# DIRECTV 2015 Pricing



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

http://www.directv.com/cms3/customer/DIRECTV_PRICING_2015/full_pricing_table_directv_2015.pdf

OK, I understand the monthly programming fees going up, not real thrilled about the $.50/month increase in the set top box fees though.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

There is no way I'd be affected (ours is only HD part time), but RSN fees increase up to $2.14? Couldn't they have just made it an even $2?

I'm assuming that older customers still won't pay for the primary.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

dpeters11 said:


> There is no way I'd be affected (ours is only HD part time), but RSN fees increase up to $2.14? Couldn't they have just made it an even $2?
> 
> I'm assuming that older customers still won't pay for the primary.


 That's correct, dpeters. the primary tv fee only applies to customers set up in late 2014


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Can't older customers convert to the new pricing schedule if they wish to?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> That's correct, dpeters. the primary tv fee only applies to customers set up in late 2014


Right, was just making sure that wasn't changing. But it would have been specifically in the document if it was.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

studechip said:


> Can't older customers convert to the new pricing schedule if they wish to?


You can change to a current package, but not sure why someone would want to move to the new reciever model if it was possible. I don't think they pay for HD, but then paying $6 or $6.50 for the first receiver really cuts down on any savings.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> There is no way I'd be affected (ours is only HD part time), but RSN fees increase up to $2.14? Couldn't they have just made it an even $2?
> 
> I'm assuming that older customers still won't pay for the primary.


I checked the RSN for my area and it goes from the current $1.82 to $3.63, almost a 100% increase unless I'm doing it wrong!

I've got D* on suspend now and am watching on E* currently. After the 1st of the year one of them will get the ETF and I'll keep the other. If it wasn't for my passion for boxing I'd be sorely tempted to just pay both ETF's and be done with it altogether.

Try this math... Cancel both, pay about $360 total in ETFs, or about $30 on a monthly basis if you look at 12 months. Hook up OTA antenna, sub to Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus which would total up to about $25/month. Add in the ETFs making the total $55/month. Hmm, just how much do I love boxing??


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

lparsons21 said:


> I checked the RSN for my area and it goes from the current $1.82 to $3.63, almost a 100% increase unless I'm doing it wrong!
> 
> I've got D* on suspend now and am watching on E* currently. After the 1st of the year one of them will get the ETF and I'll keep the other. If it wasn't for my passion for boxing I'd be sorely tempted to just pay both ETF's and be done with it altogether.
> 
> Try this math... Cancel both, pay about $360 total in ETFs, or about $30 on a monthly basis if you look at 12 months. Hook up OTA antenna, sub to Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus which would total up to about $25/month. Add in the ETFs making the total $55/month. Hmm, just how much do I love boxing??


No, you're doing the math right. There have been huge strides in the new channels offered within the RSNs this year, which contributed to the increase. Any year where any company has big negotiations, big new channels added, etc, you're going to see the larger increase. Some years, it's a lot less. just depends.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

The sad part is that I don't actually watch any of the RSN's. So essentially if I'm paying an RSN fee it is a charity with no tax benefit!!


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

lparsons21 said:


> The sad part is that I don't actually watch any of the RSN's. So essentially if I'm paying an RSN fee it is a charity with no tax benefit!!


I would definitely do some research and see what channels keep you in that high of a package then. If you move to Entertainment or Select, no RSN applies.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Those wouldn't do as there are channels I would miss. The most likely thing that will happen is that I'll kill off D* and just keep E* because of the archived movies and such on my EHD. The actual cost between the 2 services for me is nearly equal but I like the E* tech a bit more. I will be massaging what I subscribe to though, not sure just what but some anyway.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> Those wouldn't do as there are channels I would miss. The most likely thing that will happen is that I'll kill off D* and just keep E* because of the archived movies and such on my EHD. The actual cost between the 2 services for me is nearly equal but I like the E* tech a bit more. I will be massaging what I subscribe to though, not sure just what but some anyway.


Just be weary of the contract disputes. Charlie is using them to save money anytime he can.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

I wish they would list the old price so you could see what the difference is.


----------



## Wayne Kjelsrud (May 17, 2008)

TheRatPatrol said:


> I wish they would list the old price so you could see what the difference is.


$7 for premiere


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Wow. Choice Xtra Classic is going up to $79.49. Crazy. That's a $4 bump. The TV fee is N/A for me since the first TV is free. Do you know what the new RSN for 92606 is? DirecTVs page is still showing $3.63. And yeah, like others, I don't watch ANY sports.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> Just be weary of the contract disputes. Charlie is using them to save money anytime he can.


I've been with both services enough to be aware of those issues. Not in the least worried as I'm almost always a month or more behind in shows!!


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

I current have Choice Xtra Classic. If I was to switch to the current Xtra package to save a few bucks, would they make me switch to the new DVR pricing too? Right now my bill shows $10 HD and $10 DVR fee. I don't have WHDVR. I certainly don't want my bill to get jacked up to the $25 fee.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> I current have Choice Xtra Classic. If I was to switch to the current Xtra package to save a few bucks, would they make me switch to the new DVR pricing too? Right now my bill shows $10 HD and $10 DVR fee. I don't have WHDVR. I certainly don't want my bill to get jacked up to the $25 fee.


No. Keep in mind though there are a few channels you'd lose (though honestly likely nothing you'd miss) and you can't go back (though it may be possible if done in under 30 days.)

I believe Chiller and Sprout are two of the channels, there are more I believe but really nothing that is a larger network.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> No. Keep in mind though there are a few channels you'd lose (though honestly likely nothing you'd miss) and you can't go back (though it may be possible if done in under 30 days.)
> 
> I believe Chiller and Sprout are two of the channels, there are more I believe but really nothing that is a larger network.


*Boomerang
CBS Sports Channel
Chiller
Golf Channel
NHL Network
Sprout
Style
Tennis Channel*

Definitely nothing I'd miss.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Style doesn't exist anymore, it was replaced by Esquire

Cloo, El Rey and Univsion Deportes also require Ultimate

CBS Sports, Golf Channel, NHL Network and Tennis Channel are all in Xtra


----------



## mitchflorida (May 18, 2009)

TheRatPatrol said:


> I wish they would list the old price so you could see what the difference is.


They do that on purpose, trying to deceive the customers.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

mitchflorida said:


> They do that on purpose, trying deceive the customers.


If it is to decieve, they're doing a pretty bad job of it. Way too easy to look at a bill, or those that check their bills every month probably knows the current price right off.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> If it is to decieve, they're doing a pretty bad job of it. Way too easy to look at a bill, or those that check their bills every month probably knows the current price right off.


You should probably ask friends and relatives if they know how much they pay for services. Every time I have ever asked anybody a question like that, they say they "aren't sure, but something around $xxx (rounded to the nearest $10 or so and off by $10 - $20)". Heck, I know a guy who SPECIFICALLY knows he is paying for 60Mbps internet, but only gets 30Mbps (due to some Cox hardware issue) and he could get it fixed by getting a truck roll, but he never does. Says its too much hassle LOL. I agree that truck rolls are too much hassle, but if I was getting 50% of the service I was paying for, I'd sure as hell do a truck roll.

That being said, DirecTV pricing *IS* deceptive. They have that $30 lazyness surcharge built in , where as Dish doesn't (from what I've seen).


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

But is the fact that they don't list the old and new price an actual attempt to make customers believe something that is untrue? Synonyms are swindle and cheat, though maybe mislead is closer, but I don't see that either.

Besides, I haven't gotten the email yet. In the past they've said things in the email like the average increase is 4%. Is this deceptive? Obviously that means some were potentially less, some more but it's not deceptive unless someone calls them out on rounding or something.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Anyone know if they post the 2015 commercial pricing somewhere too?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dpeters11 said:


> But is the fact that they don't list the old and new price an actual attempt to make customers believe something that is untrue?


If a customer does not know what they are paying now for their base package there is no need to highlight the increase.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

mitchflorida said:


> They do that on purpose, trying deceive the customers.


If it's an old package why would they post its price anywhere? I never expect to see the original prices from the day something was put out in stores, only the current regular price and maybe the current sale price. To expect them to list the price of the previous model you can no longer get would be odd to me.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

KyL416 said:


> Style doesn't exist anymore, it was replaced by Esquire
> 
> Cloo, El Rey and Univsion Deportes also require Ultimate
> 
> CBS Sports, Golf Channel, NHL Network and Tennis Channel are all in Xtra


I have xtra classic and I get the last four you listed.


----------



## sallop (Dec 27, 2014)

so will current customers with 3 recievers (since 2010) have to pay the new 6.50 fee for the 1st reciever ? or will it be 0 ?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

sallop said:


> so will current customers with 3 recievers (since 2010) have to pay the new 6.50 fee for the 1st reciever ? or will it be 0 ?


It should be $0 (well technically speaking, they will charge you $6.50 but give the credit for the same). Then $6.50 for every receiver after the first one.


----------



## sallop (Dec 27, 2014)

peds48 said:


> It should be $0 (well technically speaking, they will charge you $6.50 but give the credit for the same). Then $6.50 for every receiver after the first one.


so old customers should be grandfathered in for 1st tv being free ? (hd-dvrs) wonder why it says all customers is 6.50 though, with no designation for older customers or newer customers


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

sallop said:


> so old customers should be grandfathered in for 1st tv being free ? (hd-dvrs) wonder why it says all customers is 6.50 though, with no designation for older customers or newer customers


Well, 'ALL" customers will be paying $6.50. Older customers on the old price structure still get the first receiver included in the base package


----------



## Nighthawk68 (Oct 14, 2004)

Have they or are they changing the premium structure? I see a "Pick 2" option at $30.99 with HBO or $25.99 without HBO. Can you no longer do just HBO or 1 premium service?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Nighthawk68 said:


> Have they or are they changing the premium structure? I see a "Pick 2" option at $30.99 with HBO or $25.99 without HBO. Can you no longer do just HBO or 1 premium service?


I believe that just means there is no change for individual services.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

peds48 said:


> It should be $0 (well technically speaking, they will charge you $6.50 but give the credit for the same). Then $6.50 for every receiver after the first one.


So is everyone going up 50 cents?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Yes, unless a new customer came in with a price guarantee new customer deal, everyone will pay an extra 50 cents per box, but if the first one is credited back now, it still will be at the new rate.


----------



## mitchflorida (May 18, 2009)

inkahauts said:


> If it's an old package why would they post its price anywhere? I never expect to see the original prices from the day something was put out in stores, only the current regular price and maybe the current sale price. To expect them to list the price of the previous model you can no longer get would be odd to me.


Because they aren't old packages. They are the current packages. I would like to see how much each package was raised.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Wayne Kjelsrud said:


> $7 for premiere


Wow ....

I've had Premier seemingly forever, grandfathered in so the DVR fee is waived. But now with this, plus $.50 increase per box (I have 5 here), and a possible increase in the RSN fees. Looks like I'm going to have to finally give it up. ..

Gone as long as I could, but this one finally breaks the old camels' back I'm afraid.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

HoTat2 said:


> Wow ....
> 
> I've had Premier seemingly forever, grandfathered in so the DVR fee is waived. But now with this, plus $.50 increase per box (I have 5 here), and a possible increase in the RSN fees. Looks like I'm going to have to finally give it up. ..
> 
> Gone as long as I could, but this one finally breaks the old camels' back I'm afraid.


If I am looking at this correctly the Premier is going up $10 and I have 3 receivers so add another $1. I will definitely be dropping back to XTRA with the Pick 3 with HBO included. That would put me back to $120 for programming , plus $10 HD and $10 DVR and then add the 2 receivers at $6.50 each ( I have 3 ). I am also considering dropping the 1 receiver I have in my bedroom, since I almost never play it. And last but not least the sales tax for all of it.
I do have some discounts going right now that would go away if I change before they run out. It will probably be 4 months until I change packages.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

mitchflorida said:


> I would like to see how much each package was raised.


Entertainment $57.99 > $59.99 (+$2)
Choice $66.99 > $70.99 (+$4)
XTra $73.99 > $77.99 (+$4)
Ultimate $81.99 > $86.99 (+$5)
Premier $129.99 > $136.99 (+$7)

(Current prices as listed on the DirecTV website.)


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

James Long said:


> Entertainment $57.99 > $59.99 (+$2)
> Choice $66.99 > $70.99 (+$4)
> XTra $73.99 > $77.99 (+$4)
> Ultimate $81.99 > $86.99 (+$5)
> ...


I don't get those prices when I go to the Packages page.
I get Select $49.99
Entertainment $54.99
Choice $63.99
Xtra $70.99
Ultimate $78.99
Premier $126.99

I do not know why we each get different things on the page. I did clear history and cookies just last night so that everything I see should be new.
???

*Edit / Update: *Weired: I put in my zip code and all the prices changed to what you posted earlier.

