to carry the channels?:grin:


----------



## jal (Mar 3, 2005)

You will like Directv. I was with dish for about 9 years, then made the switch. One of the reasons was the jacked up hd fees, among other things.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

phrelin said:


> So we don't know if they paid anything or just agreed to carry the channels?:grin:


If they didn't pay anything and simply agreed to carry the channels in exchange for 20% of the company Voom wouldn't still be here.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

From the tea leaves we have:

DISH agreed to carry the Voom HD channels for 15 years with the understanding that ...
1) Cablevision/Voom would spend $100 million per year on programming.
2) DISH would own 20% of Voom until Voom spent $500 million on programming.

If Cablevision/Voom fails to spend $100 million per year DISH can walk away any time ... the failure of Voom to spend the money on programming releases DISH from the contract.

If Cablevision/Voom spends $500 million total DISH is locked in for the full 15 years and they are "bought out" of their 20% ownership. (DISH will no longer own a portion of the Voom channels.)

If Cablevision/Voom reduces the number of channels offered they can reduce the money they spend per year ... the $500 million is not reduced. If Cablevision/Voom reduces the number of channels to zero (no longer offering the service) the contract ends.

That's the tea leaves. I expect that DISH is paying Cablevision/Voom per subscriber for use of the Voom HD channels ... we have no 'tea leaves' pointing to a cash down payment by DISH. DISH bought a satellite and licenses from Cablevision, and the consumation of that deal was required for the Voom programming contract to take effect, but the contract for the Voom HD channels is separate from the satellite purchase.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

FYI: The temporary restraining order request remains open in this case.

Trial is April 1st at 9:30am


----------



## cforrest (Jan 20, 2007)

James Long said:


> FYI: The temporary restraining order request remains open in this case.
> 
> Trial is April 1st at 9:30am


It's a PC for 4/1, not a trial yet! I am sure after the PC the judge will either set a trial date or another conference hearing.


----------



## Spaz007 (Dec 11, 2007)

Here is a easy fix to the problem drop VOOM and add GOOD channels. I would pay extra fees for a few months if needed to get rid of it.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Spaz007 said:


> Here is a easy fix to the problem drop VOOM and add GOOD channels. I would pay extra fees for a few months if needed to get rid of it.


Just as I would pay to keep VOOM on and keep channels I have no interest in (oh, maybe SciFi and USA) off. Comments like this do no good on either side of the conflict. Please refrain from such comments.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

FTA Michael's Second Law of Programming: Any channel you don't watch is a worthless waste of bandwidth, but any channel you watch is essential. Except that it also applies to that guy next to you.


----------



## Yes616 (Sep 6, 2006)

Voom really does need to spend more money on new programming. The repeats are now beyond serious! All I see are just a couple of new movies on MonstersHD every few months and this 2 or 3 movies per day over and over all day is terrible. I used to love that channel but now it just makes me mad.

I have a great idea for RaveHD. They need to get involved with a venue not far from me and I will bet many would like this if it ever happened. Bethel Woods Center for the Arts
Look at what they have so far this year. Look at last year. And yes, it is really at the site of the original Woodstock Music & Arts Festival in 1969.

These concerts televised in HD would be a real treat for everyone.

Just an idea or two since the Voom programming & marketing depts. seems to be out to lunch. I hope someone there is looking.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Mr. Yes, I agree with you. I love Rave, and have been one of their biggest supporters here, BUT I, also, am getting very tired of having minimal new programming there. As for the Bethel Woods situation, there are festivals like this all over the country during the summer. They could do a GREAT programming series doing a tour of the various festivals. An old friend/co-worker put this little gathering together in 1983: http://www.wefest.com/2008/index.html and it is still going strong. I'm not a country fan, but this festival along with some programming from your place could make for some interesting additions to the programming.

The problem is that I don't believe that Rave has ever produced any original programming. They buy programming from around the world, a large portion coming from England and some more from Canada, along with the programming from here. Now that MTV has their HD channel I can't help but wonder how much Rave programming is going to migrate to there and disappear from Rave. Obviously MHD has wider distribution. Rave needs to do something.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Richard King said:


> Mr. Yes, I agree with you. I love Rave, and have been one of their biggest supporters here, BUT I, also, am getting very tired of having minimal new programming there. As for the Bethel Woods situation, there are festivals like this all over the country during the summer. They could do a GREAT programming series doing a tour of the various festivals. An old friend/co-worker put this little gathering together in 1983: http://www.wefest.com/2008/index.html and it is still going strong. I'm not a country fan, but this festival along with some programming from your place could make for some interesting additions to the programming.
> 
> The problem is that I don't believe that Rave has ever produced any original programming. They buy programming from around the world, a large portion coming from England and some more from Canada, along with the programming from here. Now that MTV has their HD channel I can't help but wonder how much Rave programming is going to migrate to there and disappear from Rave. Obviously MHD has wider distribution. Rave needs to do something.


All VOOM does is buy programming. Therefore they don't seem to have the cash to spend, or want to....


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Well, it appears that Voom is starting to produce some original programming. I noticed on the show "From the Basement" that it is available "Only on Voom HD". Additionally, they have a feature length film coming next month called: "Meatloaf: In Search of Paradise" that is a Voom HD original production. This flick will be shown in theaters on March 31 and then start on Voom on April 4. There may be some hope. I am sure the Meatloaf thing has been in production for quite some time along with From the Basement since these kinds of things can't be done overnight. Which raises the question as to whether Dish jumped the gun a bit or has other motives. I am sure that "From the Basement" production costs are very minimal, but I suspect the Meatloaf flick cost a bit to produce.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

http://www.fromthebasement.tv/show.php?number=01&page=welcome
Oh well.... .it appears that "From the Basement" is another import from England.


----------



## JohnMI (Apr 2, 2002)

I admit that I abused VOOM as much as I could originally. Back when it was it's own entity offering their own service, I signed up purposely just before it all fell apart. I did it to get a decent OTA tuner for cheap.  I actually signed up for VOOM, got my install, and it was less than 2 weeks later that they announced that they were closing up shop. I got a letter apologizing for the situation and telling me to just keep my VOOM box to get rid of it as I pleased.

Which was exactly what I was hoping for -- it actually happened a bit faster than I expected. In the end, I paid for less than a month of service. 

All that being said, I haven't done VOOM on Dish yet. But it will still be interesting to see how this lawsuit goes.

- John...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Trial is April 1st (no fooling). I hope DISH wins.

If DISH loses they basically lose their $10 Essentials package.


----------



## cforrest (Jan 20, 2007)

Looks like the PC was adjourned to May 13th! Still no trial yet. Wonder if E and Rainbow are working on a settlement, while the litigation is ongoing, since the PC was adjourned.


----------



## fredpb (Aug 30, 2007)

LinkNuc said:


> Well now that we are in the rant mode, drop 'em all and make room for the nationals...Comcast is kicking A$$ this year, D* has made their statement by action, Dish needs to set it....and forget it!


