# 150 HD channels by year end



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

Or at least that's what the commercial said last night. I can't believe they're still running that thing. Don't they have enough lawsuits or do they need another for false advertising? It's one thing to make that claim in July and then be able to say "we couldn't do it because of uncontrollable circumstances". But running that ad with a week left in the year is fraud.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

BillJ said:


> Or at least that's what the commercial said last night. I can't believe they're still running that thing. Don't they have enough lawsuits or do they need another for false advertising? It's one thing to make that claim in July and then be able to say "we couldn't do it because of uncontrollable circumstances". But running that ad with a week left in the year is fraud.


Obviously you missed the part where they say "up to" 150.


----------



## tcatdbs (Jul 10, 2008)

Still on their website too:

"With over 100 HD channels available and 150 projected by the end of the year, you can expect a lot of choices when it comes to sports, movies, and news."

I guess "projected" = "up to". I'm "supposed to" have all their HD with Absolute, and don't have close to 100. I guess if they keep the ad up another week, it'll still be good, it'll just be end of 2009 instead of 2008. Good way to save on advertising! Also a good way to lose subs.


----------



## brant (Jul 6, 2008)

tcatdbs said:


> I'm "supposed to" have all their HD with Absolute, and don't have close to 100.


i have absolute, and including HBO & Starz HD, as well as HD PPV, I have 76 HD channels. Still a long ways to go.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

JMHO, 
but I just don't worry about the Marketing flak, from anybody. There are far to many so called HD channels, that aren't HD at all. ABC Family, TOON, are fine examples, of worthless HD channel.
I will be more upset and want the channels, when there is actually HD content on the station, not just a HD logo.


----------



## SHS (Jan 8, 2003)

I my book most of so called HD channel don't count becuase there not a national programming and I have agree with GrumpyBear


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

SHS said:


> I my book most of so called HD channel don't count becuase there not a national programming and I have agree with GrumpyBear


Yep, I only count Networks. Not PPV, Partime RSN's Or Sports packages.


----------



## Adam Richey (Mar 25, 2002)

I, for one, think the term "projected" doesn't mean "up to." It doesn't mean exactly 150 channels, but that verbage right there is false advertising unless they somehow get more HD channels.


----------



## coldmiser (Mar 10, 2007)

Hey now...they still have a few days to meet that number.


----------



## calgary2800 (Aug 27, 2006)

I would be happy just to get ABC back at this point.


----------



## daleles (Jul 2, 2005)

I saw another (more recent) Dish commercial and now they're saying they have "120 HD channels" now. I don't see it. Since the "up to 150 HD channels" commercial, which originally aired in the Summer, they've added about 6 channels I believe, 5 new PPV's and they split the VS/Golf channel into each separate channel. 

By the way, they also said they had about "100 National HD channels" (back in the Summer) which was also a lie. All the RSN HD channels are NOT HD National channels. 

Maybe the reason they're losing subscribers is because they've lied in their commercials? Making promises they can't keep. And what about NESN HD? Didn't they put out a press release back in the Spring (just in time for baseball season) announcing NESN HD?
It never happned. 

daleles


----------



## peak_reception (Feb 10, 2008)

*Ye of Little Faith!

Mark Wednesday, December 31, on your calendar and watch very closely what happens! *


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Adam Richey said:


> I, for one, think the term "projected" doesn't mean "up to." It doesn't mean exactly 150 channels, but that verbage right there is false advertising unless they somehow get more HD channels.


Not that I agree with the advertising or the fuzzy math that Dish and DirecTV and others are using...

but to be fair, "projected" simply means something is in plans. If I project to do something, I may not actually be able to do it... but as long as there is an effort to try and at least a partial plan to ge there, then I could fairly say I project something.

Again, I disagree with the use of tricky words in advertising to give easy-outs... but I can't disagree that the word doesn't mean what it means.


----------



## clyde sauls (Nov 16, 2007)

I was thinking if Dish was smart . They would try to add all the national hd channels that are available. Then with the price increase in Feb . If they really did have the most hd available and subs could get it before the price increase. It might keep Subs from leaving due to price going up.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

clyde sauls said:


> I was thinking if Dish was smart . They would try to add all the national hd channels that are available. Then with the price increase in Feb . If they really did have the most hd available and subs could get it before the price increase. It might keep Subs from leaving due to price going up.