*Second Edit: *The first time I was on the page each package says no locals at the bottom of the info for each package. Now with my zip code typed in it says locals included. That makes me think the locals are $3 per month.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Pricing is interesting lately. FiOS has been running a Holiday Offer to reduce and lock in pricing for 3 years for existing customers, and now I see the Premier pricing going up $7/mo plus an additional 50 cents per month per receiver, of which I had 6 additional. Man, the prices are really starting to get scary high.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I've called and dropped from Premier to Ultimate and dropped the protection plan.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Sixto said:


> Pricing is interesting lately. FiOS has been running a Holiday Offer to reduce and lock in pricing for 3 years for existing customers, and now I see the Premier pricing going up $7/mo plus an additional 50 cents per month per receiver, of which I had 6 additional. Man, the prices are really starting to get scary high.


Mine's never gonna go over $200 a month. If I see it happen, I'll call and drop the Premier plan. They never let that happen, tho. I made the call this year and I shouldn't go over $200 on average for the year even with the price increases. Should be interesting to see what they do next time I have to call and threaten to drop the Premier plan. I only use it for scripted shows, rarely watch a movie on it, don't mind paying for it, but I'm not going over $200 a month. Gee, a few more years and the Premier plan by itself will be over $200.

Rich


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

RAD said:


> I've called and dropped from Premier to Ultimate and dropped the protection plan.


There really isn't a reason to have the protection plan in general. If your account is in good standing, they'll generally give you free truck rolls. If you have owned boxes, they'll replace them with owned boxes I guess, but if you are all leased boxes, there is absolutely no good reason to flush $7 down the drain or however much it costs now.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Rich said:


> Mine's never gonna go over $200 a month. If I see it happen, I'll call and drop the Premier plan. They never let that happen, tho. I made the call this year and I shouldn't go over $200 on average for the year even with the price increases. Should be interesting to see what they do next time I have to call and threaten to drop the Premier plan. I only use it for scripted shows, rarely watch a movie on it, don't mind paying for it, but I'm not going over $200 a month. Gee, a few more years and the Premier plan by itself will be over $200.
> 
> Rich


I can't believe they are bumping up plans by $7+. That's pretty extreme. At least they didn't raise the DVR fees this year. I'd be kind of ticked if they did that, since you know... there hasn't been a new feature on the DVR since the HD GUI. And of course, there was that month where they completely broke the DVRs :blackeye: and search wouldn't work.

I really don't get DirecTV. Unless you call them and ask for the discount price, they are a lot pricier then Dish.

I don't really know why you keep the premier package if you don't watch the movie channels.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

SledgeHammer said:


> I can't believe they are bumping up plans by $7+. That's pretty extreme. At least they didn't raise the DVR fees this year. I'd be kind of ticked if they did that, since you know... there hasn't been a new feature on the DVR since the HD GUI. And of course, there was that month where they completely broke the DVRs :blackeye: and search wouldn't work.
> 
> I really don't get DirecTV. Unless you call them and ask for the discount price, they are a lot pricier then Dish.
> 
> I don't really know why you keep the premier package if you don't watch the movie channels.


It appears to me that many times that DirecTV has more special offers for the Premier package than they do for the others. I had Xtra, HBO, Showtime & Starz and asked what they could do for me. They moved me to the Premier and gave $20 off for 6 months and a few other discounts. Right this minute I am paying less for the Premier than I was for what I had. That is the only reason I have that package.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> I can't believe they are bumping up plans by $7+. That's pretty extreme. At least they didn't raise the DVR fees this year. I'd be kind of ticked if they did that, since you know... there hasn't been a new feature on the DVR since the HD GUI. And of course, there was that month where they completely broke the DVRs :blackeye: and search wouldn't work.
> 
> I really don't get DirecTV. Unless you call them and ask for the discount price, they are a lot pricier then Dish.
> 
> I don't really know why you keep the premier package if you don't watch the movie channels.


My wife uses it. I've tried to drop it and she just says don't. And the Retention people keep giving me credits to keep it. To be absolutely honest, if it wasn't for the Yankee games and the Jets (I know, I really know) and Giants, I'd have no real need for D*. I'd rather spend my time watching NF content.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jimmie57 said:


> It appears to me that many times that DirecTV has more special offers for the Premier package than they do for the others. I had Xtra, HBO, Showtime & Starz and asked what they could do for me. They moved me to the Premier and gave $20 off for 6 months and a few other discounts. Right this minute I am paying less for the Premier than I was for what I had. That is the only reason I have that package.


Must be some reason for them to do that. I don't know what it is, but they've always talked (bribed?) me into keeping it.

Rich


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

SledgeHammer said:


> There really isn't a reason to have the protection plan in general. If your account is in good standing, they'll generally give you free truck rolls. If you have owned boxes, they'll replace them with owned boxes I guess, but if you are all leased boxes, there is absolutely no good reason to flush $7 down the drain or however much it costs now.


And that was why I had the protection plan, all my STB's are owned. I didn't want to be in the position if one died they'd replace it but start a commitment and have a leased box.


----------



## anex80 (Jul 29, 2005)

Does anyone know if the channels in any of these packages are changing? Seems like price increases and package reorganization typically go hand in hand.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> there hasn't been a new feature on the DVR since the HD GUI.


There has:
Start over
New episodes available On Demand immediately after they air for select channels
All Sports
Genie Recommends
Revamped Movies with a poster interface that now includes movies on all channels (not just Cinema)
Updated Series Info pages
Pandora
HD Apps
Play Next episode for series
HDMI Control
GenieGo support (including streaming recordings remotely over the internet)
Genie RVU clients
4K on Demand with newer Samsung 4K TVs as a client
Watch Now On Demand streaming

Just because you may or may not personally use them doesn't change the fact that they're new features that came out after the debut of the HD GUI

EDIT: Added a few more that debuted after the HD GUI


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

KyL416 said:


> There has:......


Its cool that they can give us all of that, but we're still waiting on a PIP toggle.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

anex80 said:


> Does anyone know if the channels in any of these packages are changing? Seems like price increases and package reorganization typically go hand in hand.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Not as of now. The price increases are really reflecting all the new channels and such from the last year.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> I can't believe they are bumping up plans by $7+. That's pretty extreme. At least they didn't raise the DVR fees this year. I'd be kind of ticked if they did that, since you know... there hasn't been a new feature on the DVR since the HD GUI. And of course, there was that month where they completely broke the DVRs :blackeye: and search wouldn't work.
> 
> I really don't get DirecTV. Unless you call them and ask for the discount price, they are a lot pricier then Dish.
> 
> I don't really know why you keep the premier package if you don't watch the movie channels.


They are increasing prices by $2+.

Honestly I didn't know what to expect with the Disney deal.


----------



## Aridon (Mar 13, 2007)

I'm not surprised, I bet that Disney deal was expensive.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Aridon said:


> I'm not surprised, I bet that Disney deal was expensive.


Plus whatever other deals and increases in cost of business etc.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> They are increasing prices by $2+.
> 
> Honestly I didn't know what to expect with the Disney deal.


My plan went up $4 and I still don't know if they are increasing the RSN for LA which is already a crazy $3.63.

The premiere plan I think went up $7.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> My plan went up $4 and I still don't know if they are increasing the RSN for LA which is already a crazy $3.63.
> 
> The premiere plan I think went up $7.


Right, I was just responding to your comment about plan prices going up $7+. $2+ is more accurate. Like you, mine went up $4, plus 50 cents for a receiver. I don't have an RSN fee.


----------



## cforrest (Jan 20, 2007)

To check what your new RSN fee will be check this link:

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/rsn_fee


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

cforrest said:


> To check what your new RSN fee will be check this link:
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/rsn_fee


$5.64.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

cforrest said:


> To check what your new RSN fee will be check this link:
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/rsn_fee





Sixto said:


> $5.64.


$0.00


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I'm $3.63. Tells me that ny is really expensive Sixto. But im sure ours would be the same as yours or more if they ever pick up the dodger channel at the price they are asking for right now.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

I just checked mine and I think it was $2.14.
I do not want it or need it.
I called and asked the CSR who pays for a RSN fee. She told me if they had them in your area and you had the Choice or above package that you paid it.
Oh well, dropping to Xtra won't get rid of it.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

cforrest said:


> To check what your new RSN fee will be check this link:
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/rsn_fee


Isn't this still the 2014 pricing? I don't think they've updated it. I'd be amazed if they didn't raise LA.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

jimmie57 said:


> I just checked mine and I think it was $2.14.
> I do not want it or need it.
> I called and asked the CSR who pays for a RSN fee. She told me if they had them in your area and you had the Choice or above package that you paid it.
> Oh well, dropping to Xtra won't get rid of it.


Well you will Pay it with any carrier. It's simply a matter of how they do it. DIRECTV brakes out a cost above that of the base that all markets need to pay so that they don't have to have different pricing in different markets for base packages when advertising.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

inkahauts said:


> Well you will Pay it with any carrier. It's simply a matter of how they do it. DIRECTV brakes out a cost above that of the base that all markets need to pay so that they don't have to have different pricing in different markets for base packages when advertising.


That should be a choice that is available to those that want it and not forced on everyone.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Well you will Pay it with any carrier. It's simply a matter of how they do it. DIRECTV brakes out a cost above that of the base that all markets need to pay so that they don't have to have different pricing in different markets for base packages when advertising.


The people in the $0.00 markets should thank those in $5.64 markets for helping them keep their bills low ... especially those in $5.64 who do not watch their RSNs.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

jimmie57 said:


> That should be a choice that is available to those that want it and not forced on everyone.


You "kinda" chose it by choosing a package that carries an RSN.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

peds48 said:


> You "kinda" chose it by choosing a package that carries an RSN.


Sadly no kind of about it. When you chose a package with any rsns it's there from any carrier.

They need packages with a lot more channels without rsns. But that's not happening.


----------



## shendley (Nov 28, 2005)

Where do you find the rsn charge on your bill? I'm not seeing it on mine.


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

James Long said:


> The people in the $0.00 markets should thank those in $5.64 markets for helping them keep their bills low ... especially those in $5.64 who do not watch their RSNs.


I'd be willing to bet that even in the 0.00 markets, subscribers are subsidizing the 5.64 markets via higher "programming" fees than they'd otherwise have to pay. Also, the "equipment" fees were crafted to enable PayTv co's to advertise lower monthly programming fees.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> You "kinda" chose it by choosing a package that carries an RSN.


Its forced on you in ALL packages except the Entertainment package which is super stripped of every useful channel.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

The fee is that low because everyone in that territory is paying. Prior to YES winning their lawsuit to be carried on expanded basic in 2003, Cablevision on Long Island had the RSNs as premiums. We had to pay $9.99 EACH for MSG and FSNY, at the time it was the same price as HBO.



SledgeHammer said:


> Its forced on you in ALL packages except the Entertainment package which is super stripped of every useful channel.


Entertainment has the channels with some of the highest rated shows on cable, A&E, Cartoon Network/Adult Swim, Comedy Central, Disney, E!, Fox News, FX, MTV, Nickelodeon, Syfy, TBS, TNT and USA, among others.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

dpeters11 said:


> Yes, unless a new customer came in with a price guarantee new customer deal, everyone will pay an extra 50 cents per box, but if the first one is credited back now, it still will be at the new rate.


That stinks. So the $10 credit I just got for 12 months will now only be a $4.50 credit for me...


----------



## anex80 (Jul 29, 2005)

Over this past year I've moved from the Xtra package to Choice, and now to Entertainment. I have to say I really don't miss Xtra or Choice all that much. There was one series I really enjoyed from Xtra but I can buy that on Amazon for $16. There's a few shows on Choice that I miss but most of them are available through Netflix or Amazon Prime. I get most of the sports I watch on ESPN1 or ESPN2 and still have the NFL network as a subscriber to Sunday Ticket. Plus no RSN fee and my rate will only increase by $2 next year vs. others who will pay $7. 

It's odd in a way that sports, the one thing arguably keeping pay TV afloat, is the entity most likely to bring it down.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

peds48 said:


> You "kinda" chose it by choosing a package that carries an RSN.


Did not know anything about them until I called. No one ever talked about that it was part of the package.
Also, I think they just started here in the Houston area in November of 2014.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> Its forced on you in ALL packages except the Entertainment package which is super stripped of every useful channel.


You are voting with your wallet by choosing a higher package...


----------



## zippyfrog (Jul 14, 2010)

I find the RSN fees very interesting - I have a friend who lives in Iowa City (zip code 52240) and he gets multiple RSN's. I did a lookup of his new RSN Fee, and it is $0.00. I live in Chicago and it is $3.63. According to the RSN Lookup Tool, 52240 receives CSN Chicago (Bulls, Cubs, Sox, Blackhawks), FS North (Twins, Wild, Brewers, T'Wolves) and FS Midwest (Royals, Blues, Cardinals). Chicago only gets CSN Chicago with the Bulls, Cubs, Sox, Blackhawks. Why would Iowa City not have any RSN Fee with all the same access to games on CSN Chicago as Chicago pays $3.63 for, as well as all those games on FS North and FS Midwest? That just seems bizarre.