I like the voom channels. I rarely watch the network channels.

MORE VOOM... NO NBC ABC OR CBS


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The injunction Voom asked for was denied (that doesn't bode well for Voom). We finally have some details on the dispute ... 
*THE AFFILIATION AGREEMENT*
. .On November 17, 2005, VOOM and EchoStar executed an agreement (the "Affiliation Agreement") under which EchoStar agreed to make VOOM available to its television subscribers as part of its basic HD programming package. Pursuant to the Affiliation Agreement, EchoStar paid VOOM monthly affiliation fees calculated on a per-subscriber basis for each subscriber receiving VOOM.

*PENETRATION REQUIREMENT*
. .Under Section 5 of the Affiliation Agreement, EchoStar agreed to distribute VOOM as part of its most widely distributed package of HD programming (the "Packaging Commitment") and to ensure that the majority - as defined by a graduated scale in percentages corresponding to years - of its HD subscribers receive VOOM throughout the term of the Affiliation Agreement (the "Penetration Requirement"). Also, EchoStar is obligated to pay VOOM an annually escalating per subscriber fee as determined by the number of EchoStar HD subscribers who have access to VOOM.

*SPENDING REQUIREMENT*
. .Under Section 10 of the Affiliation Agreement, VOOM agreed to spend $100 million on the Service (the "Spending Requirement"). Section 10 also provided that, if the number of channels on VOOM was permanently reduced, the annual spending requirement would decrease pursuant to a prescribed formula.

*TERMINATION AND CURE PROVISIONS*
. .Section 10 of the Affiliation Agreement also provides for the general rights of the parties to terminate the agreement under specific circumstances. Either party may terminate upon the occurrence of a material breach by the other subject to a general cure provision.
. .Section 10 further provides that failure to meet the Spending Requirement triggers a termination right. VOOM contends, and EchoStar disputes the contention, that the general cure provision applies if VOOM fails to satisfy the Spending Requirement.

*ECHOSTAR 'S NOTICE*
. .In a letter dated June 20, 2007, EchoStar declared that VOOM failed to meet the Spending Requirement under Section 10 of the Affiliation Agreement.
. .In October 2007, EchoStar conducted an audit of VOOM's annual spending.
. .In November 2007, EchoStar advised VOOM that it would terminate on the basis of VOOM's alleged spending shortfall unless VOOM consented to permit EchoStar to carry VOOM after February 1,2008 on a tiered basis, as determined by EchoStar in its discretion. VOOM responded that it would not consent to any change of Echostar's carriage requirements under the Affiliation Agreement. Nevertheless, both parties continued attempts to resolve the parties' differences amicably.
. .In a letter dated January 5, 2008, VOOM reiterated to EchoStar that it would not agree to Echostar's re-tiering of VOOM.
. .At a meeting on January 24, 2008, VOOM met with EchoStar in another attempt to resolve the dispute. During the meeting, EchoStar declared that it abandoned its plan to re-tier and, instead, intended to notice a termination of the Affiliation Agreement effective February 1, 2008 unless VOOM agreed to a 30-day standstill period during which VOOM would be re-tiered.
. .In a letter dated January 28, 2008, VOOM stated to EchoStar that EchoStar had no right to terminate the Affiliation Agreement.
. .On January 30, 2008, EchoStar wrote to VOOM informing VOOM that EchoStar was terminating the Affiliation Agreement effective February 1, 2008.
. .Subsequently, VOOM brought this action for declaratory and injunctive relief and now moves for a preliminary injunction enjoining EchoStar from terminating the Affiliation Agreement.​In a line, the court said "*Because VOOM failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, it is unnecessary to address a balancing of the equities. ... Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.*"

Full text attached.


----------



## jacmyoung (Sep 9, 2006)

Is E* serious about deactivating VOOM channels, if so when?


----------



## nKeith (Apr 20, 2008)

If this were to come to pass, it would be a tragedy. VOOM is the main reason I've subscribed to DISH.


----------



## EXTACAMO (Apr 7, 2007)

Here we go again! :nono2:


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

IMHO it is likely Dish won't terminate Voom. They've already tiered it. Because they put it in a tier with only UniversalHD and HDNetMovies, the number of subscribers dropped and the cost to Dish dropped. (They also left it in the HDOnly package.) I could see Dish freeing up transponder space by some rotation system like they did with Noggin/The N.

But it does mean subscribers can add HD without VOOM which has to be economically significant for both Dish and VOOM. VOOM has to actually get some additional programming as promised to Dish in order to get others to carry their channels and to attract subscribers. It does not appear to me that CableVision/Rainbow Media is yet willing to allocate the financial resources needed for that. But they have expanded into Canada (Equator HD, Oasis, Rush HD, Treasure HD) and Britain (Rush HD and Ultra HD), so who knows.

Liberty Media at one time expressed interest in acquiring Rainbow Media but nothing came of that.

Oh, and kudos to James for keeping us up to date.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There is a value to carrying Voom ... but DISH wants to carry Voom on THEIR TERMS.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> Oh, and kudos to James for keeping us up to date.


Yes....

It would be a very sad day if Dish would terminate Voom. I hope they can work things out one way or another.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

phrelin said:


> IMHO it is likely Dish won't terminate Voom. They've already tiered it. Because they put it in a tier with only UniversalHD and HDNetMovies, the number of subscribers dropped and the cost to Dish dropped. (They also left it in the HDOnly package.) I could see Dish freeing up transponder space by some rotation system like they did with Noggin/The N.
> 
> But it does mean subscribers can add HD without VOOM which has to be economically significant for both Dish and VOOM. VOOM has to actually get some additional programming as promised to Dish in order to get others to carry their channels and to attract subscribers. It does not appear to me that CableVision/Rainbow Media is yet willing to allocate the financial resources needed for that. But they have expanded into Canada (Equator HD, Oasis, Rush HD, Treasure HD) and Britain (Rush HD and Ultra HD), so who knows.
> 
> ...


Noggin/The N was rotated by the channel themselves, when they decided to split into two channels E* left things like they were, so I guess at the current time E* is rotating the channel but before, the channel was doing this not E*.


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

James Long said:


> The injunction Voom asked for was denied (that doesn't bode well for Voom). We finally have some details on the dispute ...
> 
> *On January 30,2008, EchoStar wrote to VOOM informing VOOM that EchoStar was
> terminating the Affiliation Agreement effective February 1,2008.*
> ...


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

spear61 said:


> James Long said:
> 
> 
> > The injunction Voom asked for was denied (that doesn't bode well for Voom). We finally have some details on the dispute ...
> ...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It is an odd situation where DISH claims to have terminated the affiliation agreement yet still carries the channels (apparently without agreement)? In a way, by continuing to carry the channels they have lessened the damages Voom is incurring. While Voom may or may not be in the "most widely distributed package" they are still being distributed and will still get paid for these months of carriage.