There's no real incentive to add before the price increase, since the price increase would affect everybody (i.e. there is no lock into existing prices)... but even with that, it couldn't hurt Dish to add more HD if they can prior to Feb to help keep the grumblers down a bit.

Then again, I'm often reminded of how people complain in Feb about Dish raising prices without adding channels... but when Dish adds channels in the summer without raising prices no one seems to remember that.


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

GrumpyBear said:


> JMHO,
> but I just don't worry about the Marketing flak, from anybody. There are far to many so called HD channels, that aren't HD at all. ABC Family, TOON, are fine examples, of worthless HD channel.
> I will be more upset and want the channels, when there is actually HD content on the station, not just a HD logo.


+1 here.

I know many people who have/had DISH and I am the only one among them that frequent DBS Talk and similar sites. I only know of one person in my circle of friends/acquaintances who actually left DISH for D* and that was to get Sunday Ticket, which E* can't provide. The only other people I know that left DISH, left because cable offered them internet & phone in a package. Granted I live in a fairly rural area, but I have never heard a complaint about channel count from anyone around here that I know. Most of those folks don't even have hidef. Most of the folks I know with dbs are much more worried about the monthly hit than if E* has one more HD channel than D*. I personally would prefer to have all the rest of my HD locals put on the sat as opposed to another mostly upconverted HD stretchovision channel added to the "count".


----------



## tedb3rd (Feb 2, 2006)

Geez, just buy those HD sunglasses that are, WOW, only $19.95 (and they sparkle and you hear the chimes when you put them on)... Then, all your channels will be in HD! They will pay for themselves in about 2 months after you downgrade the HD off of your Dish subscription. :lol:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

peak_reception said:


> *Ye of Little Faith!
> 
> Mark Wednesday, December 31, on your calendar and watch very closely what happens! *


DISH has a lot to do before then to get me excited about that Wednesday.

It is more likely that we will see one or more channel disputes turn into 'off air' apology screens/video loops than new HD.

Keep your hopes up if you wish, but I won't be suckered again. 

I'd rather be pleasantly surprised than disappointed.


----------



## davethestalker (Sep 17, 2006)

Look at it this way, "up to" also includes 2. We have many more than 2. The ad could say "up to" 300. That's a bit harder wool to pull over people's eyes though.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The "up to" debate always reminds me of a pet peeve of mine..

Whenever I hear people say "I will do that by Friday... or sooner" I cringe, since "or sooner" is automatically included in the "by xxx" part of the statement.


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

I saw that there are 7 TEMP HD Slots on

http://www.dishuser.org/dishlist.php

are these channels News Corp or Viacom HD channels?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

space86 said:


> I saw that there are 7 TEMP HD Slots on
> 
> http://www.dishuser.org/dishlist.php
> 
> are these channels News Corp or Viacom HD channels?


Those channels have also bee reported in our Uplink Reports ...

They have never been proven to be anything more than placemarkers and are likely just carrying a static logo or other non-content. The last time DISH put up a large batch of "temp" channels the numbers changed when the channels became available.

Best guess is that DISH knows we're watching and is just giving us some minor data to look at. When we see reports of 'content' other than low bit rate slates on those channels we'll be getting closer to something real.


----------



## bartendress (Oct 8, 2007)

Yay! Another HD channel count thread!

Are the channel counters under-served, or is it just a slow week on the forum?


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

bartendress said:


> Yay! Another HD channel count thread!
> 
> Are the channel counters under-served, or is it just a slow week on the forum?


Slow week, Christmas time and all I think.


----------



## peak_reception (Feb 10, 2008)

bartendress said:


> Yay! Another HD channel count thread!
> 
> Are the channel counters under-served, or is it just a slow week on the forum?


 Oh yeah, well "bartendress" isn't even a real word, so there. 

DISH should've advertised "Up To 1,000 HD Channels By The End Of The Year" since the "up to" clause is infinitely elastic.