----------



## milton (Mar 12, 2011)

zippyfrog said:


> I find the RSN fees very interesting - I have a friend who lives in Iowa City (zip code 52240) and he gets multiple RSN's. I did a lookup of his new RSN Fee, and it is $0.00. I live in Chicago and it is $3.63. According to the RSN Lookup Tool, 52240 receives CSN Chicago (Bulls, Cubs, Sox, Blackhawks), FS North (Twins, Wild, Brewers, T'Wolves) and FS Midwest (Royals, Blues, Cardinals). Chicago only gets CSN Chicago with the Bulls, Cubs, Sox, Blackhawks. Why would Iowa City not have any RSN Fee with all the same access to games on CSN Chicago as Chicago pays $3.63 for, as well as all those games on FS North and FS Midwest? That just seems bizarre.


Outer rings vs. inner rings. Higher fees are paid by RSNs for territories closer to the home cities compared to those not close to the city, even though those are "claimed" by that team.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

James Long said:


> The people in the $0.00 markets should thank those in $5.64 markets for helping them keep their bills low ... especially those in $5.64 who do not watch their RSNs.


If an RSN fee was ever introduced here, I know I'd be quite upset, especially if DirecTV didn't upgrade the channel.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

Looks like my overall bill will go up by over $8.

Choice; $4 increase
Additional receivers; $.50 x 4 = $2 increase (assuming I still get offsetting credit for my first receiver)
RSN fee; $2.14 increase (was $0)

So all told, an increase of $8.14. More than what I normally see in the annual increases.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> You are voting with your wallet by choosing a higher package...


I want H2 and DIY and Biography, not sports channels. Actually, I'm voting with my wallet by NOT switching packages. I would be willing to switch to Choice Xtra and save $2. I would not be will to go to the entertainment package because it doesn't have the channels I watch.

Also, I'm scared to death of making any change to my subscription as that may trigger a roll to some of the new pricing schedules which would end up *costing* me money. Maybe I'm incorrect:

1) if I switched to a "current package", would I give up my 10+10 HD+DVR fee and get kicked to the $25 fee?
2) if I switched to a "current package", would I give up my first (and only) DVR is free? Maybe I've misread peoples posts over the years, but I kind of got the impression they don't do that anymore?

If I got kicked off my grandfathered 1 & 2, my bill would shoot up $11.50 a month! I'm not gonna do that to save $2/mo. That would be dumb .

I haven't gotten a Genie because of the additional $3 - $5 cost per month (depending on who you want to believe) as I have no need for WHDVR.

DirecTV is probably going to hold a gun to our heads for 4K:

1) No non-genie DVR so they'll kill a bunch of the legacy HD/DVR fees from people who want 4K

2) Of course, they're going to obsolete the Tivo boxes, but nobody is buying those anyways. On a side note, I still have fond memories of my HR10-250 . Much prettier then the boxes they have now IMO too and ran cool. My HR24 runs at 140 degrees and I had to add an external 70cfm fan to keep it from crashing.

3) All the streaming services that are offering 4K are charging an arm and a leg for it and DirecTV usually charges the 2nd arm and the 2nd leg on top of that, so I could see them charging $20/mo for 4K service on top of the $10 HD. Netflix is charging $12 or so, right?

These are, after all, the people who charge $8 for a PPV and $15/hr for porn LOL.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Sixto said:


> $5.64.


Same here. That Premier package is gonna go as soon as I get something that will stream HBO. I've been throwing away money on that package for far too long.

Rich


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> I want H2 and DIY and Biography, not sports channels. Actually, I'm voting with my wallet by NOT switching packages.


No, you are NOT. While hard to do, if 10 million subs downsize their packages in protest for this price structure DIRECTV® will surely get the message and try another approach. This is boring with your wallet


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

HarleyD said:


> RSN fee; $2.14 increase (was $0)


Either you have an RSN fee, or you don't. If you live beyond certain rings and you weren't paying an RSN fee, why are you paying one now? Did a major sports league set up a home team in your area over the LTM? Of course not.

This is what happened. DTV decided that the RSN fee in major urban areas was going to be too high, much higher than even in the 5.64 of certain markets. So instead of making certain subscribers pay as much as 9.00 a month for RSN, it decided to allocate the RSN fee to subscribers that would, under normal circumstances, would not pay an RSN fee.

My point? Those in zipcodes that did not have an RSN fee during 2014, but do so in 2015, are subsidizing the sports fans in major metropolitan areas.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Its forced on you in ALL packages except the Entertainment package which is super stripped of every useful channel.


Just like all the other channels you don't watch that are forced on you in other packages


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> No, you are NOT. While hard to do, if 10 million subs downsize their packages in protest for this price structure DIRECTV® will surely get the message and try another approach. This is boring with your wallet


This isn't really something that can be blamed on DirecTV actually (wow, a first for me LOL). As you may or may not know... multiple channels are owned by the same parent company:

ESPN is owned by Disney. Disney also owns the Disney Channel (duh) along with ABC and A&E.
CBS owns CBS, Showtime, The Movie Channel, FLIX, The CW, TvGuide and a few other channels.

Unfortunately, the FCC has not yet made it illegal to force feed channels. Hey DirecTV, you want to carry ABC? That's cool, but you also gotta carry ESPN and A&E. That should be illegal. Why shouldn't it be? We are moving towards a situation where we have 200 to 300 channels, but they are all owned by 5 or 6 corporations.

I understand that ESPN is an expensive channel because NFL, NBA and whatever that baseball one is charge a lot for the broadcast rights because they have to pay everybody $10M a year to play. While a sitcom or drama, you'd have to be The Big Bang Theory, Seinfeld or Friends or Two And A Half Men to rake in that kind of money. An unknown actor on an unestablished show is going to make < $500k a YEAR.

The contracts also make DirecTV take the crap channels that nobody watches.

If you had legit ala carte pricing that was regulated, you'd probably end up with less then 50 channels still in business after a year because nobody would buy the other 250.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> Just like all the other channels you don't watch that are forced on you in other packages


Yes, but there is a difference on having the DIY channel or H2 forced on me vs. having ESPN and sports channels forced on me.

For example, a list I found (from 2012) shows that. Dunno how accurate it still is, but as you can see, ESPN is much more expensive then every other channel out there. Just from that list, I'm paying $6 for sports + $3.63 RSN. So lets round it up to $10. I'd gladly block sports from my package to save $10 a month. So would millions of others. But at the same time, maybe I find a crazy curly haired dude twisting historical facts into making you think everything is the work of aliens to be entertaining. LOL... actually I don't. But I certainly find Pawn Stars to be way more entertaining then anything ESPN would ever show me.

ESPN: $4
TNT: $.99
NFL Network: $.75
USA: $.55
ESPN2: $.54
CNN: $.51
FX: $.42
Sundance: $.25
AMC: $.23
Bravo: $.19
Comedy Central: $.14
BBC America: $.12
Food Network: $.08
PBS Kids: $.04

EDIT: one argument against ala carte is that ESPN is as "cheap" as it is because everybody is paying for it vs. just sports nuts. So non sports nuts would save $10/mo, but it would raise the bills for the sports nuts.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

zippyfrog said:


> I find the RSN fees very interesting - I have a friend who lives in Iowa City (zip code 52240) and he gets multiple RSN's. I did a lookup of his new RSN Fee, and it is $0.00. I live in Chicago and it is $3.63. According to the RSN Lookup Tool, 52240 receives CSN Chicago (Bulls, Cubs, Sox, Blackhawks), FS North (Twins, Wild, Brewers, T'Wolves) and FS Midwest (Royals, Blues, Cardinals). Chicago only gets CSN Chicago with the Bulls, Cubs, Sox, Blackhawks. Why would Iowa City not have any RSN Fee with all the same access to games on CSN Chicago as Chicago pays $3.63 for, as well as all those games on FS North and FS Midwest? That just seems bizarre.


RSNs negotiate with carriers with high prices only for those living close to the cities/teams. Prices are much lower when you get outside that area, so CSN Chicago and other RSNs are collecting far less per subscriber in Iowa than they do in Chicago. I should think the reason is self-evident - if you live in a pro sports town like Chicago you are more likely to be a pro sports fan, and a fan of a Chicago team, than someone in Iowa. Iowans are more likely to be bigger fans of college sports since there are no pro teams in the state, and pro sports allegiance is spread over many more teams so RSNs can't charge the same rate they do in and around Chicago.

Whatever Directv is actually paying for those three RSNs for subscribers in Iowa is pennies compared to what they pay for Chicago RSNs for locals, so those pennies are built into the cost of the Choice etc. packages. The RSN fee covers "excess" fees above that level, to avoid having people in areas where Directv is forced to pay less, like Iowa, subsidize those in areas where Directv is forced to pay more, like Chicago, NYC or LA. The same is true for cable, but since pricing is local they don't need the RSN fee to differentiate.


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> Whatever Directv is actually paying for those three RSNs for subscribers in Iowa is pennies compared to what they pay for Chicago RSNs for locals, so those pennies are built into the cost of the Choice etc. packages. The RSN fee covers "excess" fees above that level, to avoid having people in areas where Directv is forced to pay less, like Iowa, subsidize those in areas where Directv is forced to pay more, like Chicago, NYC or LA. The same is true for cable, but since pricing is local they don't need the RSN fee to differentiate.


How do you explain the subscribers who were paying nothing for RSNs in 2014, having to pay over two dollars in 2015.

Assuming that those subscribers did not have a major sports team move into their zip codes, what possible rationale could DTV have to charge them a RSN?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> I want H2 and DIY and Biography


Biography doesn't exist anymore it rebranded to FYI a few months ago.



SledgeHammer said:


> If you had legit ala carte pricing that was regulated, you'd probably end up with less then 50 channels still in business after a year because nobody would buy the other 250.


And considering how it would be ratings driven and without a mandate that providers must make channels available so those who want them can get them (i.e. Canada where a certain category of channels must be offered by all providers), the things that get the highest ratings will survive, while other channels like the ones you listed above will be the first ones to either change their format to appeal to the masses (i.e. Biography rebranding to FYI and History International becoming H2), or go under.



Gloria_Chavez said:


> How do you explain the subscribers who were paying nothing for RSNs in 2014, having to pay over two dollars in 2015.
> 
> Assuming that those subscribers did not have a major sports team move into their zip codes, what possible rationale could DTV have to charge them a RSN?


The addition of Root Southwest, possibly SEC Network with a higher rate inside SEC territory, teams like Rutgers who joined the Big Ten and now have to pay in market rates for BTN, contracts that have built in increases over time, and contracts that were renewed but not in effect in time for the debut of the RSN fee last year (i.e. the NBCU/Comcast contract renewal)


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> I understand that ESPN is an expensive channel because NFL, NBA and whatever that baseball one is charge a lot for the broadcast rights because they have to pay everybody $10M a year to play. While a sitcom or drama, you'd have to be The Big Bang Theory, Seinfeld or Friends or Two And A Half Men to rake in that kind of money. An unknown actor on an unestablished show is going to make < $500k a YEAR.


You have this backward. The reason why everybody gets paid $10M/year to play is because ESPN (and others) is willing to pay so much to secure the broadcast rights. The TV contracts are what drives the player salaries, not the other way around.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Gloria_Chavez said:


> How do you explain the subscribers who were paying nothing for RSNs in 2014, having to pay over two dollars in 2015.
> 
> Assuming that those subscribers did not have a major sports team move into their zip codes, what possible rationale could DTV have to charge them a RSN?


Without knowing zip codes where this is happening, one could only guess. It isn't unreasonable to think that some RSNs when renegotiating might try to expand their "local" borders to grab more cash...

It obviously isn't what you claim it is given there are still places with RSN fees of $0, so there must be some other explanation.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Ala carte should not be ratings driven at all and DirecTV, etc. should be required to OFFER all channels, but if only 100k subs pick a channel then DirecTV should only pay for 100k subs. How pricing should be set is a huge debate and why ala carte has never worked. Most of the channels have 1 or 2 hits and the rest is low rated crap and most of the reality shows cost almost nothing to make. So you think the channel that shows Here Comes Honey Boo Boo should get more money then ABC? I would say cost should be tied to production cost somehow which would indirectly derive from ratings, but not entirely. I think something like that would be the fairest. Channels with lots of high rated original programming should be able to charge more then a channel that airs strictly re-runs from the 70's. But you shouldn't allow 1 hit wonder channels to skyrocket.

Cable TV will never be regulated though because they pay to put the law makers in power.

First step would be to make lobbyists illegal I would think .


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

pdxBeav said:


> You have this backward. The reason why everybody gets paid $10M/year to play is because ESPN (and others) is willing to pay so much to secure the broadcast rights. The TV contracts are what drives the player salaries, not the other way around.


And it isn't going to help with Fox Sports 1 entering the mix making competing bids for rights as they come up.