The trial is yet to come ... but the hint offered in rejecting the injunction (which would have prevented DISH from terminating the affiliation agreement) is that Voom is losing. They have "failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success".

DISH will probably wait until the trial is over (mid month, IIRC) to make any changes to their packages. I don't expect them to drop Voom ... I expect that they will push hard to keep Voom in the "Ultimate" tier. If Voom doesn't accept that tier I expect that it will be goodbye (and instant space for 15 more HD channels).

Unfortunately losing Voom would mean carrying channels that DISH doesn't charge extra for and likely a price reduction on Ultimate (unless it is padded with other HD only channels to make it worth $10 to a customer). More channels may be what customers want (including channels that are not so wanted once they arrive). The loss of subscription revenue isn't what DISH really wants.


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Maybe some agreement could be reached to consolidate some of the channels. I and my family like MONSTERS ( it has gotten much better as of late) and would hate to see it go as well as RAVE and several others.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Reading between the lines... it sounds to me like Dish either wants Voom to pony up and improve the content OR Dish would be ok with letting the channels go.

In the mean time, Dish was trying to provide incentive to Voom to spend money by tiering the channels so that people could choose to get them or not. When people started choosing not to get them, that hurts Voom's pocketbook and hopefully spurs Voom to make improvements as they originally promised.

I've always wondered, for example, why there are movies on IFC (owned by Rainbow) that are not in HD on one of the Voom (also owned by Rainbow) channels... then hearing plans to launch AMC and IFC in HD... made me wonder how would they have new content for those channels if they didn't have new HD content on their Voom ones?

IF Voom invested more, then perhaps other companies would also want to carry them too... thereby increasing their revenue.

There are a lot of things I like about the Voom suite... but I've gone on record as saying they absolutely do not have enough content to justify being a 15 channel suite. They could drop down to 8-10 channels and not sacrifice any of the content with some repurposing... perhaps even further... but the fact that it is pretty obvious they are demanding about twice the channel bandwidth they actually are using means they either need to spend more money and make themselves more attractive OR re-purpose and cut their suite in half.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

The VOOM issue is difficult because the special interest channels on VOOM appear to draw some viewers who don't have anywhere else to go for HD content.

But IMHO the 4 movie channels could be consolidated into two and still give all the content for convenient recording. So could Equator, Gallery and Treasure be consolidated into one with all of the content available for recording. And the Family Room schedule is a waste even though it currently has started offering the only show I might record.

I'm sure others have different opinions, but I guess we'll just see what happens. As usual.

BTW, what could possibly be done with the Ultimate without VOOM. UHD and HDNetmv couldn't keep that 2nd tier alive.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The biggest problem I see with consolidation is once a couple of channels are consolidated and new "HD" channels replace them it still won't be satisfying. There are only a couple of 24/7 HD channels left to add ... most likely any addition would be an upconvert channel with less HD than the Voom channel it replaced. Which means after the initial happiness that a few more "HD" channels were added DISH customers will be back at it complaining for more.

If DISH has to lose channels out of Voom they need to lose them for channels that will be loved forever ... not appreciated for a few weeks and forgotten.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

James Long said:


> The biggest problem I see with consolidation is once a couple of channels are consolidated and new "HD" channels replace them it still won't be satisfying. There are only a couple of 24/7 HD channels left to add ... most likely any addition would be an upconvert channel with less HD than the Voom channel it replaced. Which means after the initial happiness that a few more "HD" channels were added DISH customers will be back at it complaining for more.
> 
> If DISH has to lose channels out of Voom they need to lose them for channels that will be loved forever ... not appreciated for a few weeks and forgotten.


I simultaneously agree and disagree 

I disagree in that the kind of consolidation I've always been in favor of would not result in any lost Voom content. Combining of movie channels would reduce the repeats on channels by replacing the repeats with movies from the combined channels. Similarly the repeat cycles on their other channels can be reduced by combining like content... so I see a scenario where channels can be consolidated without losing any content... thus any added HD channel, even if not 24/7 would still represent some new HD without losing any old.

That said, however, I completely agree that even in this scenario people would still find something to complain about and there will always be a faction who sees no value in Voom at all and those folk won't be happy until Voom has been sent to the grave. 

On a related note... Once Cartoon Network and Toon Disney go HD, and actually have some HD content on them... Animania will immediately become irrelevant. This, to me, has been Voom's singularly most disappointing channel in that not only does it have lots of repeats but they have insisted on showing zoomed old non-HD cartoons instead of buying some cartoons that were actually in widescreen and newer HD cartoons that could actually benefit from being shown in HD. Animania will be completely irrelevant once the channels I noted come on board with any HD at all.


----------



## VandyCWG (Dec 19, 2006)

James Long said:


> If Voom doesn't accept that tier I expect that it will be goodbye (and instant space for 15 more HD channels).


Not a Dish guy here, read this on the front page.

The one question I have, and I really don't know...

But I thought the VOOM channels were on a differnet sat, and Dish just rebroadcasted those channels. And if they go away, would Dish get the extra space, or would the space go away with Voom?


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

If Voom were to go, E,
obviously has to rethink HD only and the HD tier that Voom is on. E* does not have any other unique HD content. E* has too many holes in its HD lineup to consistently
attract new HD subs.
For me, there would be no reason to keep E* as a
second service. Every other HD channel is available on both D* or cable/Verizon. E* does not have the HD content on NHL CI or NBA LP that
D* does. E* needs Voom to create an HD niche just like D* has created some HD niches with sports.
In today's environment, it is very difficult to sign up new subs without some sort of niche. If E* were to drop Voom, I would ezpect E* to report a quarterly net loss of subs for one or two quarters.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

lawmangrant said:


> Not a Dish guy here, read this on the front page.
> 
> The one question I have, and I really don't know...
> 
> But I thought the VOOM channels were on a differnet sat, and Dish just rebroadcasted those channels. And if they go away, would Dish get the extra space, or would the space go away with Voom?


Voom is broadcast from a satellite at 61.5 degrees. The satelllite and the slot is owned by Dish, so IF Voom were to go away it would open up the bandwidth occupied by Voom for additional Dish HD programming.


----------



## Teagore (Apr 23, 2008)

Just throwing in my 2 cents here...

if E* keeps voom, what i think they should do is move it to the $10 package. then with the $20 ultimate they could give us all the other hd nets eliminating the need for certain hd nets with certain "at" packages, thus also guaranteeing that you will get all future new hd nets when they come out. imho.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

Richard King said:


> Voom is broadcast from a satellite at 61.5 degrees.


And duplicated on the 129 satellite.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

lawmangrant said:


> But I thought the VOOM channels were on a differnet sat, and Dish just rebroadcasted those channels. And if they go away, would Dish get the extra space, or would the space go away with Voom?