----------



## bartendress (Oct 8, 2007)

peak_reception said:


> Oh yeah, well "bartendress" isn't even a real word, so there.


Just try telling that to the drag-queen who bestowed that name upon me! :nono2:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

:backtotop


----------



## Adam Richey (Mar 25, 2002)

I believe it's safe to say that Dish Network has at least provided incredibly misleading advertising, if not outright false advertising. I am not expecting anything new, and I plan to switch to DirecTV around the time I file bankruptcy so that Dish can be included on that too. Unless the next week or two bring one HELL of an influx of HD programming or at the very least information on channels coming instead of just "These could be possible additions here soon," I'm out.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

As I was trying to figure out what package changes might be appropriate come February, I discovered that in our household we've basically been watching shows on 27 channels including locals, 19 HD and 8 still SD. I don't need 150. I need 27, including these 8: PBS, The CW, AMC, BBCA, CMT, Comedy Central, FX, and Hallmark.

There. That solves that whole counting thing.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Adam Richey said:


> I believe it's safe to say that Dish Network has at least provided incredibly misleading advertising, if not outright false advertising. I am not expecting anything new, and I plan to switch to DirecTV around the time I file bankruptcy so that Dish can be included on that too.


Ok, wait... At the same time you're saying Dish is doing something wrong, false, or at least misleading... you're also planning to file for bankruptcy and planning to stick it to Dish as part of that maneuvering?

Off-topic, but... I've known people who were about to file for bankruptcy who ran up all their credit cards and bought a bunch of stuff just to cover it under that umbrella. While there are legitimate reasons to file for bankruptcy, I stop feeling sorry for anyone who chooses to run their debt up further to get some "last minute shopping" in before filing.

Back to topic now... I wish Dish, DirecTV, and everyone else would quit with the fuzzy math and misleading advertising.. but I can't find one more honest than another anymore, so I've stopped criticizing the practice too much.


----------



## DJ Lon (Nov 3, 2005)

GrumpyBear said:


> ...There are far to many so called HD channels, that aren't HD at all. ABC Family, TOON, are fine examples, of worthless HD channel...


That's not entirely fair. I will agree TOON is 100% Turner Stretch-O-Vision 24/7 but ABC Family showed a few _Harry Potter_ movies a few weeks ago in 16:9 HD and _White Christmas_ was shown in 16:9 HD as well. TBS, TNT and other channels are slowly showing HD versions of TV shows and movies (_A Christmas Story_ was in 16:9 HD) as well. My guess is that HD telecines are not widely available to the networks yet so they broadcast what they have.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

peak_reception said:


> DISH should've advertised "Up To 1,000 HD Channels By The End Of The Year" since the "up to" clause is infinitely elastic.


While the phrase is infinitely elastic, DISH Network's subscribers are not and for one reason or another, they place high value on greener grass.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I remember last year when DirecTV was advertising up to 100 channels in HD... and many of us were noting that there weren't even 100 HD channels to add.

Same thing this year, now with Dish and 150... there aren't 150 HD channels. Heck, I'm not even sure there are 100 as we get to 126 or so only by counting part-time RSNs when most of us actually only get 1 or 2 RSNs and not the whole package.

So, I take such things with a grain of salt and just wait and see what channels light up.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Right now there are 67/68 on the two services with 16/15 the other provider has. In other words, if you could get every national non-RSN/non-PPV HD channel on DISH and DirecTV you would get 83 channels. Add in RSNs and one can cross the 100 line but only with a lot of blackouts. 32 PPV channels is the only way DirecTV gets to "150".

It was a mistake for DirecTV or DISH to advertise a channel count that cannot be honestly reached.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

PPV's HD Channels SHOULD NOT EVEN COUNT towards the total number.
RSN's are miss leading too, as they aren't 24/7, to much time offline or in blackout mode.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> Right now there are 67/68 on the two services with 16/15 the other provider has. In other words, if you could get every national non-RSN/non-PPV HD channel on DISH and DirecTV you would get 83 channels. Add in RSNs and one can cross the 100 line but only with a lot of blackouts. 32 PPV channels is the only way DirecTV gets to "150".
> 
> It was a mistake for DirecTV or DISH to advertise a channel count that cannot be honestly reached.