Hopefully the CSN Houston and SportsNet LA fiascos will send a message to anyone attempting to launch a new RSN in the future. While the idea of your team getting their own RSN might sound good, it can backfire if the bid was so high, no one but the cable provider you partnered with is willing to carry it, or you gave everyone the power of veto and were forced into bankruptcy because of a stubborn partner.


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> Biography doesn't exist anymore it rebranded to FYI a few months ago.
> 
> And considering how it would be ratings driven and without a mandate that providers must make channels available so those who want them can get them (i.e. Canada where a certain category of channels must be offered by all providers), the things that get the highest ratings will survive, while other channels like the ones you listed above will be the first ones to either change their format to appeal to the masses (i.e. Biography rebranding to FYI and History International becoming H2), or go under.
> 
> The addition of Root Southwest, possibly SEC Network with a higher rate inside SEC territory, teams like Rutgers who joined the Big Ten and now have to pay in market rates for BTN, contracts that have built in increases over time, and contracts that were renewed but not in effect in time for the debut of the RSN fee last year (i.e. the NBCU/Comcast contract renewal)


What about 15234. I'm not in SEC territory, nobody joined the big ten from around here and the only RSN I receive is Root Sports Pittsburgh. Went from 0.00 to 2.14.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

My bill s going up over $10, $7 for premier, $1 for my second and third receivers and $2.14 for RSN. It might be time to get serious about FIOS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> This isn't really something that can be blamed on DirecTV actually (wow, a first for me LOL).


Weather is DIRECTV® or the Leagues to blame it does not matter. What matters is the almighty dollar. if there was a revolt of all consumers because of this price structure, things would change. But apparently there are enough folks happy with their RSNs that there are willing to pay extra for them that the few who get affected get tossed to the sidelines


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Billzebub said:


> What about 15234. I'm not in SEC territory, nobody joined the big ten from around here and the only RSN I receive is Root Sports Pittsburgh. Went from 0.00 to 2.14.


Directv owns Root Sports, so I don't know how much "negotiation" they do, but considering the size of Pittsburgh and it being a pretty good pro sports town, that's probably not out of line compared to other cities since they hold the MLB/NHL rights.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Billzebub said:


> What about 15234. I'm not in SEC territory, nobody joined the big ten from around here and the only RSN I receive is Root Sports Pittsburgh. Went from 0.00 to 2.14.


The lookup shows that the Cleveland Cavaliers are available with Sports Pack in Pittsburgh, it's possible that might change to Choice and higher next year, but that wouldn't be reflected by the lookup tool until it happens.

Also since Root Sports Pittsburgh is owned by DirecTV they don't really make public announcements for contract renewals, but it could have happened this year as I previously needed the Sports Pack to get Pittsburgh teams but at some point this year they became available with choice and higher.

BTN also claims the area via Penn State so any increase they got could be included.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> Weather is DIRECTV® or the Leagues to blame it does not matter. What matters is the almighty dollar. if there was a revolt of all consumers because of this price structure, things would change. But apparently there are enough folks happy with their RSNs that there are willing to pay extra for them that the few who get affected get tossed to the sidelines


That is not a valid argument. Case in point: it is still fairly easy to call into DirecTV and get $20 to $30/mo knocked off your bill. A miniscule / irrelevant number of people spend the 5 min / yr to do that. I've got a buddy who's been paying Cox $62/mo for 65Mbps service, he only gets 30Mbps down. He's "never gotten around to it" (calling them). Hell, my neighbors *gas* meter started making some crazy / annoying noise. I told them about it and super politely hinted that it was a really annoying noise. They said they'd take care of it. I quietly gave them 3 to 4 months to do it and they "never got around to it". This was a GAS meter we're talking about, like in the your (and mine) house could blow up kind... so I had the association send them a letter... they still didn't do anything about it. So instead of fighting with the association for another 6 months, I just called the gas company myself and reported it as a safety issue. Took me all of 5 mins and it was fixed the next day.

Point is, you'd have a hard time getting people to do anything that doesn't involve a Kardashian or a Honey Boo Boo.

Wide spread back lashes are extremely rare.

However, the cord cutter movement...

Another way people respond with their wallets is piracy. Greed killed the music industry and its done the same for TV and movies. Shows and movies are online super quick these days. Hell, The Interview was pirated more then people in the theater saw it. As crazy as it sounds, piracy pretty much killed the pay television hacking industry. Why bother doing something illegal (and a lot of work / hassle) when you can just do something that nobody cares about and get the same result?

At some point DirecTV & Dish and Cable will get into a pricing war similar to what happened with Cell Phones. Remember when you paid $80/mo for some crappy plan? Now you can pretty much get unlimited everything for $20 - $30 / line.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> That is not a valid argument.
> 
> Point is, you'd have a hard time getting people to do anything that doesn't involve a Kardashian or a Honey Boo Boo.
> 
> ...


You seem to agree with me, as my first line was "While hard to do, if 10 million subs downsize...."

So "the problem" appears to be that there are too many folks happy with their RSNs and don't mind paying a little extra for them. Folks like you who do mind, just get tossed to the sidelines. They are not enough of "you" to make a change


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> BTN also claims the area via Penn State so any increase they got could be included.


I would rather roast on a spit in hell for all eternity than watch a Penn State game. Hail to Pitt.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Directv owns Root Sports, so I don't know how much "negotiation" they do, but considering the size of Pittsburgh and it being a pretty good pro sports town, that's probably not out of line compared to other cities since they hold the MLB/NHL rights.


If the $2.14 is for greater rights fees to the Pirates and they spend a little to maintain and add players, then, well, I guess I'm alright with that.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> You seem to agree with me, as my first line was "While hard to do, if 10 million subs downsize...."
> 
> So "the problem" appears to be that there are too many folks happy with their RSNs and don't mind paying a little extra for them. Folks like you who do mind, just get tossed to the sidelines. They are not enough of "you" to make a change


I agree with you on the part of 10 million subs downsizing would make a diff. I don't agree with you about the most people are happy paying the fees. Being too lazy, not caring, being ignorant about it, etc.

If I told you that you could save $30 a month with a 5 min phone call once year, you'd probably do it, right? I would. I don't really care about $30/mo, but I'd certainly rather not pay it then pay it. 5 mins / once a year is worth saving $360 to me. I wouldn't say I particularly care about $360 spread out over a year for something I want, it falls into the I'd rather not category.

I'd wager that if you told 100 DirecTV subs (that are NOT on this forum) they could save $30 / mo with a 5 min phone call, you'd get a total of 0 people who actually did it.


----------



## nsykes (Oct 10, 2011)

I just called DTV and removed my $7.99 Protection package and changed from Choice Xtra Classic to the newer XTRA package. I have been a customer since 2008 so no Primary receiver fee. The few channels I lost I don't care about. Will I be charged for my primary receiver now? Any other glaring issues anyone sees for making these changes. I believe I have 30 days to revert. Please let me know. Thanks for any assistance in advance.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

No, you won't get charged for the primary. As long as the channels lost aren't missed, there are really no other caveats for the plan change. None of your receivers are owned correct? One thing if you don't have the PP is that if an owned reciever needs replaced, it's replaced with leased.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

jimmie57 said:


> That should be a choice that is available to those that want it and not forced on everyone.


Wont' work. Those channels that prompt an RSN are in the packages because that is what that channel wanted during negotiations. They would have to negotiate to be sold as an add on, and most channels will not do it. It means they cannot charge as much for their advertising space as they can if they are included in a tier.


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> Wont' work. Those channels that prompt an RSN are in the packages because that is what that channel wanted during negotiations.


You can't be certain of that.

An RSN can dictate to a distributor, I want the equivalent of 2.50 from each of your subscribers in the Bay Area (defined by x area codes).

At that moment, the PayTv distributor decides how it will come up with the 2.50. It may charge everyone in the Bay Area zip codes 2.00 per month, and many subscribers in NorCal 1.00 a month to make up the difference.

If I had to bet, I'd say that many subscribers in distant areas are being (now) asked to subsidize sports programming for subscribers in major metropolitan areas.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

nsykes said:
 

> I just called DTV and removed my $7.99 Protection package and changed from Choice Xtra Classic to the newer XTRA package. I have been a customer since 2008 so no Primary receiver fee. The few channels I lost I don't care about. Will I be charged for my primary receiver now? Any other glaring issues anyone sees for making these changes. I believe I have 30 days to revert. Please let me know. Thanks for any assistance in advance.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


No. The primary TV fee only applies to customers who activated on or after July 24, 2014.


----------



## nsykes (Oct 10, 2011)

dpeters11 said:


> No, you won't get charged for the primary. As long as the channels lost aren't missed, there are really no other caveats for the plan change. None of your receivers are owned correct? One thing if you don't have the PP is that if an owned reciever needs replaced, it's replaced with leased.


Thanks for the response. Nope no owned receivers here. Any additional Advanced Reciever charges I should expect? I've got a HR-44 and a HR-24.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

Gloria_Chavez said:


> You can't be certain of that.
> 
> An RSN can dictate to a distributor, I want the equivalent of 2.50 from each of your subscribers in the Bay Area (defined by x area codes).
> 
> ...


Not what I was referring too. What I'm referring to is the option to add the RSNs 'a la carte'. the distributor gets to negotiate HOW the channel is subbed too. Ex, all subs in the choice package or higher VS. 'a la carte' subbing like HBO.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

nsykes said:


> Thanks for the response. Nope no owned receivers here. Any additional Advanced Reciever charges I should expect? I've got a HR-44 and a HR-24.


No. There shouldn't be any additional charges due to changing the package. The only time changing the package will change a grandfathered set up is when you have the free HD for life, or free DVR for life.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> . I don't agree with you about the most people are happy paying the fees.


There are thousands of folks with the sentiments below. There are not many of "you" or at least "you" are a minority 


Billzebub said:


> If the $2.14 is for greater rights fees to the Pirates and they spend a little to maintain and add players, then, well, I guess I'm alright with that.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

nsykes said:


> Thanks for the response. Nope no owned receivers here. Any additional Advanced Reciever charges I should expect? I've got a HR-44 and a HR-24.


No, changing packages will not impact any of the HD/DVR/MRV fees.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> There are thousands of folks with the sentiments below. There are not many of "you" or at least "you" are a minority


You know there are lots of people who don't watch sports, right? Or who only watch the Superbowl or playoffs, etc? I admit, there are lots of sports nuts out there. However, the ratings disagree with your assessment that I am in the minority. The double header on Xmas for example pulled in 7.6M viewers and was considered "huge". An original episode of The Big Bang Theory typically pulls in almost twice that number. Hell, at its ratings peak, an episode of Jersey Shore (on cable) was pulling in more viewers then that NBA game and they were doing it on a weekly basis (~9M viewers according to Wikipedia).

Don't form a general opinion about the country from one guy who hangs out on a message board about DirecTV and who likes his sports.

You could say the same thing about me (except the sports part LOL), but I'm going by the ratings, not the opinions of people on this forum .

Now, of course, the Superbowl pulls in 111.5M viewers, but that's one special game a year and its more of a social event rather then for the game itself.

Year round, the ratings show that most people do NOT watch sports.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

You're comparing the wrong numbers. The RSN fee only applies to specific team's territories, so the national ratings are irrelevant in this, especially for a regular season game that only two cities really care about. What someone in Seattle is watching instead of the game has no bearing on how popular the Celtics are in Boston or the Hornets are in Charlotte. Try looking for the numbers specific to the cities of whatever team was playing and see how those games did compared to what other people were watching locally.

It's like how WWE constantly brags about topping Monday Night Football in their "Did You Know" screen during Raw. Unless it's towards the end of the season with playoff implications, most people only watch if their local team is playing. Then you got the variable of them being carried on an OTA station in the home markets, causing a ratings split where the interest in that game is the highest since cable and broadcast are reported seperately.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> You're comparing the wrong numbers. The RSN fee only applies to specific team's territories, so the national ratings are irrelevant in this, especially for a regular season game that only two cities really care about. Try looking for the numbers specific to those teams cities and see how those games did compared to what other people were watching locally.


Yeah, I think I saw that game pulled in a 17.2 rating in Miami. Ok. That wasn't the guys argument. It was that people who don't watch sports are in the minority. However, even a 17.2 rating is the "minority" last time I checked math . 5 and change nationally certainly is.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> Yeah, I think I saw that game pulled in a 17.2 rating in Miami. Ok. That wasn't the guys argument. It was that people who don't watch sports are in the minority. However, even a 17.2 rating is the "minority" last time I checked math . 5 and change nationally certainly is.


"you" are in the minority in the sense that James pointed out. Is dumb to think that the jersey shore can be compared to a "local" game


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Don't form a general opinion about the country from one guy who hangs out on a message board about DirecTV and who likes his sports.
> 
> You could say the same thing about me (except the sports part LOL), but I'm going by the ratings, not the opinions of people on this .


Since when does liking baseball make me a sports nut. As a baseball fan, higher rights fees give the Pirates a better ability to compete with larger market teams.