DISH Network bought the satellite Voom once used (when Voom's then 21 channels were the core of an independent DBS service). The current 15 Voom channels are transmitted on DISH Network owned satellites. If Voom went away, DISH would have full use of the space.

That being said, I don't expect Voom to go away.


----------



## BNUMM (Dec 24, 2006)

Even if Voom went away Dish would not have a net loss of customers. Most of their new adds are still SD.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

> Under Section 10 of the Affiliation Agreement, VOOM agreed to spend $100 million on the Service (the "Spending Requirement").
> ...
> ECHOSTAR 'S NOTICE
> In a letter dated June 20, 2007, EchoStar declared that VOOM failed to meet the Spending Requirement ...


Thank you to E* for heeding the complaints and taking action on the lack of new content. My preferred resolution would have VOOM regularly adding new shows and also consolidating some of their channels.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> It is an odd situation where DISH claims to have terminated the affiliation agreement yet still carries the channels (apparently without agreement)?


If VOOM didn't fulfill their obligations (and they don't seem to be arguing that they did), they need to stop whining. The cow is out of the barn with respect to interesting DISH Network in bringing VOOM to the basic HD package so they need to start working towards an agreement with DISH Network that they can live up to.


----------



## tommiet (Dec 29, 2005)

Give me $10.00 off my HD package and E* can keep VOOM....


----------



## lionsrule (Nov 25, 2003)

Maybe this has been posted elsewhere....

But from tvpredictions.com:

"Voom objected to the plan, saying it would reduce its programming fees and jeopardize its business. Following a series of negotiations, Dish informed the programmer that it planned to terminate the agreement entirely. That's when Voom decided to file the lawsuit and injunction request, which the court rejected on April 23. "

Bye,bye voom.......


----------



## Ressurrector (Jan 1, 2008)

tommiet said:


> Give me $10.00 off my HD package and E* can keep VOOM....


Sounds fair


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> I simultaneously agree and disagree
> 
> I disagree in that the kind of consolidation I've always been in favor of would not result in any lost Voom content. Combining of movie channels would reduce the repeats on channels by replacing the repeats with movies from the combined channels. Similarly the repeat cycles on their other channels can be reduced by combining like content... so I see a scenario where channels can be consolidated without losing any content... thus any added HD channel, even if not 24/7 would still represent some new HD without losing any old.
> 
> ...


Animania must cater to twenty somethinga. I don't "get it". My idea of cartoons are Porky Pig ETC.

HDMe you forgot NICKTOONSHD. I agree Animaria will be irrelevant in six to eight months.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

BobaBird said:


> Thank you to E* for heeding the complaints and taking action on the lack of new content. My preferred resolution would have VOOM regularly adding new shows and also consolidating some of their channels.


+1.


----------



## moman19 (Oct 22, 2004)

Other than RAVE, Monster, Movies and perhaps Equator, the bandwidth can be better spent by satisfying all those who want to see FNC, MSNBC, Comedy Central, etc., etc. in HD. HD News is old news now that the legitimate cable news channels as well as the broadcast networks offer more & more content in HD.

Do we really need Amimaniacs and Kung Foo in HD 24 x7?

(I'm sure some will scream YES, YES, YES.....)


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Paul Secic said:


> Animania must cater to twenty somethinga. I don't "get it". My idea of cartoons are Porky Pig ETC.
> 
> HDMe you forgot NICKTOONSHD. I agree Animaria will be irrelevant in six to eight months.


Yeah, I wasn't even thinking about other cartoon channels that might appear in HD at some point... Either ToonDisneyHD or Cartoon Network HD alone could make Animania irrelevant... but both would be a death blow.


----------



## FitzAusTex (Jan 30, 2007)

HDMe said:


> Yeah, I wasn't even thinking about other cartoon channels that might appear in HD at some point... Either ToonDisneyHD or Cartoon Network HD alone could make Animania irrelevant... but both would be a death blow.


 I still think there are parents out there that don't want their kids exposed to all the advertisments on the other cartoon networks...especially in the current economic environment.


----------



## kal915 (May 7, 2008)

I think Voom should keep
Worls Sport HD since there's no HD channel dedicated to world sports,Rush HD, and Gameplay HD since G4 has no plans for an HD channel yet


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

The problem with the VOOM channels is simply lack of content for 24/7. It really has nothing to do with gaining bandwidth - just wasting bandwidth.

Everyone has an opinion, but I could see VOOM successfully creating out of their existing lineup channels that might attract a modest audience:

1. An adult general interest channel out of the programming on Equator, Gallery, Treasure, Ultra, and HDNews.
2. A different sports channel out of the programming on Rush and World Sport.
3. A younger audience channel out of the programming on Anamania and Family.
4. Continue and improve Rave.
5. A general movie channel out of Movies and Film Fest.
6. A special movie channel out of Kung Fu and Monster.
7. Continue and improve Game Play.

I don't know what Dish would do with the bandwidth gain from 8 channels. It could go to four locals in HD since they are taking up space on both 61.5° and 129°.

Just my thoughts.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

FitzAusTex said:


> I still think there are parents out there that don't want their kids exposed to all the advertisments on the other cartoon networks...especially in the current economic environment.


Perhaps... but not all the cartoons on Animania are kid-friendly either (for content). They do have some actual HD cartoon content, but are missing a lot. If they spent some money and bought some rights to some of the hollywood blockbuster animated movies, for example, Animania would be a great channel!


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

moman19 said:


> Other than RAVE, Monster, Movies and perhaps Equator, the bandwidth can be better spent by satisfying all those who want to see FNC, MSNBC, Comedy Central, etc., etc. in HD. HD News is old news now that the legitimate cable news channels as well as the broadcast networks offer more & more content in HD.
> 
> Do we really need Amimaniacs and Kung Foo in HD 24 x7?
> 
> (I'm sure some will scream YES, YES, YES.....)


NO NO to Kung fu:nono2: :nono2: :nono2:


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Perhaps... but not all the cartoons on Animania are kid-friendly either (for content). They do have some actual HD cartoon content, but are missing a lot. If they spent some money and bought some rights to some of the hollywood blockbuster animated movies, for example, Animania would be a great channel!


Movies like Madascar SP, Toys, Robots from Pixlar. HBO has abandoned those for some reason. Haven't seen those in HD yet.


----------



## max1 (Aug 12, 2005)

This wouldn't be a sad day if E dropped Voom. I haven't watched Voom in 6 months. They have been showing the same programming over and over with no new programs. I think E should drop them and make more room for more national HD channels tha have shows people may watch like my Omaha local channels in HD. I wouldn't lose any sleep over Voom. Max.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

kal915 said:


> I think Voom should keep
> Worls Sport HD since there's no HD channel dedicated to world sports,Rush HD, and Gameplay HD since G4 has no plans for an HD channel yet


Doesn't G4 have COPS on a lot? I havn't watched it since they canned The Screensavers 2 or 3 years ago. Call for Help is produced in HD according to Leo LaPorte. VOOM should buy that show. Fresh content 5 days a week. COME ON VOOM!