 It was a "dishonest assertion mistake" honestly but foolishly made for competitive reasons. While the channel count issue existed before, the real marketing problem began in January 2008 with this Comcast news release:


> Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSK, CMCSA), the nation's leading provider of entertainment, information and communications, today announced three major content initiatives at the 2008 Consumer Electronics Show. Comcast CEO Brian L. Roberts unveiled the Company's plan to give consumers more than 1,000 HD choices in 2008....


 Comcast touts it's HD based on VOD/PPV without mentioning "channels".

Unless someone puts a 10T drive in a satellite recorder, satellite services can't match Comcast's cleverly named "Project Infinity" for "choices" (unless someone starts counting internet streaming programming, which will probably happen as every cable/telcom provider can provide infinite access to streamed content).

Satellite providers went with the "HD channels" counting option. "Channels", I guess, are those numbered thingy's, but Dish screwed that up with that channel 501.

On the other hand, in addition to VOD Comcast HD offers me only HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz!, ESPN and Discovery, not even locals! So if I were Comcast I wouldn't mention channels either.

In other words, this whole counting thing is irrelevant. As I said above, we basically record from 27 channels, 8 of which are SD. That's the only count that matters to me. And my count really doesn't matter to any other household.


----------



## Adam Richey (Mar 25, 2002)

When Dish decided to charge me for the "3 months of free Starz!" because of being sent 2 dud replacements for my DVR, I quit being sympathetic for them. I don't owe them any money outside of my monthly bill, considering the condition of a 2 year agreement was the 3 months of free Starz!. LOL 

I seriously don't think we will see anything until the projected timetable of this new satellite being completely ready and fully tested is right, which I thought was late January or February?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Feb/March time frame


----------



## grog (Jul 3, 2007)

Well if I select 'HD Only' on my VIP622 I see 212 stations. 

I did not count OTA channels.

It's all in how we count them!
Sure, SCFI is on 122, 5503 and 9432.
Sure I counted PPV channels.
Sure I counted the test channel.
Sure I counted local HD.

But hey.... I see more than 150!

If you are only looking for numbers there you go.


----------



## dennispap (Feb 1, 2007)

GrumpyBear said:


> PPV's HD Channels SHOULD NOT EVEN COUNT towards the total number.
> RSN's are misleading too, as they aren't 24/7, to much time offline or in blackout mode.


Agreed


----------



## otnipj3s (Jul 20, 2008)

DJ Lon said:


> That's not entirely fair. I will agree TOON is 100% Turner Stretch-O-Vision 24/7 but ABC Family showed a few _Harry Potter_ movies a few weeks ago in 16:9 HD and _White Christmas_ was shown in 16:9 HD as well. TBS, TNT and other channels are slowly showing HD versions of TV shows and movies (_A Christmas Story_ was in 16:9 HD) as well. My guess is that HD telecines are not widely available to the networks yet so they broadcast what they have.


I think you hit the nail on the head about the HD quality coming from the networks. I was watching the Adams Family movie about a month ago on believe it or not ABC Family HD. It looked _GREAT_! I haven't seen anything close to that good on that channel, and the movie is from 1991. Maybe it was a bluray version they were broadcasting.


----------



## tcatdbs (Jul 10, 2008)

15 HD Hockey channels showed up yesterday (nothing on them), but I'm sure they added 15 to their count. I notice a Direct TV commercial saying they have OVER 150 now... wow, time to switch :lol:


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

The numbers game is just so lame. All providers play the game, and they are all LAME for playing the game.


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

15 HD Hockey channels? What a waste of bandwidth, man.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DirecTV was already claiming 150 ... not too hard when you offer 32 PPV channels and count sports alternate feeds that have dedicated channel numbers by market.


----------



## oldschoolecw (Jan 25, 2007)

James Long said:


> DirecTV was already claiming 150 ... not too hard when you offer 32 PPV channels and count sports alternate feeds that have dedicated channel numbers by market.


That is the one thing that disappoints me with having DirecTV is there lack in judgment when saying they have this or that in HD. I'm sorry but I don't see how they can pull the HD PPV's as part of there total HD experience. In all fairness what should be counted are National channels and then premium channels, and sports networks that have zero blackouts which could be considered Nationals.