Please don't generalize about me and keep me out of you argument over this.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

KyL416 said:


> Hopefully the CSN Houston and SportsNet LA fiascos will send a message to anyone attempting to launch a new RSN in the future. While the idea of your team getting their own RSN might sound good, it can backfire if the bid was so high, no one but the cable provider you partnered with is willing to carry it, or you gave everyone the power of veto and were forced into bankruptcy because of a stubborn partner.


All the CSN Houston and SportsNet LA fiacos will teach them is to write contracts like the Dodgers did (directly with TWC) rather than with a separate corporation like CSN Houston that could go bankrupt and leave the teams out in the cold needing a new contract.

Like all bubbles the sports rights bubble must burst eventually, but this can't really happen until providers start seeing significant subscriber losses. Subscriber numbers are down, but so far it is trickle. When it starts looking like a flood (losing 5% in a year) then you'll see panic and chaos, and the MVPD market could see significant changes as a result.

Directv should be in a decent position since they still see plenty of growth in DTVLA, and moreso if they're owned by AT&T. Comcast would seem to be the most vulnerable, due to ownership of NBC and other networks along with the debt they'll be taking off if the buyout of TWC is approved. Their internet business might be the only thing that allows them to survive.


----------



## cmasia (Sep 18, 2007)

Enjoyed reading all the comments on the price increases coming our way.

Here are a few observations in no order of importance and not aimed at any individual comment ( except one ) in this thread.

1) Interesting to see the percentage increase gets higher as the tiers get higher: Entertainment went up 3.4%, Premier 5.4% - if I did the math right.
From a marketing standpoint it can only mean one of two things:
A) D* is losing more subs in the lower tiers, and recognizes higher tier subs are not as price sensitive.
B) The costs of the additional channels in the higher tiers have escalated more than the base package channels.
Which of the above do you think is accurate?

2) The receiver fees have gone up 8.3%, far exceeding package fee increases.

3) RSN fees in Las Vegas went up 21%.

4) For me, base fees before taxes and extras - Premier with 4 TV's ( first free ) went up 6%. If I remember right, it went up 5% last year.

5) The argument comparing D* bills with cell phone bills is a non starter. There was, is, and never will be a comparison between the pricing of both services.

6) With MLBEI, NHLCI, and NFLST, my annual spending is around $2,500. Every year, I'm able to get discounts or free programming worth between $300 - $400. Anyone who does not try to work the system to their advantage is missing out.

7) Although I'm in the minority, DirecTV's coverage, at no additional cost, of Super 15 Rugby, Rugby Championship, ITM and Currie Cup, along with bonus coverage of the UEFA Champions League and Europa League has a value - to me - of at least the cost of Sunday Ticket.

Yeah, my bill will be about $10 -12 higher per month, but for a retired guy with the TV on all day, I can live without that 30 to 40 cents a day.
DISCLAIMER: That final comment is not an attempt to compare my life or financial situation with anyone else.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

cmasia said:


> 1) Interesting to see the percentage increase gets higher as the tiers get higher: Entertainment went up 3.4%, Premier 5.4% - if I did the math right.


Theoretically one is paying for what one is getting - following that theory one could assume the channels in Entertainment are getting a $2 increase. The channels in Choice (but not Entertainment) a $2 increase (total $4). The channels in Xtra no increase (total $4). The channels in Ultimate $1 (total $5) and the channels in Premier $2 (total $7).

Theoretically.

The same dollar increase across the board would be a larger percentage increase for lower packages. DirecTV seems to have spread the increase up ... and with increases in the components of Premier it makes sense to apply more increase to the higher packages.

The theory breaks when one realizes the increases are even dollars. The price points set are set by marketing ... Entertainment at $59.99 (full price) is easier to list than Entertainment at $59.21 or $60.11. DirecTV is setting a price point that the market will (hopefully) accept - not necessarily a penny for penny recuperation of costs for that level of programming. (Which further helps to break the calculation of percentages.)

"Entertainment" subscribers may already be paying much more than is needed to cover the cost of their programming. But their package is at a price point that works ... currently $9 less than Choice - in a couple of months $11 less than Choice. Close enough that people might spring the extra ~$10 for the additional channels (make that the extra $11 to $16 with RSN fee). DISH's 2015 price will be about the same ... $59.99 for AT120 (Entertainment level) and $15 more for AT200 (Choice level). Another sign that the prices are "what the market will bear".

Or so marketing hopes.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Billzebub said:


> What about 15234. I'm not in SEC territory, nobody joined the big ten from around here and the only RSN I receive is Root Sports Pittsburgh. Went from 0.00 to 2.14.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I'd guess auto cost increase hit them this year and you now are below the minumum threshold.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

slice1900 said:


> Like all bubbles the sports rights bubble must burst eventually, but this can't really happen until providers start seeing significant subscriber losses. Subscriber numbers are down, but so far it is trickle. When it starts looking like a flood (losing 5% in a year) then you'll see panic and chaos, and the MVPD market could see significant changes as a result.


I don't know if there is a bubble or not. When you adjust for inflation, DirecTV's packages today cost about the same as they did in 1995 but they deliver a lot more programming than they did then. HD and DVRs weren't even a possibility then, and USSB held a group of popular channels.

DVRs have changed the game. Live event programming is highly sought by advertisers because it is the one type of programming most people will not time-shift. Thus, sports is a perfect choice for programmers who want top advertising dollars, and of course sports want a larger piece of the pie. There really isn't more money being spent on programming, just a greater percentage is going to sports over scripted programming.


----------



## mavs-fan (Aug 31, 2011)

Will the Family package remain at $29.99 after the new price increases? It seems that it hasn't been mentioned in this thread or on DirecTV's new price breakdown.

Typically, we'll drop down to the Family package for a few months in the summer when most programming is in re-runs, then re-up in the fall in order to offset DirecTV's continual price increases.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

nsykes said:


> Thanks for the response. Nope no owned receivers here. Any additional Advanced Reciever charges I should expect? I've got a HR-44 and a HR-24.


There was a time when the PP was nearly a necessity, but that time has passed. I have to carry it because I have so many owned HRs and I want to keep them owned. They used to have the best CSRs, but not now.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Year round, the ratings show that most people do NOT watch sports.


Wouldn't you consider the NFL as wildly popular? How do we know how many people actually watch the NFL games? I know a lot of people have parties many times during the NFL season. I don't think the ratings people take that into consideration. I certainly wouldn't sit in a freezing stadium to watch a football game, that sport is perfect for TV.

But, aside from the NFL and my beloved Yankees, I could care less about ESPN. Yeah, I need ESPN to get those few Yankee games they have and I need it for the Monday night football games, but I don't watch it for anything else. If it went away I certainly wouldn't miss it.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Billzebub said:


> Since when does liking baseball make me a sports nut. As a baseball fan, higher rights fees give the Pirates a better ability to compete with larger market teams.
> 
> Please don't generalize about me and keep me out of you argument over this.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I certainly don't mind paying the RSN fee to be able to watch the Yankees. As I said in another post, ESPN is not something I normally watch.

Rich


----------



## jdh8668 (Nov 7, 2007)

Well we can thank all the idiotic greedy professional sports owners for our annual rate increase. Mine went up $5.81....my largest yearly increase ever since I have been with Directv since 1998. It all starts with owners giving out mega million dollars contracts to their players. Then to recoup that money, they must sell the broadcast rights to ESPN, RSN's etc for billions of dollars.(remember, the owners must have extreme profit or what's the use of owning a sports franchise). And where does the money come from to pay for those broadcast rights? Every satellite and cable subscriber. My bill is close to $110 a month and I have no premium channels and only one extra tv (my rsn Chicago fee went up 50%). With all that is free on the internet, and devices like Roku, and using an antenna for locals, I am coming closer every day to saying buh bye to Directv.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

sregener said:


> I don't know if there is a bubble or not. When you adjust for inflation, DirecTV's packages today cost about the same as they did in 1995 but they deliver a lot more programming than they did then. HD and DVRs weren't even a possibility then, and USSB held a group of popular channels.


If that's true, Directv's pricing was much higher than typical cable pricing back in 1995. Pay TV prices have increased at a rate much higher than inflation.

The bubble I was referring to was the money paid for sports rights. I hope you don't think that player salaries, values of teams, etc. have only been going up at the rate of inflation. If you do, you must be using one of those conspiracy theory inflation measurements that claims inflation is 10% a year


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

jdh8668 said:


> Well we can thank all the idiotic greedy professional sports owners for our annual rate increase. Mine went up $5.81....my largest yearly increase ever since I have been with Directv since 1998. It all starts with owners giving out mega million dollars contracts to their players. Then to recoup that money, they must sell the broadcast rights to ESPN, RSN's etc for billions of dollars.(remember, the owners must have extreme profit or what's the use of owning a sports franchise). And where does the money come from to pay for those broadcast rights? Every satellite and cable subscriber. My bill is close to $110 a month and I have no premium channels and only one extra tv (my rsn Chicago fee went up 50%). With all that is free on the internet, and devices like Roku, and using an antenna for locals, I am coming closer every day to saying buh bye to Directv.


The owners give out those huge contracts with players because they know they'll get the higher rates for TV rights. You don't get rich enough to buy a pro sports team by spending money before you know where the revenue that will pay for it is coming from.

Some of the leagues have contracts that specify a certain percentage of overall earnings has to go to players, so it is pretty much built in that player increases are driven by TV rights fees increases, not the other way around. When the TV rights revenue stops going up and starts going down, so will player salaries. That process will be hastened by the strikes/lockouts that will ensue as all the millionaires and billionaires have to fight over a shrinking pie, instead of today's fights over a growing pie.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

dpeters11 said:


> Yes, unless a new customer came in with a price guarantee new customer deal, everyone will pay an extra 50 cents per box, but if the first one is credited back now, it still will be at the new rate.


Are you sure that the price protection covers fees? I thought it only covered package pricing.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

cmasia said:


> 5) The argument comparing D* bills with cell phone bills is a non starter. There was, is, and never will be a comparison between the pricing of both services.


Not true. There was a cell phone pricing bubble and it burst. There was a housing bubble and it burst. There was an oil bubble and it burst. All bubbles burst. The rights fees bubble will burst at some point. Once subscriber churn picks up, that'll start to happen. It's already kinda started with the cord cutter movement, but not big enough yet.

You might be willing to pay $100 to $120 / mo for TV, but are you willing to pay $200 / mo? or $300 / mo?


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Rich said:


> Wouldn't you consider the NFL as wildly popular? How do we know how many people actually watch the NFL games? I know a lot of people have parties many times during the NFL season. I don't think the ratings people take that into consideration. I certainly wouldn't sit in a freezing stadium to watch a football game, that sport is perfect for TV.
> 
> But, aside from the NFL and my beloved Yankees, I could care less about ESPN. Yeah, I need ESPN to get those few Yankee games they have and I need it for the Monday night football games, but I don't watch it for anything else. If it went away I certainly wouldn't miss it.
> 
> Rich


I didn't say people don't watch sports . I said not everybody watches sports. I also said that the national ratings agree with that. The Super Bowl and World Series are outliers. There are plenty of things on TV that consistently pull higher ratings then most sports telecasts. Jersey Shore was a good example. I don't watch either sports or Jersey Shore, but its a good example. I do watch The Big Bang Theory and Two And a Half Men. Even though Two And a Half Men is horrible this year (just powering through to the finish line) and is a 12 yr old show, it still outdraws most sports telecasts. Heck, during its huge bubble in the early 2000s, Pro Wrestling consistently outdrew most sports telecasts on a weekly basis. Sports does draw local ratings, but thats pretty irrelevant on a national scale. That being said, there is certainly a lot more money on the table with sports then any other show I've mentioned .


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

sregener said:


> I don't know if there is a bubble or not. When you adjust for inflation, DirecTV's packages today cost about the same as they did in 1995 but they deliver a lot more programming than they did then. HD and DVRs weren't even a possibility then, and USSB held a group of popular channels.
> 
> DVRs have changed the game. Live event programming is highly sought by advertisers because it is the one type of programming most people will not time-shift. Thus, sports is a perfect choice for programmers who want top advertising dollars, and of course sports want a larger piece of the pie. There really isn't more money being spent on programming, just a greater percentage is going to sports over scripted programming.


While I'll agree you get more for your money than you did back then, the average inflation rate since 1995 has been 2.41% per year, meaning that the average price of everything today compared to then is 57.26% higher. So that would mean if Directv's prices "cost about the same as they did in 1995" they've only gone up about 55% to 60% since then.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

jdh8668 said:


> Well we can thank all the idiotic greedy professional sports owners for our annual rate increase.


Why limit it to just professional sports owners? How about all the media companies, Hollywood studios, producers and actors? What were they paying Charlie Sheen, like $1,800,000 PER episode during his last year of Two and a Half Men. And I do place some of the blame on DIRECTV and their management. Sorry I subscribe to Google alerts for DIRECTV and every time there's one of those SEC filings for so and so executive getting a big stock option or cashing in their stock it does tick me off just a bit when I look at my bill (guess there goes any future early hardware testing invites).