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

Hey, Cablevision reported 1st Q earnings today and Voom has 2.5 million subs.
Cablevision reported that they now have 1.1 million HD subs and a HD penetration of about 35 percent. So that means E* has 1.4 million Voom subs,
either HD only or HD ultimate. So after all this complaining, E* HD subs must like
Voom or they would opt for HD essentials. Voom is the only niche HD programming
that E* currently offers.

Voom HD subs increased from 2.1 to 2.5 million in the quarter. Since Cablevision only reported 1.1 million HD subs, about .3 million were E* subs. Impressive HD
sub gains. 

So far the first Q net sub increases among the major MVPs are:

1. D* 275,000
2. Verizon 263,000
3. ATT Uverse 147,000
4. Time Warner 55,000
5. Cablevision 2,000
6. Comcast -57,000 loss of subs

Pretty big sub gains considering the economy and housing starts.
E* reports 1st Q next week. With 300,000 HD sub gain, wonder what E*'s net sub gain or loss will be?


----------



## Unclejeff (Mar 10, 2004)

I did an HD upgrade with Dish because of the Voom music/live show content.

Voom go me to upgrade.


----------



## Jtaylor1 (Jan 27, 2008)

I wouldn't be surprised if Rainbow 1 becomes another D* satellite.


----------



## HDRoberts (Dec 11, 2007)

Jtaylor1 said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if Rainbow 1 becomes another D* satellite.


What are you talking about? Rainbow 1 aka Echostar 12 will remain a Dish satellite, regardless of the outcome of this lawsuit. The VOOM carriage agreement and the Rainbow 1 agreement are separate.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Jtaylor1 said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if Rainbow 1 becomes another D* satellite.


Only if Charlie decides to sell it to D* which I don't think will ever happen.


----------



## SingleAction (Apr 29, 2005)

Paul Secic said:


> Doesn't G4 have COPS on a lot? I havn't watched it since they canned The Screensavers 2 or 3 years ago. Call for Help is produced in HD according to Leo LaPorte. VOOM should buy that show. Fresh content 5 days a week. COME ON VOOM!


I miss Leo too!


----------



## bbexperience (Jan 4, 2007)

Did I miss an announcement somewhere? My box just spontaneously restarted and when it came back I noticed that Gameplay HD, Treasure HD, and Animania HD are gone, replaced by some generic message. I don't really care about Treasure and Animania was pretty much made obsolete with the addition of ToonHD, but Gameplay? I'm probably the only one who ever watched it :grin: .


----------



## richiephx (Jan 19, 2006)

And all that effort to rename World Cinema to Voom Movies and it's gone.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Verrry interesting. As of 11:30 pm PDT down to Monster, KungFu, Rush, Equator, and Rave. According to the web site we Ultimate subscriber for our extra $10 now have those five and UniversalHD, HDNetMovies, Smithsonian, MGMHD, Fishing, NHL, and NBA.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I find it odd that they would do this AFTER they launched 20 other channels this morning. Also, now they have to revise their channel number list DOWN... Not the way you want to go. This doesn't make any sense unless they are planning on launching more channels tomorrow to take the place of the ones they killed tonight...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> I find it odd that they would do this AFTER they launched 20 other channels this morning. Also, now they have to revise their channel number list DOWN... Not the way you want to go. This doesn't make any sense unless they are planning on launching more channels tomorrow to take the place of the ones they killed tonight...


Your post really points to the 2 gripes I have with this maneuver:

1. Taking channels down that didn't need to be taken down to add the channels today. So their channel count goes down unless we quickly (and quickly=1 week) get new channels to replace them.

2. Absolutely no notice to customers of the takedown in advance. Outside of times when contracts expire and they have to take something down suddenly, this seems poor not to have told customers that these channels were going away. It couldn't have been a decision made at midnight... so customers should have been given notice.

IF they can do this without warning, seems to me those folks with MPEG2 HD receivers should be wary that one night Dish might throw the switch and convert those remaining HD channels on 110 over to MPEG4 too!


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Your post really points to the 2 gripes I have with this maneuver:
> 
> 1. Taking channels down that didn't need to be taken down to add the channels today. So their channel count goes down unless we quickly (and quickly=1 week) get new channels to replace them.
> 
> ...


I agree - I know we had some timers set to record some movies on filmf coming up. I seriously doubt that Dish had to 'make room' for the new channels (especially since they came up before Voom came down). I really think this is Dish spanking Voom for the lawsuit and not coming up with new content. Unfortunately for those of us that found enough content that was new to us - we lose! You had suggested Voom consolidating some of their programming and I thought that was a perfect solution - too bad nobody at Voom listened to you!


----------



## nmetro (Jul 11, 2006)

I guess Cablevision (Rainbow Media) needs more money after the bought Newsday (Long Island New York newspaper). The deal was signed yesterday.

The practice of DISH dropping channels abruptly has happened a few times in the past. The most famous was their VIACOM dispute which were down for a couple days. Then there was Lifetime Movies (about a month). Also, there was a dispute with Times-Warner and that lasted a couple days as well. Then of course there is the broadcast station retransmission agreements, most recently with KWGN in Cheyenne. So, dropping VOOM abruptly is almost status quo for DISH.

So, what will most likely happen is that DISH and Rainbow will get together and work out some kind of agreement and the channels will be returned. What is interesting they did leave KugnFu, Monster, Equator, Rush and Rave active (these are also VOOM channels). 

Of course, if DISH does monitor these conversations, one could make an argument why DISH dropped VOOM. There were many anti-VOOM comments made here. The law suit dispute does center around the limited content on VOOM (repeating programming over and over). While repeats are very common on most cable/satellite channels, the folks at VOOM took it to new highs. So, hopefully when this is resolved that not only VOOM is returned, but a better VOOM comes out of all this.


----------



## mntwister (Mar 7, 2008)

Well, I for one was very happy to see the new channels turned on yesterday, but was a little peeved about the loss of Voom's FilmFest and Voom Movies. They were showing Hollywood classics 24 hours a day and were showing big Hollywood movies in HD that have not been shown on any other HD channels. Exodus, Man of LaMancha, Gentlemen Prefer Brunettes, alot of westerns with the big studio stars, those were darn good Hollywood classics and never looked better.

I am not one to argue alot of new hd additions. I am glad movie fans were able to finally get MGM HD and another Cinemax HD or two, but I was watching FilmFest all the time. I'd rather have that which is full HD 24 hours a day than something like Cartoon Network, where the actual true high def content is probably under 5% if even that. I would think Dish would have fought to keep those channels because Directv did not have these. Then they keep Kung Fu, a channel which I have never seen a true high definition program and what they show is also poorly mastered and scratched film prints. Filmfest were almost all restored full HD movies.