My contract just ended with DirecTV a few weeks ago and after 9 years of being a customer I have been debating trying out Dish Network for the first time because of the HD packaging plans they offer.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

oldschoolecw said:


> That is the one thing that disappoints me with having DirecTV is there lack in judgment when saying they have this or that in HD. I'm sorry but I don't see how they can pull the HD PPV's as part of there total HD experience. In all fairness what should be counted are National channels and then premium channels, and sports networks that have zero blackouts which could be considered Nationals.
> 
> My contract just ended with DirecTV a few weeks ago and after 9 years of being a customer I have been debating trying out Dish Network for the first time because of the HD packaging plans they offer.


Just do a REAL HD channel comparison, to make sure you get the channels you want. Direct, Dish, and EVERY Cable company out there does the same thing, with the inflated numbers crap, with PPV's and other things. Make sure you are happy with the true HD lineup. Its the Hardware for me that keeps me with Dish right now.


----------



## oldschoolecw (Jan 25, 2007)

GrumpyBear said:


> Just do a REAL HD channel comparison, to make sure you get the channels you want. Direct, Dish, and EVERY Cable company out there does the same thing, with the inflated numbers crap, with PPV's and other things. Make sure you are happy with the true HD lineup. Its the Hardware for me that keeps me with Dish right now.


I here you and thanks, the only thing that has been holding me back from making any move is the Tivo option down the road once again with DirecTV. But in a nut shell here is what I have now with DirecTV and that is the PREMIER package which more or less is everything turned on. I never buy PPV movies because I will catch them on my premium channels about 3 to 6 months after there on PPV. The sports package gets blacked out all the time so I really don't need that. And I do not buy any of the season sports packs like for instance "NFL Sunday ticket"

I have also taken 85 percent of the SD channels out of my favorites because HD is really the only programming I can sit and enjoy, HD the greatest thing since Satellite TV


----------



## MarcusInMD (Jan 7, 2005)

It's official. Dish network really does suck.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

MarcusInMD said:


> It's official. Dish network really does suck.


Based upon what?

and

Compared to what?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

By my non-PPV non-RSN count DISH and DirecTV are nearly equal.
DISH has 67 nationals (including 10 HD only channels - 7 in Platinum).
DirecTV has 68 nationals (including 6 HD only in their HD extra pack).
DISH is missing 16 HDs that are on DirecTV (8 on DISH in SD, 3 not on DISH, 5 premiums in SD).
DirecTV is missin 15 HDs that are on DISH (4 on DirecTV in SD, 2 not on DirecTV, 5 premiums in SD and 4 premiums not on DirecTV).

The RSNs and PPVs are the big difference in counting ... there are blackouts on national HD channels such as ESPN, but not to the level of the blackouts on RSNs.


----------



## davethestalker (Sep 17, 2006)

James Long said:


> The RSNs and PPVs are the big difference in counting ... there are blackouts on national HD channels such as ESPN,* but not to the level of the blackouts on RSNs*.


We (South Bend area) get Concast Sports Net Chicago and it's useless. Every Cubs game is blacked out, every Sox game is blacked out. And for some really strange reason, the Bulls games are not. 

Jordan's not playing anymore, so I could care less about the Bulls or any NBA games for that matter.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

davethestalker said:


> We (South Bend area) get Concast Sports Net Chicago and it's useless. Every Cubs game is blacked out, every Sox game is blacked out. And for some really strange reason, the Bulls games are not.
> 
> Jordan's not playing anymore, so I could care less about the Bulls or any NBA games for that matter.


Check out Fox Sports Midwest if you really want to see blackouts. 

With the sports pack I can get some good games on FSN Detroit but blackouts really hurt the value of RSNs.


----------



## GB1 (Dec 7, 2006)

Anyone else see the Dish add last night at 9 p.m. (12/31/08)Stating they had over 100 HD channels and would have "up to 150 by the end of the year"? How dishonest.


----------



## tedb3rd (Feb 2, 2006)

Oh my gosh! The first company to ever not follow through with statements and promises to customers.