All these folks will just keep sticking their hands in the honey hole until they get stung and finally stop.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

tsmacro said:


> While I'll agree you get more for your money than you did back then, the average inflation rate since 1995 has been 2.41% per year, meaning that the average price of everything today compared to then is 57.26% higher. So that would mean if Directv's prices "cost about the same as they did in 1995" they've only gone up about 55% to 60% since then.


Ok I couldn't find anything that specifically told me how much Directv has gone up over that time period but pay tv has gone up an average of 6.1% per year since 1995. Sure more channels and better tech but you can't expext to keep out-pacing the rate of inflation by that large a margin and not reach a breaking point at some point, some would say the increasing number of cord-cutters and cord-nevers are a sign that the breaking point is near.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

tsmacro said:


> Ok I couldn't find anything that specifically told me how much Directv has gone up over that time period but pay tv has gone up an average of 6.1% per year since 1995. Sure more channels and better tech but you can't expext to keep out-pacing the rate of inflation by that large a margin and not reach a breaking point at some point, some would say the increasing number of cord-cutters and cord-nevers are a sign that the breaking point is near.


Don't forget that during that time, besides the base price going up there's those extra fees that have been added to the price, such as DVR service, originally there wasn't a charge, HD and WHDVR. Plus they went from the purchase model for the STB's to the lease model which while still charging the customer for the box DIRECTV now gets boxes back to recycle and again charge the upfront charge for.


----------



## woj027 (Sep 3, 2007)

when I did my zipcode look up I was hoping to see a credit. :grin:

DirecTV doesn't Carry the Pac-12, Doesn't Carry CSN-NW, so I can't watch my teams play.

I only have ROOT


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Of course comparing percentage increases in fees and charges is only valid if the other variables (especially the value of the content) remains constant. I think we can all agree that the value of most of the channels is down significantly -- if not entirely.


----------



## scott0702 (Nov 25, 2006)

Sixto said:


> Pricing is interesting lately. FiOS has been running a Holiday Offer to reduce and lock in pricing for 3 years for existing customers, and now I see the Premier pricing going up $7/mo plus an additional 50 cents per month per receiver, of which I had 6 additional. Man, the prices are really starting to get scary high.


I have been a D* customer since 2006 and this is the largest increase I have seen. I have Premier so that's up $7.00, then I have 7 receivers so an additional $3.00 there. My RSN fee is currently 3.63 so not sure if that is going up or not. I've thought about downgrading packages since in reality I don't have time to watch all those channels however if D* continues to give me the promo credits on Premier it all balances out. But yes, the prices are really getting high.


----------



## lokar (Oct 8, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> That is not a valid argument. Case in point: it is still fairly easy to call into DirecTV and get $20 to $30/mo knocked off your bill. A miniscule / irrelevant number of people spend the 5 min / yr to do that. I've got a buddy who's been paying Cox $62/mo for 65Mbps service, he only gets 30Mbps down. He's "never gotten around to it" (calling them). Hell, my neighbors *gas* meter started making some crazy / annoying noise. I told them about it and super politely hinted that it was a really annoying noise. They said they'd take care of it. I quietly gave them 3 to 4 months to do it and they "never got around to it". This was a GAS meter we're talking about, like in the your (and mine) house could blow up kind... so I had the association send them a letter... they still didn't do anything about it. So instead of fighting with the association for another 6 months, I just called the gas company myself and reported it as a safety issue. Took me all of 5 mins and it was fixed the next day.


Totally agree that laziness is the norm for a lot of people. My brother paid full price for NFL Sunday Ticket this year because he didn't know about auto renew and was too lazy to call and cancel it even when I told him I was sure they would cancel it if he called and he might even get some bill credits to boot. He "never got around to it."


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

RAD said:


> Don't forget that during that time, besides the base price going up there's those extra fees that have been added to the price, such as DVR service, originally there wasn't a charge, HD and WHDVR. Plus they went from the purchase model for the STB's to the lease model which while still charging the customer for the box DIRECTV now gets boxes back to recycle and again charge the upfront charge for.


But those fees came because they provided you something you didn't get then. Back in 1995 there were no DVR or HD fees, because there were no DVRs or HD.

Of course now those fees are nearly mandatory since Directv doesn't let you sign up for service without HD, which new customers pay for by paying for the first receiver when previously that was free. While you could avoid the advanced receiver fee by getting only receivers, few would consider that a valid option. A DVR went from a "wouldn't it be nice if someone made VCRs that used a hard drive" to a luxury item early adopters had to something most would consider a necessity for watching TV today.

This is something people miss when they talk about inflation rates and think "there's no way inflation has only gone up 57% since 1995". Back then most people didn't have a cellular or internet service bill, because they didn't have such a service. They might save by dropping the landline they had in 1995, but it doesn't make up the difference. In 2035 we'll have new bills for stuff that doesn't exist now, and while some bills we have today might disappear (like cable/satellite bills, perhaps) they will be more than made up for with new stuff that may not even exist today but people will consider "necessities" in 2035.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

harsh said:


> Of course comparing percentage increases in fees and charges is only valid if the other variables (especially the value of the content) remains constant. I think we can all agree that the value of most of the channels is down significantly -- if not entirely.


Why do you say the "value of most of the channels is down significantly". That's purely in the eye of the beholder. A lot of people really liked watching Honey Boo Boo, based on the ratings, so you can't say it is objectively worse than something from the 90s that drew similar ratings.

There are more commercials now so that provides less content per hour, but most people have DVRs now so the commercials are less of a burden than they were when you had to watch live. In a way the more commercials the less time it takes you to watch an "hour" of programming, so it really doesn't matter if commercials are added as you either spend less time watching TV or you can watch more programming in the same amount of time.


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

tsmacro said:


> While I'll agree you get more for your money than you did back then, the average inflation rate since 1995 has been 2.41% per year, meaning that the average price of everything today compared to then is 57.26% higher. So that would mean if Directv's prices "cost about the same as they did in 1995" they've only gone up about 55% to 60% since then.


1998 DTV ARPU, 46 dollars

http://investor.directv.com/files/doc_financials/annual/AR1998.pdf

3Q2014 DTV ARPU, 107 dollars

http://investor.directv.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2014/DIRECTV-Announces-Third-Quarter-2014-Results/default.aspx

CAGR 98-14, 5.42%

So, during the given period (98 to 14), DTV has increased rates 300 basis points more than inflation, on average, each year.

More than DOUBLE the rate on inflation.

Have you increased your TV watching (hours) by 100% over that time period?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Gloria_Chavez said:


> 1998 DTV ARPU, 46 dollars
> 
> http://investor.directv.com/files/doc_financials/annual/AR1998.pdf
> 
> ...


That's such a bad way to Compare it and you know that. Start with taking $25 off that Apru from today before you even begin. Then you can maybe have an argument for what you come up with. You can't with what you state flat out.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

tsmacro said:


> While I'll agree you get more for your money than you did back then, the average inflation rate since 1995 has been 2.41% per year, meaning that the average price of everything today compared to then is 57.26% higher. So that would mean if Directv's prices "cost about the same as they did in 1995" they've only gone up about 55% to 60% since then.


I signed up with DirecTV in 2002. They had a DVR back then. The beloved Sony SAT-T60. It was released in 1999.

Also, according to the government CPI inflation calculator, $34.95 in 2002 is equal to $45.88 in 2014 dollars. All I've added is HD since then, but my bill sans discounts is $105.12 minus $6 for the primary TV. Sorry, but thats WAY above inflation. With my discounts, I'm at $74.60. If I added in the $20 for HD and DVR in 2002 dollars, I'm on track WITH my discounts. However, they didn't charge $10 for DVR service back then, it was like $0 - $5 depending on your deal. And of course, HD was not available back then.

At the end of the day, all we have is HD versions of the SD channels. You might consider that more for your money, but thats debateable since SD is effectively obsolete.

Regardless though... $45.88 + $20 is $65.88, not $105.12. Even if I threw in another $30 for "new features", I'm not even hitting the current pricing.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> That's such a bad way to Compare it and you know that. Start with taking $25 off that Apru from today before you even begin. Then you can maybe have an argument for what you come up with. You can't with what you state flat out.


There's an adjustment warranted, but claiming it must be $25 when there are still many customers who are SD only and have no DVRs is pretty far off. I think even removing $15 would be pushing it, but that's a much better estimate than $25.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> Why do you say the "value of most of the channels is down significantly". That's purely in the eye of the beholder. A lot of people really liked watching Honey Boo Boo, based on the ratings, so you can't say it is objectively worse than something from the 90s that drew similar ratings.


And now that they've cancelled Honey Boo Boo, what's left on what used to be "The Learning Channel"??? Cupcakes, Little People and Sister Wives?

Could it compete with the Filipino Flood Channel or the Destination Obesity Channel?

Maybe they could do a historical channel -- Keeping Up With The Kennedys.


----------



## Chuck W (Mar 26, 2002)

I think it's time to drop out of Premiere. I've held on because in years past my wife had been watching many of the movie channels. However, now that I have her and my daughter well versed on Netflix and Amazon, it's time to shed some of those movie channels and hopefully save some money.

I'll have to see what my pricing would be if I dropped out of premiere(been there for years) down to Ultimate with just HBO. I'd also have to check to make sure this won't screw things up for my grandfathering of the DNS networks I still receive(or DVR pricing either).


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

I've worked hard to keep my bill under $100 over the years, even with 5 to 6 boxes. That's not going to be possible any more, so time to make some changes. My boys have migrated more toward video games and Netflix, so probably time to dump several boxes and drop my package down as well.


----------



## EdL (Sep 1, 2007)

cforrest said:


> To check what your new RSN fee will be check this link:
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/rsn_fee


Omaha, NE = $2.14


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

Chuck W said:


> I think it's time to drop out of Premiere. I've held on because in years past my wife had been watching many of the movie channels. However, now that I have her and my daughter well versed on Netflix and Amazon, it's time to shed some of those movie channels and hopefully save some money.
> 
> I'll have to see what my pricing would be if I dropped out of premiere(been there for years) down to Ultimate with just HBO. I'd also have to check to make sure this won't screw things up for my grandfathering of the DNS networks I still receive(or DVR pricing either).


I can answer that question, but can you tell me what it says about your dvr pricing on your bill? Are you paying the 10 HD 10 DVR etc.? If that is the case, the new price for ultimate is 85.99, HBO is 17.99 so programming is 103.98 VS 136.99 for premier. If you're not using Starz, Showtime, Cinemax or the Sports Pack, makes no sense to pay for them...and the plus there is removing programming you are not using compensates for the increase and then some.


----------



## Aridon (Mar 13, 2007)

Sling box and a Chromecast allows you to mirror a box to other TVs which can reduce box needs in every room.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

Aridon said:


> Sling box
> 
> What is a sling box? Forgive my ignorance


----------



## cmasia (Sep 18, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Not true. There was a cell phone pricing bubble and it burst. There was a housing bubble and it burst. There was an oil bubble and it burst. All bubbles burst. The rights fees bubble will burst at some point. Once subscriber churn picks up, that'll start to happen. It's already kinda started with the cord cutter movement, but not big enough yet.
> 
> You might be willing to pay $100 to $120 / mo for TV, but are you willing to pay $200 / mo? or $300 / mo?


Cell phone pricing was very, very high in the industry's infancy because of the incredibly high cost of building a network. Cable and satellite never had those "bubble" prices in the early years.
As cell capacity increased, and equipment costs came down, along with the larger take up rate in the late 90's, prices came down.
Having been in the industry during that time, we always knew ARPU would come down. It's only gone back up because of the enhanced non voice services smartphones offer.

Cable and satellite providers do not have the same ability to reduce prices as they are beholden to content providers ( ESPN, USA, networks, etc ).
Those costs will always increase - the very reason this thread exists.


----------



## shendley (Nov 28, 2005)

I'm a bit baffled by the rsn fee. I've never seen that charge on my bill. Does that mean I've been in a market with no charge? Or does the rsn charge not have a separate line on the bill?


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

cmasia said:


> Cell phone pricing was very, very high in the industry's infancy because of the incredibly high cost of building a network. Cable and satellite never had those "bubble" prices in the early years.
> As cell capacity increased, and equipment costs came down, along with the larger take up rate in the late 90's, prices came down.
> Having been in the industry during that time, we always knew ARPU would come down. It's only gone back up because of the enhanced non voice services smartphones offer.
> 
> ...


I was more referring to the price collapse over the last few years with the introduction of family pricing and T-Mobile starting a price war. Also, don't forget, up until a few years ago, you had to pay $20/mo for unlimited texting. Its baked into the voice package now, but its certainly not $20 anymore. I get a 18% corporate discount with AT&T (theoretically) and even with that, I still get a better deal with T-Mobile.

You don't see that happening with TV? DirecTV only agrees to pay the rising costs because they can pass them onto the consumers.