I also understand that Voom was to spend so much money on these channels, and I did notice that the repeats started to get shown more often, maybe that's part of it, but FilmFest had alot of different films. Sad to see it go and I wrote Dish to let them know I will miss it and hope they reconsider and not remove those 2 Voom movie channels.


----------



## comptr (Jan 6, 2007)

SingleAction said:


> I miss Leo too!


Well heres a update on leo call for help is gone it was cancelled in canada for low ratings. If you want to see leo live go to twitlive.tv. o One more thing it sucks that disk pulled the voom channels I actually watched them sometimes


----------



## da_pirate (May 14, 2008)

i don't really like the fact they dropped Voom. That is the ONLY reason i didn't drop dish. The only other thing they have is their DVR is nice. I do automation programming for custom systems and I like Dish's DVR compared to the others. BUT i don't like the fact you can't control TV2 with IR or better yet, thru ethernet as I have a custom system. Other competitors give big bonuses for those who make the switch. I've opted spend more monthy ONLY because Dish has "GamePlay" (as i'm a big gamer, but didn't like all the dang reruns on this channel, still showing stuff from 2006), I liked Rave and Rush and also I would sometimes catch a "flick" on KungFu or Monster if nothing else was on. I liked watching those older classic movies in HD. I for one am sad to see it go as if there was nothing else on the other 200 channels i wanted to watch i could always turn on rush and see someone jumping off a cliff, or catch a classic Karate Movie on kungfu or see someone going thru a Game I like to play or watch some of the competitions and watch real gamers play on GamePlay. G4 is terrible to watch in SD. Or maybe i would catch a live concert on Rave. No other satellite company could offer that with regular programming. That's just my opinion. My daughter didn't like Anamania or whatever it's called much. 

My point is there were a few HD channels on there that gave Dish a leg up. Now besides the DVR, what programming differences does dish have opposed to the others? In fact, the others now make a custom installer version of their HD receiver which allows customers like myself to easily integrate satellite receivers into a home automation system. Dish has yet to do something like that and think about it's entire customer base. It's only concerned about the majority. Which is fine but there are many of us that want to put our receivers in an equipment closet out of sight and control it with a touchpanel remote. Those are the customers that have more than 6 receivers in a single home. Now those customers use cable and the maker of the HR series receivers since you need to use a separate receiver why not go with a company that has the NFL package (which dish has yet to get)?

i'm seriously considering yanking my VIP's out of my equipment rack to replace with some new HR's and probably will save some money doing that.
Don't mind trading Sirius for XM. It's all the same to me since i don't really look at them anyhow.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

da_pirate said:


> Now besides the DVR, what programming differences does dish have opposed to the others? In fact, the others now make a custom installer version of their HD receiver which allows customers like myself to easily integrate satellite receivers into a home automation system. Dish has yet to do something like that and think about it's entire customer base. It's only concerned about the majority. Which is fine but there are many of us that want to put our receivers in an equipment closet out of sight and control it with a touchpanel remote.


Although I'm not comfortable with the status of the other equipment you refer to, Dish Network is no longer a hardware manufacturer. That will either result in a broader line of equipment with Dish (unlikely) or Echostar patents appearing in cable branded equipment. Integration may become possible with the better Echostar DVR on cable. Who knows? They'll all have the same HD programming a few years from now.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

spear61 said:


> James Long said:
> 
> 
> > The injunction Voom asked for was denied (that doesn't bode well for Voom). We finally have some details on the dispute ...
> ...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Geronimo said:


> They wrote to say that it would be terminated IF VOOM failed to take certain actions. Thereisa difference.


That's not what the court document said ... The court document said: "On January 30, 2008, EchoStar wrote to VOOM informing VOOM that EchoStar was terminating the Affiliation Agreement effective February 1, 2008." No ifs, ands or buts, just terminated. There was a discussion leading up to the January 30th notification, but the January 30th notification was clearly termination.

DISH did not follow through on terminating the channels until the court ruled in their favor (and against Voom) on the issue of a temporary restraining order to prevent the termination of the agreement. A slight reprieve just in case the court ordered the channels to be returned.

The full text of the court order remains in my earlier post:
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=1583661#post1583661


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

mntwister said:


> Well, I for one was very happy to see the new channels turned on yesterday, but was a little peeved about the loss of Voom's FilmFest and Voom Movies. They were showing Hollywood classics 24 hours a day and were showing big Hollywood movies in HD that have not been shown on any other HD channels. Exodus, Man of LaMancha, Gentlemen Prefer Brunettes, alot of westerns with the big studio stars, those were darn good Hollywood classics and never looked better.
> 
> I am not one to argue alot of new hd additions. I am glad movie fans were able to finally get MGM HD and another Cinemax HD or two, but I was watching FilmFest all the time. I'd rather have that which is full HD 24 hours a day than something like Cartoon Network, where the actual true high def content is probably under 5% if even that. I would think Dish would have fought to keep those channels because Directv did not have these. Then they keep Kung Fu, a channel which I have never seen a true high definition program and what they show is also poorly mastered and scratched film prints. Filmfest were almost all restored full HD movies.
> 
> I also understand that Voom was to spend so much money on these channels, and I did notice that the repeats started to get shown more often, maybe that's part of it, but FilmFest had alot of different films. Sad to see it go and I wrote Dish to let them know I will miss it and hope they reconsider and not remove those 2 Voom movie channels.


Guess what! Gentlemen Prefer Brunettes, will be on HBO EAST in HD on Thursday I have it qued up to record. If I remember correctly it's on at 3AM PST.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

James Long said:


> That's not what the court document said ... The court document said: "On January 30, 2008, EchoStar wrote to VOOM informing VOOM that EchoStar was terminating the Affiliation Agreement effective February 1, 2008." No ifs, ands or buts, just terminated. There was a discussion leading up to the January 30th notification, but the January 30th notification was clearly termination.
> 
> DISH did not follow through on terminating the channels until the court ruled in their favor (and against Voom) on the issue of a temporary restraining order to prevent the termination of the agreement. A slight reprieve just in case the court ordered the channels to be returned.
> 
> ...


As I read the document it states that DISH notified VOOM in November that it would terminate unless VOOM agreed to the tiering. True DISH did not followup on that statement until the recent ruling but, as the ruling states DISH did not put a timeframe on their earlier statements and the delay does not constitute a waiver of the right to terminate or take other action.


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

Voom filed for breach of contract on May 28 - New York courts.

Wants damages for breach of multibillion dollar contract. Say they spent money as required and fullfilled their side of the deal.

Just another little distraction for Charlie.


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)




----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

Mavrick said:


>


That is funny, nice work!


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

spear61 said:


> Voom filed for breach of contract on May 28 - New York courts.
> 
> Wants damages for breach of multibillion dollar contract. Say they spent money as required and fullfilled their side of the deal.
> 
> Just another little distraction for Charlie.


They breached the contract...