Welcome to modern western civilization--SUCKER! Complain, complain, complain. But if you don't cancel your service, they DON'T CARE!


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

I don't know why people are complaining, Dish has something like 364 days or something to get to 150 HD channels "by the end of the year". :grin:


----------



## GB1 (Dec 7, 2006)

tedb3rd said:


> Oh my gosh! The first company to ever not follow through with statements and promises to customers.
> 
> Welcome to modern western civilization--SUCKER! Complain, complain, complain. But if you don't cancel your service, they DON'T CARE!


Well a little harsh...I don't think pointing out what I saw and my thoughts is the same as being a SUCKER. I actually am very active in protecting my (and others) rights as consumers. Canceling service is one very important choice -among many others.

Overall I am very happy with Dish (ex comcast sub)


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

tedb3rd said:


> But if you don't cancel your service, they DON'T CARE!


I wouldn't bet that "they" cared if you canceled service.

In this case all of the complaining and canceling in the world isn't going to change reality. The 150 channels was a goal. I know that some latched on to one poorly worded ad and think they heard a promise or commitment but one has to actually listen to the ads. They are nearly all couched in "weasel words" - the 'expect' 'plan' 'up to' type language.

And yes, you can cancel and go to another service such as DirecTV ... who just happen to be missing 15 HD channels that DISH does carry (as opposed to the 16 HD channels DirecTV has that DISH doesn't carry).

I'm disappointed that the 150 ads still occasionally get on the air and that the "TurboHD" upgrade channel was still active after the December Charlie Chat where DISH said that they were not going to make it. But I'm so sick of "marketing" from DISH, DirecTV (150 channels now, if you count PPV and channels that would be illegal for DirecTV to allow me to subscribe to - plus DirecTV is deceptive about their prices in advertising) and Comcast (HD choices instead of HD channels is the ultimate in padding) that when I see marketing I just ignore it. No one seems to be telling the "truth".


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

James Long said:


> Comcast (HD choices instead of HD channels is the ultimate in padding) that when I see marketing I just ignore it.


Whats wrong with "choices" ? The future of pay TV is in VOD - not some prepackaged set of programming called "channel". In 20 years I think the idea of Channels will be as antiquated as AOL dail-up.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Gee. Now Dish has 12 months again to get to 150.:sure:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Being disappointed in a company not meeting its marketed goal (like "up to" 150 channels in HD) is a lot like being disappointed that Santa Claus didn't actually come to your house and leave gifts.

The stories are nice and entertaining for the family, but there is no Santa Claus. If you wake up on Christmas morning to find someone in your house, call the police!


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Well at least they didn't a bunch of worthless HDPPV, to meet the magic number, or to keep pace with the other guys, who keep adding PPV to pad things.


----------



## clyde sauls (Nov 16, 2007)

I think they shouldnt said anything in the press release last summer after adding the 22 hd channels. Then I believe it did say 100 channels now and 150 before the end of the yr.I know they cant tell the future if something happens to the future satellite launching or if they cant get contracts signed. So dont say nothing.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Say nothing and all the threads are about DISH saying nothing and not having a plan to add any HD. The only way to "win" is to actually add HD - or at least that would seem to be true until you read the threads about the next channel that somebody wants.

Even if every "HD" channel in existence is added someone will be complaining about the lack of "true HD" content ... and/or compression ... and/or some SD channel that isn't even available in HD anywhere yet ... and/or some HD channel that doesn't/no longer exists.

Is there a way to win? Not really. They just need to do what they can and hope people accept it.


----------



## mw1597 (Jan 13, 2007)

The way for DISH to win is to stop playing the numbers game. I could care less about how many HD channels DISH has. What I do care about is do they offer the few channels that I care to watch at a reasonable cost. I still mainly watch network OTA HDTV that I get for free. There are just a handful of non-network satellite HD channels that I watch on a regular basis. IMO it is time for DISH to offer ala carte programming.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

James Long said:


> Is there a way to win? Not really. They just need to do what they can and hope people accept it.


The lesson learned from "WarGames" was...

The only way to win is not to play.