At some point, people are going to max out and cord cut. I don't see myself paying $200 / mo for TV for example even though I can afford it. It just wouldn't be worth it at that point. At the rate the price increases are going, we could see $200/mo in 5 to 10 yrs. Especially with the unknown cost of 4K added in.

Also, as internet speeds increase, streaming options are going to become more common. HBO is going to or has started to stream.

I don't know what DirecTVs pain threshold is, but when subscriber growth (however small it is now) turns to subscriber loss, there will be a change. When / if that happens is anybody's guess.


----------



## Aridon (Mar 13, 2007)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> > Sling box
> >
> > What is a sling box? Forgive my ignorance


Slingplayer with Chromecast: 




Once it's on, a rf remote would make navigating easy. Added bonus is it would stream even off the home network.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

That is really cool! It's like a genie go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chuck W (Mar 26, 2002)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> I can answer that question, but can you tell me what it says about your dvr pricing on your bill? Are you paying the 10 HD 10 DVR etc.? If that is the case, the new price for ultimate is 85.99, HBO is 17.99 so programming is 103.98 VS 136.99 for premier. If you're not using Starz, Showtime, Cinemax or the Sports Pack, makes no sense to pay for them...and the plus there is removing programming you are not using compensates for the increase and then some.


Yes, I'm on the old $10+$10. Thanks for the info.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> That is really cool! It's like a genie go


Not really...I have both Chromecast and Slingplayer...but try taking along and *viewing* numerous hours of recordings _*without any kind of Internet connection or paying for minutes on a phone*_. GenieGo does that...streaming is a secondary capability it supports, and some folks don't even use streaming on GenieGo at all.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> That is really cool! It's like a genie go
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Better than a GenieGo, if streaming live TV is important to you. GenieGo can only stream recorded content, so if you want to stream live, you have to schedule a recording first, and then stream it from your playlist while it's in progress. If you want to change channels, there must be another recording in progress.

OTOH, if it's important to watch content off-line, you can't do that with a Slingbox.

If the intent is only to stream recorded content, either device will get the job done, though you can achieve better picture quality on larger screens (> 10", e.g.) with the Slingbox, if you have sufficient bandwidth.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

inkahauts said:


> I'd guess auto cost increase hit them this year and you now are below the minumum threshold.


I'm in 19529 and my RSN is $0. Guess I'll count myself lucky! Especially since I could care less about sports.


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

shendley said:


> I'm a bit baffled by the rsn fee. I've never seen that charge on my bill. Does that mean I've been in a market with no charge? Or does the rsn charge not have a separate line on the bill?


It means that the RSN fee in urban markets was climbing too quickly, so DTV decided to "share the pain" with subscribers in markets without major sports teams. Not because the RSN contract so stipulates. But because DTV was afraid that a 10 dollar a month RSN fee in certain markets would lead to churn.

Don't believe me? Have DTV share the RSNs carriage contracts with you.


----------



## twiseguy (Jan 31, 2011)

I sure hope that DTV plans on spending my new rate for *full time HD *for FSN Ohio/Cinci. soon. And that means showing *BOTH* channels (except Reds blackouts on FSN Cinci) to all of Ohio. TWC, Uverse, and most Ohio cable companies do it.
It really sucks when the Cavs and Blue Jackets are on at the same time, but one of them will be unavailable, even though there are auxiliary numbers on both networks.


----------



## Smthkd (Sep 1, 2004)

Funny, I just read all of your post and remembered why I left Dtv. it was the fee hikes every year or so. I went to Dish and must say "I HATE IT" but seeing all of you discuss this rate increase and cutting back on your programming or insurance makes me wonder if Dtv is slowing pushing themselves away from profit than they believe. Just think about it. A lot of you are cutting back from higher costlier packages and saving $8 up to $15 per month due to increase of 3% or $4 to $5. It would seem this doesn't make since considering your profit comes from customer retention instead of new subscribers that get crazy discounts. Before this news I was actually considering coming back to Dtv but now Im more incline to cut Sat. services completely because I know Dish will follow soon, plus the cant seem to keep channels anyway!

Smthkd


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

James Long said:


> If a customer does not know what they are paying now for their base package there is no need to highlight the increase.


+1


----------



## pinkertonfloyd (Jun 5, 2002)

inkahauts said:


> Just be weary of the contract disputes. Charlie is using them to save money anytime he can.


Because DirecTV doesn't have them? It's sadly a problem in the industry.

Really, the only carrier without disputes is Comcast... but that why they're about 50-100% more. That's the issue with a company that's also a major content provider.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

mrknowitall526 said:


> I'm in 19529 and my RSN is $0. Guess I'll count myself lucky! Especially since I could care less about sports.


That's because the only RSN claiming the Lehigh Valley is CSN Philly which isn't carried.



Gloria_Chavez said:


> Don't believe me? Have DTV share the RSNs carriage contracts with you.


So I take it you've personally seen the contracts or are you just speculating yet again no matter how much evidence is provided to you saying otherwise? Being in outer ring does NOT mean it's free, you still have to pay just not as much as someone in the inner ring. I'm in the Poconos, I get the NYC and Pittsburgh RSNs, I ALWAYS had the fee since it first debuted, yet my fee is a LOT cheaper than someone in NYC. There are a lot of other things that happened, the contract renewal with NBCU/Comcast that went into effect, new additions of channels, the realignment of some NCAA conferences resulting in more areas having to pay in-conference rates for channels, existing contracts with built in increases, among other things.


----------



## jay22381 (Nov 12, 2014)

I live in the lehigh valley and rcn was my cable company they just raised rates 12 bucks for the rsn fees and program costs i switched to dtv in september and i still have no rsn fee.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Smthkd said:


> Funny, I just read all of your post and remembered why I left Dtv. it was the fee hikes every year or so. I went to Dish and must say "I HATE IT" but seeing all of you discuss this rate increase and cutting back on your programming or insurance makes me wonder if Dtv is slowing pushing themselves away from profit than they believe. Just think about it. A lot of you are cutting back from higher costlier packages and saving $8 up to $15 per month due to increase of 3% or $4 to $5. It would seem this doesn't make since considering your profit comes from customer retention instead of new subscribers that get crazy discounts. Before this news I was actually considering coming back to Dtv but now Im more incline to cut Sat. services completely because I know Dish will follow soon, plus the cant seem to keep channels anyway!


Why do you think "this doesn't make sense"? If customers are responding to Directv's price increases by cutting back on their packages, rather than switching, that's good for Directv because as you point out the profit comes from customers who stick around, not the people who switch every year or two chasing new customer discounts.

Directv would much rather have people cut back on packages than drop them and come back a year later with new customer discounts!


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Smthkd said:


> Funny, I just read all of your post and remembered why I left Dtv. it was the fee hikes every year or so. I went to Dish and must say "I HATE IT" but seeing all of you discuss this rate increase and cutting back on your programming or insurance makes me wonder if Dtv is slowing pushing themselves away from profit than they believe. Just think about it. A lot of you are cutting back from higher costlier packages and saving $8 up to $15 per month due to increase of 3% or $4 to $5. It would seem this doesn't make since considering your profit comes from customer retention instead of new subscribers that get crazy discounts. Before this news I was actually considering coming back to Dtv but now Im more incline to cut Sat. services completely because I know Dish will follow soon, plus the cant seem to keep channels anyway!
> 
> Smthkd


Didn't dish already announce the 2015 increase, about $5?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

pinkertonfloyd said:


> Because DirecTV doesn't have them? It's sadly a problem in the industry.
> 
> Really, the only carrier without disputes is Comcast... but that why they're about 50-100% more. That's the issue with a company that's also a major content provider.


Charlie is just willing to be more vocal. Like saying his customers don't care about zombies.


----------



## FussyBob (Jan 11, 2009)

What is this $12 charge on my bill?

- Watch DIRECTV on Multiple TVs12.00


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Gloria_Chavez said:


> It means that the RSN fee in urban markets was climbing too quickly, so DTV decided to "share the pain" with subscribers in markets without major sports teams. Not because the RSN contract so stipulates. But because DTV was afraid that a 10 dollar a month RSN fee in certain markets would lead to churn.
> 
> Don't believe me? Have DTV share the RSNs carriage contracts with you.


You know you must have auto correct on because you said that all wrong. It's about the regions with more and higher priced rsns paying more rather than spreading the coast of those rsns evenly to everyone. And since those costs are based on what they have to pay for the rsns while it's not in (at least I can't ever see it being logical to be in there) the contracts they have to make those markets pay more outright it is a direct result of that.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

FussyBob said:


> What is this $12 charge on my bill?
> 
> - Watch DIRECTV on Multiple TVs12.00


That's the receivers fees. If you are an older customer you likely have three receivers in your home right? If you are new you have two.


----------



## FussyBob (Jan 11, 2009)

inkahauts said:


> That's the receivers fees. If you are an older customer you likely have three receivers in your home right? If you are new you have two.


Thanks, I should read my bill closer.

Another line item below that one confused me.

"3 TVs at $6 each; Save $6 off 1st TV"

Thus I thought I was getting charged an additional $12.


----------



## Sea bass (Jun 10, 2005)

Wow, I have Premier and can't believe the pricing. I still remember when Premier was $90+ and it seemed high! Wish my pay check went up like Directv's billing!

I guess the streaming service, Audience net, and on-demand content has to get paid for somehow...

Or, let's make some coin now before it's AT&T's problem! I'd add a smilie, just not feeling it...sad.


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> You know you must have auto correct on because you said that all wrong. It's about the regions with more and higher priced rsns paying more rather than spreading the coast of those rsns evenly to everyone. And since those costs are based on what they have to pay for the rsns while it's not in (at least I can't ever see it being logical to be in there) the contracts they have to make those markets pay more outright it is a direct result of that.


A question.

Do NFL ST subscribers pay the full cost of the content.

Or does DTV "spread the pain" among all subscribers, embedding some of the cost in content packages and equipment fees?


----------



## JimAtTheRez (May 9, 2008)

Well, I wanted the SEC Network and they added that, and the WatchESPN ability and associated content, and they are adding that. I have Premier and 5 DVR's and 1 other receiver....so I guess I will just shut up and pay the increase. BTW, go Rebels and the SEC!


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Gloria_Chavez said:


> A question.
> 
> Do NFL ST subscribers pay the full cost of the content.
> 
> Or does DTV "spread the pain" among all subscribers, embedding some of the cost in content packages and equipment fees?


Without access to their books, no one can answer that question. Directv has said at times how many paying subscribers get NFLST, but they never talk about numbers from commercial accounts but they almost certainly make more revenue from them than they make from residential customers. What does that total up to? No one outside of Directv's accounting department and executive team knows.

Even if NFLST revenue is less than the cost, it wouldn't follow that everyone else is making up the difference. Clearly Directv feels it is worth having because it gets them more subscribers than they otherwise would have. There are a lot of subscribers, both residential and commercial, that only subscribe because Directv is the only option for NFLST. Whatever profit they make from those customers can be counted toward paying for NFLST as well.


----------



## WB3FFV (Mar 2, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> That being said, DirecTV pricing *IS* deceptive. They have that $30 lazyness surcharge built in , where as Dish doesn't (from what I've seen).


$30 lazyness charge, what is that? I often keep debating if I should re-up and move to Genie from my normal HD-DVR's, or if I should ditch DTV and move to FiOS. Of course, I have lifetime DVR service with DTV, so I hate the idea of losing it if I jumped..


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

dpeters11 said:


> If it is to decieve, they're doing a pretty bad job of it. Way too easy to look at a bill, or those that check their bills every month probably knows the current price right off.


No, the deception is a success. I think most people don't invest much of their time committing to memory the names of subscription packages from any cable-television provider. That's also why companies have their stupid-ass named packages; they're not going to give them names like _Package A_ or _Package B_ or _Package C_. (Those would be banal yet easy for subscribers to recall with little or no confusion.) TheRatPatrol mentioned wanting DirecTV to list a comparison pricing (a "Before and After," if you will). Well, that would not be to the benefit of DirecTV. After all, some of those prices aren't jumping only one or two dollars.

_By the way:_ My feeling is this: We are all have our personal lives which include our economic interests. So, how much we are willing and/or how much we do spend on our subscriptions is no one else's concern. I can say, with reason, that the coming HD _helps_ to justify the increases. I would definitely feel differently if nothing was getting added in [HD] programming and, yet, we would still get automatically annual price increases. I have come across that this has actually been a complaint by some subscribers of Comcast.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

APB101 said:


> No, the deception is a success. I think most people don't invest much of their time committing to memory the names of subscription packages from any cable-television provider. That's also why companies have their stupid-ass named packages; they're not going to give them names like _Package A_ or _Package B_ or _Package C_. (Those would be banal yet easy for subscribers to recall with little or no confusion.) TheRatPatrol mentioned wanting DirecTV to list a comparison pricing (a "Before and After," if you will). Well, that would not be to the benefit of DirecTV. After all, some of those prices aren't jumping only one or two dollars.