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Paul Secic said:


> They breached the contract...


Says Dish.

Actually, we don't know that. We know that Dish claims they breached the contract by not spending enough on programming, and I think the lack of new programming bears that out. BUT, we really don't know how much they spent on programming. It appears that Voom is claiming they met the obligations. Maybe some numbers will come out in the trial if it gets that far.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I wish VOOM to win and Dish to return all VOOM channels back.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Mavrick said:


>


How about a supersized avatar?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I would replace the word "STAR" to "Satellite".


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

Richard King said:


> Says Dish.
> 
> Actually, we don't know that. We know that Dish claims they breached the contract by not spending enough on programming, and I think the lack of new programming bears that out. BUT, we really don't know how much they spent on programming. It appears that Voom is claiming they met the obligations. Maybe some numbers will come out in the trial if it gets that far.


They included the numbers in their filing. The filed document is too big to attach here . Voom says their obligation was no more than 82 million per year for the reduced channels (15), and they spent 102.9 in 2006 and 114 in 2007 and the numbers were audited and accepted by Dish. They get into programming vs services and say the contract says "services" which apparantly covers more costs.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DISH's complaint was that in 2006 they didn't meet the minimum on programming. The biggest part of Voom's defense in the case DISH filed against Voom was that they were including non programming costs in their number of dollars that they claimed was being spent on programming. Voom also claimed (in the other case) that they had made up the difference in 2007.

Now it looks like "new math" is in play ... calling the 15 channel package reduced? There is a clause that lowers the amount Voom has to spend on a reduced package ... now it appears Voom wants to claim a discount based on a package size no one has carried since Voom became a programming service.

At least Voom filed in New York ... but this SHOULD be part of the same case that they are already losing.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Now we can watch accountants as well as attorneys get rich. Only unlike TiVo, like Echostar/Dish Voom's owner Cablevision financials are in terms of 9 zeros.

By the way, don't we really need a Forum to keep track of all of the Echostar/Dish lawsuits in a convenient place?:grin:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

P Smith said:


> I wish VOOM to win and Dish to return all VOOM channels back.


Actually, I'd say this pretty much assures Voom will not be coming back to Dish. IF Dish prevails in the suit, then Voom goes out of business most likely. IF Voom prevails, then Dish will have to pay a breach-of-contract penalty and that, by default, means they are relieved of the contract... and again, Voom likely goes out of business but at least turns a profit with the lawsuit.


----------



## grog (Jul 3, 2007)

If Voom wins the case Dish may very well be out of business.

We are not talking about millions in damages here.. we are talking billions! Future revenue based on the business prospects. 

Best case for us is if Dish and Voom 'make nice nice' and drop the case.

From what I have read I don't see how Dish can win this one. :nono:


----------



## Satpro92 (Jan 30, 2005)

grog said:


> If Voom wins the case Dish may very well be out of business.
> 
> We are not talking about millions in damages here.. we are talking billions! Future revenue based on the business prospects.
> 
> ...


Yep,Dish can't afford VOOMS demands!


----------



## jacmyoung (Sep 9, 2006)

VOOM was pretty much dead before DISH picked it up, and then never gained any traction just like the first time, to try to convince the judge it is worth billions they must first trick him into a bar and then get him to start drinking...


----------



## cforrest (Jan 20, 2007)

James Long said:


> At least Voom filed in New York ... but this SHOULD be part of the same case that they are already losing.


It is part of the same case, just an amended complaint. Same Index# on the document.


----------



## marcuscthomas (May 4, 2006)

Satpro92 said:


> Yep,Dish can't afford VOOMS demands!


Dish needed Voom at a time when there was virtually no HD to broadcast. They used Voom to lead the market for several years. Now that they no longer need the 15 count of Voom channels, because there are plenty of HD channels to take up their bandwidth, they have conveniently found a reason (or excuse) to drop them. Early on, Voom was worth the cost to Dish, now they are not. This is the business that we fund.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

marcuscthomas said:


> Dish needed Voom at a time when there was virtually no HD to broadcast. They used Voom to lead the market for several years. Now that they no longer need the 15 count of Voom channels, because there are plenty of HD channels to take up their bandwidth, they have conveniently found a reason (or excuse) to drop them. Early on, Voom was worth the cost to Dish, now they are not. This is the business that we fund.


Bingo!


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

I believe the VOOM package was too expensive (if you consider that you had to first subscribe to other HD channels in order to get it as opposed to VOOM being your only HD package). Unlike HBO or Showtime, there just was not enough "premium" programming offered on VOOM to warrant it's being packaged as a higher HD tier. That was the kiss of death for VOOM on E* IMHO.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

James Long said:


> Now it looks like "new math" is in play ... calling the 15 channel package reduced? There is a clause that lowers the amount Voom has to spend on a reduced package ... now it appears Voom wants to claim a discount based on a package size no one has carried since Voom became a programming service.


There's "new math" on both sides. DISH trumpeted the addition of 22 HD channels. About a week later they killed 15 VOOM HD channels. When I took math that was really only an addition of 7 channels net. And despite what their email reply to my protest says, the new channels do not have the same content as many of the VOOM channels.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

I am surprised that as a public company, E* would roll the dice with shareholders value and risk a 9 to 10 figure judgment which will ultimately come down to
an interpretation of the contract. In these cases, the facts will be stipulated (agreed to). E* had a fifteen year deal that it wants out of. A smarter move
would have been to fit the $3.25 carriage fee into a $10 basic HD fee, package that with a DVR advantage package like D* has with HD DVR Plus, get all the HD RSNs up, add the 100 local HD markets and go with it. Like Chase Carey was
recently quoted at the Goldman Sachs conference. Its one thing to talk about
being the HD leader and it is another thing to have a plan and execute it.
Cablevision with Voom, 4 HD RSNs, 7 HD locals and 45 total HD channels has 
a 35 percent HD penetration. E* has a HD penetration of less than 10 percent.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

grog said:


> If Voom wins the case Dish may very well be out of business.
> 
> We are not talking about millions in damages here.. we are talking billions! Future revenue based on the business prospects.
> 
> ...


At this point we only have Voom's court filings to read... and their filings are obviously going to be slanted in their favor. IF you only read the prosecutor's documents, then everyone would look guilty and we could just skip the trials and go straight to the executions...

I suspect the real bottom line here is going to be that the contract was legally dissolved because Voom failed to live up to at least part of it... so anything else is moot. Dish can't sue for damages because their recourse is to end the contract, which they did... Voom can't sue for damages because they opened the door for the contract to be ended.

There's also no way Voom could possibly sue for billions given their standing. IF their company was truly that valuable, they would have a lot more to show for it than they do now. HEck, if there was any validity to the "future value" they could have taken loans against this future-money and used that to buy more programming for their channels! They also could have campaigned harder to be carried on more places than just Dish and one cable outlet.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

cforrest said:


> It is part of the same case, just an amended complaint. Same Index# on the document.