----------



## razorbackfan (Aug 18, 2002)

It's January 1, 2009. Dish can start running the "150 HD channels by the end of the year ad" again.


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

razorbackfan said:


> It's January 1, 2009. Dish can start running the "150 HD channels by the end of the year ad" again.


By the end of 2009 LOL.


----------



## PRIME1 (Nov 29, 2007)

Might as well go ahead and bump it up as well:

"250 HD channels by the end of the year"

:sure:


----------



## grog (Jul 3, 2007)

Now if they had the Speed channel in HD then they could say:

We now have 150 HD. Which would be true since the Speed channel is on channel 150.


----------



## Dario33 (Dec 15, 2008)

Forget 150 -- just give me one and I'll be happy: *FX* (preferably by next Tuesday )


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

phrelin said:


> As I was trying to figure out what package changes might be appropriate come February, I discovered that in our household we've basically been watching shows on 27 channels including locals, 19 HD and 8 still SD. I don't need 150. I need 27, including these 8: PBS, The CW, AMC, BBCA, CMT, Comedy Central, FX, and Hallmark.
> 
> There. That solves that whole counting thing.


Isn't KBCW in HD? I wonder why?


----------



## Galaxie6411 (Aug 26, 2007)

I won't even bother trying to explain how the ad specifically said/says *UP TO* 150 channels. 

I find this issue coming up every few weeks a fun exercise on perception of ads. I even admit the very first time I saw the ad I thought it said 150 but once I saw it again the UP TO stuck out like a sore thumb.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Paul Secic said:


> Isn't KBCW in HD? I wonder why?


It's in HD off the air and on other carriers, but not on Dish.


----------



## Robotpedlr (Dec 14, 2008)

Maybe they are counting all the various locals in their 150 number...that would get them closer with all the markets.


----------



## tcatdbs (Jul 10, 2008)

I think Dish would have more customers if they were honest. Usually you see lists like "top 10" with a list of 10 items. I get a DirectTV flier about every other month with a nice long list of HD channels, but not close to the number specified at the top of the list. If Dish had said "we now have 64 HD channels" after they added 22 a couple months ago, and "up to 100 by year end"... everyone here (and anyone thinking of switching to Dish), might think they were the more honest of the 2 or 3 services available... and actually switch.

I just don't see why they take so long "negotiating" the 10-15 channels available to add... why not just make them $1.00 per channel options, and let us decide. I'd add FX, VH1, Speed, and my local PBS and be happy to pay $4.00 more. I think Dish would be surprized to see how much revenue they could get by adding more items a-la-cart.

This is a pretty good comparison list, and they can't really explain accurately what's really in the "total".
http://www.cnet.com/1990-7874_1-5108854-5.html?tag=mncol;txt


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

tcatdbs said:


> ... why not just make them $1.00 per channel options, and let us decide. I'd add FX, VH1, Speed, and my local PBS and be happy to pay $4.00 more. I think Dish would be surprized to see how much revenue they could get by adding more items a-la-cart.


Because $1 per channel is unlikely to be the cost. If available a la carte, I would be surprised to see any popular channel available for less than $5 per channel.

Consider that HBO was once $10 per month for just one HBO channel. Now you get a suite of HBO channels for $15 or so... but don't expect to be able to pay $1 for any single HBO channel in that suite.

Similarly, don't expect USA or FX to just be $1 a la carte.

I would drive a Porsche if it only cost $5,000! But I doubt that is ever going to happen.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

tcatdbs said:


> I just don't see why they take so long "negotiating" the 10-15 channels available to add... why not just make them $1.00 per channel options, and let us decide. I'd add FX, VH1, Speed, and my local PBS and be happy to pay $4.00 more. I think Dish would be surprized to see how much revenue they could get by adding more items a-la-cart.


Part of negotiation is getting the providers to agree to sell their channels. DISH may want to offer Speed HD for $1 per customer, but the channel owner wants their other channels carried too so they refuse to allow carriage of their more popular channels to force their less popular channels on the air.

MTV, VH1, CMT were up for a year with nearly no HD ... not exactly the type of HD DISH is looking for. They will come ... along with other channels from their provider. Hopefully channels that are worth carrying that are actual HD. 