That would be good news for DISH ... Voom was denied the injunction they requested to stop DISH from ending the contract. Voom should have just followed through with the case in progress ... but it is obvious they were losing so they are trying a different tactic.

It should have the same level of success.



grog said:


> We are not talking about millions in damages here.. we are talking billions! Future revenue based on the business prospects.


The total limit of DISH's liability is for the 15 year contract ... assuming Voom remains a programming service that long. Billions is an exaggeration. DISH wasn't paying Voom billions for carriage rights. The limit is what DISH would have paid Voom over the next 12 years.



> From what I have read I don't see how Dish can win this one. :nono:


You need to read more.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Actually, I'd say this pretty much assures Voom will not be coming back to Dish. IF Dish prevails in the suit, then Voom goes out of business most likely. IF Voom prevails, then Dish will have to pay a breach-of-contract penalty and that, by default, means they are relieved of the contract... and again, Voom likely goes out of business but at least turns a profit with the lawsuit.


I agree.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

FYI, before anyone accuses me of Voom bashing based on my post earlier today... Please note that I was disappointed to lose Voom in its entirety. I will miss many things from Voom, but I think the line was drawn in the sand a while back and that line was crossed and then someone came along and smoothed back over the sand so now it was like it never happened.


----------



## DustoMan (Jul 16, 2005)

LOL! "Fuzzy Math" making a come back!


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

James Long said:


> That would be good news for DISH ... Voom was denied the injunction they requested to stop DISH from ending the contract. Voom should have just followed through with the case in progress ... but it is obvious they were losing so they are trying a different tactic


Its all the same case. Cablevision lost the injunction motion because apparently the judge did not think that Cablevision would suffer irreparable harm that
could not be satisfied by a money damages remedy. But it is only one motion. The case goes forward and will be decided on an interpretation of the contract. There is obviously a question of fact. The facts will eventually be stipulated. A determination will have to be made based on the stipulated facts. Was there a 
breach of contract, was the breach curable and what are the rights of both parties
under the contract when a breach occurs?


----------



## FitzAusTex (Jan 30, 2007)

James Long said:


> That would be good news for DISH ... Voom was denied the injunction they requested to stop DISH from ending the contract. Voom should have just followed through with the case in progress ... but it is obvious they were losing so they are trying a different tactic.


It is my understanding that the injunction to prevent E* placing Voom into the HD Ultimate tier was denied, rather than stopping E* from ending the contract. Do I have this wrong?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

See http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=1583661#post1583661

Voom's request was to prevent DISH from ending the contract:"VOOM brought this action for declaratory and injunctive relief and now moves for a preliminary injunction enjoining EchoStar from terminating the Affiliation Agreement."​They did not ask the court to force any particular tier placement.

In a line, the court said "Because *VOOM failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits*, it is unnecessary to address a balancing of the equities. ... Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction is denied."

The injunction was denied because Voom failed to demonstrate that they were likely to win the case ... not because of lack of irreparable harm.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> FYI, before anyone accuses me of Voom bashing based on my post earlier today... Please note that I was disappointed to lose Voom in its entirety. I will miss many things from Voom, but I think the line was drawn in the sand a while back and that line was crossed and then someone came along and smoothed back over the sand so now it was like it never happened.


Truth be told I miss EquatorHD, & FilmfestHD. However I can live without VOOM. I lived without it before HD so...................


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

James Long said:


> See http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.p...ould have to be rated 50/50 for both parties.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I trust what the judge wrote ... failure to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits. There is no need to spin clear language and claim the injunction was refused for other reasons.


----------



## tedb3rd (Feb 2, 2006)

I am getting a HD video camera. I will film 5 minutes of my 1-year-old being cute. I will sell that content to VOOM for $500,000. There--I just helped VOOM adhere to the contract.  

Seriously... VOOM seems to be acting like a spoiled brat AND the dog that bites the hand that feeds it. When you have to sue to get a carrier to broadcast your channels... Hmmmm

VOOM used to be the big one because there wasn't anything else out there. Now, there is competition with other channels and VOOM has lost. ...classic case of competition for the consumer. Dish saved VOOM's [email protected]# once and they don't seem interested in doing it again.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

James Long said:


> I trust what the judge wrote ... failure to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits..


You are taking the judge's
ruling out of context. The standards are different for
motions and lawsuits. I am a licensed attorney in NY.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Hound said:


> You are taking the judge's
> ruling out of context. The standards are different for
> motions and lawsuits. I am a licensed attorney in NY.


The full text is posted ... no "context" problems here.


----------



## TexasAg (May 28, 2008)

Hound said:


> Furthermore when filing motions for a preliminary injunction or summary judgment, there cannot be a question of fact.


Every first-year law student knows that summary judgment is only appropriate when there is no "substantial question of material fact" in a case. Could you please show us something saying that this is also the standard for a preliminary injunction in New York?

From my viewpoint, if a preliminary injunction can only be granted when there is no "question of fact," preliminary injunctions would only be granted in cases where summary judgment is appropriate, which appears to be wrong. And why is it that the no "question of fact" standard was ever mentioned in the denial of the preliminary injunction? The judge went through the "likelihood of irreparable harm" and "likelihood of success on the merits" requirements, but never mentions that there is a question of fact.
__________________
My personal opinions are just that. Don't rely on them - I could be Charlie Ergen's pool boy.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

The question of fact is whether Voom breached the contract. That will have to be determined at trial with discovery and stipulation of facts.


----------



## TexasAg (May 28, 2008)

Hound said:


> The question of fact is whether Voom breached the contract. That will have to be determined at trial with discovery and stipulation of facts.


So you cannot cite any case saying that a preliminary injunction can only be issued when there in no "question of fact"? Because that is what you said: "when filing motions for a preliminary injunction ... there cannot be a question of fact."

In fact, let me quote from the denial of the preliminary injunction: "The existence of issues of fact no longer serve, of and by themselves, to defeat an application for a preliminary injunction". That appears to have been the law since at least 2001.
__________________
My personal opinions are just that. Don't rely on them - I could be Charlie Ergen's pool boy.


----------



## dgordo (Aug 29, 2004)

A preliminary injunction standard is not based upon questions of fact.

“A decision to grant or deny a preliminary injunction is based on the district court's consideration of four factors: (1) the likelihood of the success on the merits; (2) irreperable harm if the injunction is not granted; (3) the balance of hardships between the parties; and (4) the public interest.”


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

Question of fact is a component of likelihood of 
success on the merits. If a question of fact exists, there is not likelihood of success on the merits. This dispute is a question of fact.


----------



## dgordo (Aug 29, 2004)

With summary judgment there can be no questions of fact.

With an injunction, there can be unresolved questions of fact, but the court believes these will be resolved in favor of the party requesting the injunction.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It took a while for this to be made public ... but here are some notes from May 13th.


----------