Charlie Ergen has stated in the past that he would love to offer a la carte channels ... it is the channel providers that won't go for it.


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

James Long said:


> Part of negotiation is getting the providers to agree to sell their channels. DISH may want to offer Speed HD for $1 per customer, but the channel owner wants their other channels carried too so they refuse to allow carriage of their more popular channels to force their less popular channels on the air.
> 
> MTV, VH1, CMT were up for a year with nearly no HD ... not exactly the type of HD DISH is looking for. They will come ... along with other channels from their provider. Hopefully channels that are worth carrying that are actual HD.
> 
> Charlie Ergen has stated in the past that he would love to offer a la carte channels ... it is the channel providers that won't go for it.


That is funny a la carte the only channel keeping me at the 250 level
is History International which I watch all the time if HI drops to a
lower level I could save 10 dollars a month on my bill.


----------



## oldschoolecw (Jan 25, 2007)

tcatdbs said:


> This is a pretty good comparison list, and they can't really explain accurately what's really in the "total".
> http://www.cnet.com/1990-7874_1-5108854-5.html?tag=mncol;txt


Thanks for the comparison link, it looks as if I would be better off going with Dish Network for their HD experience.

What caught my eye was the non HD music channels "I could care less about them and it looks that Dish Network feels the same".

And having all of those premiums in HD is just another thing I want.

Verizon Fios is what I will be getting down the road but there not expected to be in my area for at least 3 to 7 years.


----------



## dennispap (Feb 1, 2007)

tsmacro said:


> I don't know why people are complaining, Dish has something like 364 days or something to get to 150 HD channels "by the end of the year". :grin:


Not if the ad was on 12-31-08 like above poster said. That gave them approx 3 hours.


----------



## dennispap (Feb 1, 2007)

peak_reception said:


> *Ye of Little Faith!
> 
> Mark Wednesday, December 31, on your calendar and watch very closely what happens! *


What happened?????


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dennispap said:


> What happened?????


The ball got dropped.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

James Long said:


> The ball got dropped.


In my city they drop an acorn!


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

How about a little Gas for the fire.
I caught a glimpse of a DISH commerical, something about currently having 120 HD Channels?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

You've got it wrong. It says "Over 120 National HD Channels." Check out below the middle screen of the three from the web site:










It's on their web site, so it's got to be true.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

hehehehe, I didn't set the entire commercial. Just saw the 120HD as I was speeding on past it.


----------



## RollTide1017 (Oct 12, 2008)

"120 national HD channels" Now that is a flat out lie becuase there are not even 120 national HD networks.


----------



## grog (Jul 3, 2007)

New Math! :lol::lol:
The number must be in Octal.
You know that a 120 in Octal is 80 in decimal.

Just call it marketing. :lol:



RollTide1017 said:


> "120 national HD channels" Now that is a flat out lie becuase there are not even 120 national HD networks.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

They are just doing like the cable and fios people are doing, counting PPV, VOD, RSN's and anything that even might have a hint of HD on it.


----------



## Gary Noonan (Oct 14, 2005)

:lol: Dish has even longer if the add does not specify what year the word "end" applies to. Perhaps, by the end of 2020?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

grog said:


> New Math! :lol::lol:
> The number must be in Octal.
> You know that a 120 in Octal is 80 in decimal.
> 
> Just call it marketing. :lol:


Maybe if we zoom in really close there is a subscript "8" there to indicate the base number system!


----------



## ibooksrule (Feb 16, 2003)

GrumpyBear said:


> JMHO,
> but I just don't worry about the Marketing flak, from anybody. There are far to many so called HD channels, that aren't HD at all. ABC Family, TOON, are fine examples, of worthless HD channel.
> I will be more upset and want the channels, when there is actually HD content on the station, not just a HD logo.


ABCfamily does have some HD programming. All of their programming that is new is HD such as Kyle Xy and Secret life. Granted its stupid when they show a movie and they show the same thing cropped even on HD side when they should show the cropped version on SD and the original widescreen movie on HD. I have not figured out why they do this. 
Cartoon net in HD yea 95% of everything they show is not HD.


----------