I still don't see it as deceptive. That indicates they are trying to lie to you, or make you think proves aren't going up.

Besides, as I mentioned, so far the only thing I've seen about the prices is this thread. I haven't seen the wording of the communication that will be going out to customers. Is it still deceptive if in that email they say the average increase is a certain percentage, if that percent is an accurate number?


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

WB3FFV said:


> $30 lazyness charge, what is that? I often keep debating if I should re-up and move to Genie from my normal HD-DVR's, or if I should ditch DTV and move to FiOS. Of course, I have lifetime DVR service with DTV, so I hate the idea of losing it if I jumped..


If you compare pricing to Dish (I did a few days ago as a matter of fact), DirecTV is about $20 - $30 more.

If you take the 5 minutes to call into DirecTV customer service and take advantage of all the "discounts" available, i.e. bundling, just plain credits, etc. cuz you asked for them, etc. you can typically get around $30 knocked off your monthly bill because that's baked into the price. Its not something that's documented, its not something you are told about, its something you specifically have to ask for "in the right way".

Typically, you have to "renew" these deals every 6 to 12 months.

Lots of people find that to be too much of a hassle (thus the laziness tax) and just pay the extra $30/mo.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

Well,
I just got off the phone with a very knowledgeable CSR named Jessie in Montana.

I dropped from the Premier to the Xtra package and kept HBO, Showtime and Starz.
And at the same time I deactivated my second HDDVR.

I asked her to put a note in whatever file she could that I was doing this to protest the excessive increases coming up in my service.
I also told her that I thought the RSN fee should be a choice and not put on everyone in an area.

This reduced my bill by $20 per month.
All my existing discounts are still in effect except for the $5 off of Sports Pack which is in the Premier package.
When the new pricing kicks in my bill will still be less than what I just paid last month.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

FussyBob said:


> Thanks, I should read my bill closer.
> 
> Another line item below that one confused me.
> 
> ...


Just be grateful that their accounting department rarely (I've never found one) makes mistakes.

Rich


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

RAD said:


> http://www.directv.com/cms3/customer/DIRECTV_PRICING_2015/full_pricing_table_directv_2015.pdf
> 
> OK, I understand the monthly programming fees going up, not real thrilled about the $.50/month increase in the set top box fees though.


Just as a point of reference, my Cablevision boxes went up $.80 each for 2015, to $7.56 each. There's no initial outlay for hardware.

Programming fees stayed the same for 2015, except what used to be a $4.98 "sports programming" is now a $5.98 "sports and broadcast TV" fee. :scratchin

Phone and internet stayed the same.


----------



## goober22 (Sep 8, 2004)

Well, this has finally caused me to drop my package level. I've been a Premier sub since I signed up in 2005. We just dropped our 2 D12 receivers since we don't use them much - save $12 I thought. Now with the price hikes we'll pay $11.64 more (premier $7, xtra recvrs $2.50 & now a sports fee $2.14) - for a net savings of 36 cents!

I'm dropping down to the Ultimate pack. Never watched sports in the 600s & we are so far behind in movies we really don't need the premiums. We have Amazon Prime so we can stream and if needed there's Netflix for $9 (and other options as well, wink-wink).

So I'll save $50 a month now as D* has priced me out. When you add up all the increases this year, I can't understand how these companies think we can continue to pay. Water/sewer went up $12, power $21, trash $3/3 months, D* $12, Net/phone $16, Health $28. (haven't got car/home ins.quotes yet).

That's $90 a month or $1080 a year. I did NOT get that much of a wage increase.I make more now but have less left over after bills than I did 5 years ago.

Rich get richer as poor gets poorer. Goodbye middle class!


----------



## Barcthespark (Dec 16, 2007)

I have 2 HD DVRs, 1 HD receiver, and the Ultimate package. My bill is currently $113.99, increasing to $119.99 in February.

I called in and deactivated the HD receiver and dropped to XTRA. My bill in February will now be $104.49, a savings of $15 month ($180 for the year).


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

Sea bass said:


> Wish my pay check went up like Directv's billing!


Bingo. As a percentage of what I make DirecTV gets higher every year. The way my company manages annual increases it's pretty much guaranteed that you are going to get a 3% annual increase.

The $.50 increase in receiver charges is 8%.

The $4.00 increase to my base package is 6% but if you add the new $2.14 RSN fee (which I do since the RSN comes with my package and I have no choice in the matter) then it is an increase of over 9% to my base package cost.

I don't know of too many people who see annual raises in the 8% - 9% range. When I look at the programming my wife and I actually watch she would be covered with an antenna and a TiVO and I could get most everything on Hulu Plus.

Sunday Ticket has kept me anchored but medical expenses killed that this year and you know what? I lived without it.

I can't say that I'm unhappy with DirecTV but if I can get exactly the same programming, with the flexibility to either record it or watch it when I want for $100+ less per month I have to take a hard look at that.

And coincidentally, my commitment is up.

It would be kind of sad. The end of a 14 year relationship that I've had as a DirecTV subscriber but come on. I could do a lot of other things every month with that extra hundred bucks.

But they've pushed the issue to a point where I'm seriously thinking about my options now.

EDIT TO ADD; Was it 2012 that the receiver charge went from $5 to $6? If so, with the latest fifty cent hike that makes it a 30% increase in 3 years.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Barcthespark said:


> I have 2 HD DVRs, 1 HD receiver, and the Ultimate package. My bill is currently $113.99, increasing to $119.99 in February.
> 
> I called in and deactivated the HD receiver and dropped to XTRA. My bill in February will now be $104.49, a savings of $15 month ($180 for the year).


Well, 2 boxes on Dish / Top 200 is only $88.99 regular pricing , Top 250 w/ 2 boxes is $98.99. Heck, you could do Top 250 on Dish which is a better package then Xtra with 3 boxes for the same price you're paying now on DirecTV. Dish doesn't charge extra for HD. And on top of that you'd get the 1st yr 50% or so. Just sayin'.

For me with a single TV on Choice Xtra Classic setup its an even worse discrepancy: $105.12 before discounts vs. $81.99 on Dish for Top 200. My DirecTV discounts bring me down to be slightly cheaper then Dish, so that's why I'm hanging around (for now).


----------



## sangs (Apr 2, 2008)

JimAtTheRez said:


> Well, I wanted the SEC Network and they added that, and the WatchESPN ability and associated content, and they are adding that. I have Premier and 5 DVR's and 1 other receiver....so I guess I will just shut up and pay the increase. BTW, go Rebels and the SEC!


Somebody posted that before today's bowl game.  (Sorry.)


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> That is really cool! It's like a genie go


The Slingbox isn't limited to what channels or content you can use it with. Anything you can do locally with the remote, you can do at a distance (i.e. changing channels, trick play, scheduling and confirming recordings).

The Slingbox also works with anything that produces a suitable signal, not just DIRECTV HD DVRs.

A down-side is that it only works via IR and that can be a problem for DIRECTV receivers that can't do IR and RF simultaneously.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

jimmie57 said:


> I also told her that I thought the RSN fee should be a choice and not put on everyone in an area.


As we all know that's not how the pricing model works.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Of course we all know that the other alternative is to use the Dish strategy to hold down prices - just cut channels from the inventory or fail to renew agreements for weeks or longer and have those channels go dark. Most folks might not care for that alternative though.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Of course we all know that the other alternative is to use the Dish strategy to hold down prices - just cut channels from the inventory or fail to renew agreements for weeks or longer and have those channels go dark. Most folks might not care for that alternative though.


Even with that I think they said the average 2015 Dish increase was about $5.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Of course we all know that the other alternative is to use the Dish strategy to hold down prices - just cut channels from the inventory or fail to renew agreements for weeks or longer and have those channels go dark. Most folks might not care for that alternative though.


Yes, there is that . DirecTV has gone dark a few times too. Not as much as Dish has obviously recently. However, some might consider that a better strategy then "sure, we'll pay any price for your channel and pass it on to the consumer, wink wink".


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

SledgeHammer said:


> Well, 2 boxes on Dish / Top 200 is only $88.99 regular pricing , Top 250 w/ 2 boxes is $98.99. Heck, you could do Top 250 on Dish which is a better package then Xtra with 3 boxes for the same price you're paying now on DirecTV. Dish doesn't charge extra for HD. And on top of that you'd get the 1st yr 50% or so. Just sayin'.
> 
> For me with a single TV on Choice Xtra Classic setup its an even worse discrepancy: $105.12 before discounts vs. $81.99 on Dish for Top 200. My DirecTV discounts bring me down to be slightly cheaper then Dish, so that's why I'm hanging around (for now).


I would be on Dish in a NY second if I could get the networks in HD.....


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dpeters11 said:


> Even with that I think they said the average 2015 Dish increase was about $5.


DISH's was $5 across all the tiers ... plus $2 last November for the "Almost Everything Pack" (which went up early due to increases in premium package prices in November ... and will go up again with everything else). Fortunately DISH reinstated "Free HD for Life" (for basically all customers) and don't charge for the first receiver - which helps keep the total price of service "low". Unfortunately "low" is not as low as it was a few years ago on either satellite carrier.

Do you remember when there were years with no price increase?


----------



## betterdan (May 23, 2007)

I've got Ultimate package now with HBO and Cinemax with a Genie and 2 clients. Looks like my bill is going to go up $7 if I'm correct.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

242424 said:


> I would be on Dish in a NY second if I could get the networks in HD.....


I don't know where you live, but if Dish doesn't have locals that are close enough to you, one option might be to get the Dish OTA adapter and use that for locals (you'll actually get *more* locals -- the sub channels). I have an OTA antenna in my attic, totally out of sight and it pulls channels from 60 miles away. Both Dish & DirecTV have OTA adapters that completely integrate with the DVRs, guides, recording, searches, etc. everything. Functionality wise, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Although, the Dish one is the size of a computer mouse and the DirecTV one is the size of a computer . Bonus, supposedly the OTA locals are better PQ then the Sat ones (higher bit rate / lower compression).


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

I have an rooftop antenna now and it gets a total of one HD station. lol


----------



## n3vino (Oct 2, 2011)

SledgeHammer said:


> There really isn't a reason to have the protection plan in general. If your account is in good standing, they'll generally give you free truck rolls. If you have owned boxes, they'll replace them with owned boxes I guess, but if you are all leased boxes, there is absolutely no good reason to flush $7 down the drain or however much it costs now.


I have the protection plan. Been with D* at least 3years. I'm sort of afraid to drop it because, no telling what could go wrong with something that would be costly to fix, although I can't think of what. My contract is up in May, so maybe I'll drop it then. If something goes wrong then, I guess I could switch to E*. So far, using the PP, I got a free upgrade to the Genie which required a truck roll, got a HR24 replaced didn't pay shipping, and received a replacement remote control, which I understand I would have had to pay for $15.00, Right now I qualify for an upgrade, but I don't know what I could upgrade. Besides, I don't want to extend my contract right now. My refer a friend is over and with the new increases, I estimate my bill to go up around $18.00.

So I need to decide if I want to drop the PP.

I


----------



## n3vino (Oct 2, 2011)

SledgeHammer said:


> Ala carte should not be ratings driven at all and DirecTV, etc. should be required to OFFER all channels, but if only 100k subs pick a channel then DirecTV should only pay for 100k subs. How pricing should be set is a huge debate and why ala carte has never worked. Most of the channels have 1 or 2 hits and the rest is low rated crap and most of the reality shows cost almost nothing to make. So you think the channel that shows Here Comes Honey Boo Boo should get more money then ABC? I would say cost should be tied to production cost somehow which would indirectly derive from ratings, but not entirely. I think something like that would be the fairest. Channels with lots of high rated original programming should be able to charge more then a channel that airs strictly re-runs from the 70's. But you shouldn't allow 1 hit wonder channels to skyrocket.
> 
> Cable TV will never be regulated though because they pay to put the law makers in power.
> 
> First step would be to make lobbyists illegal I would think .


I agree with you. On my package, they boast 210 channels but at least 75% of them are bull corn channels, and channels that I never watch. But what is happening is that all broadcasters have D* by the nuts, because subscribers will jump ship if D* says, no to the broadcasters. So subscribers are to blame for D* not being able to say no to the Bull Corn channels, and yes to the ones people actually watch.


----------



## Barcthespark (Dec 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Well, 2 boxes on Dish / Top 200 is only $88.99 regular pricing , Top 250 w/ 2 boxes is $98.99. Heck, you could do Top 250 on Dish which is a better package then Xtra with 3 boxes for the same price you're paying now on DirecTV. Dish doesn't charge extra for HD. And on top of that you'd get the 1st yr 50% or so. Just sayin'.
> 
> For me with a single TV on Choice Xtra Classic setup its an even worse discrepancy: $105.12 before discounts vs. $81.99 on Dish for Top 200. My DirecTV discounts bring me down to be slightly cheaper then Dish, so that's why I'm hanging around (for now).


I had Dish come out a few years ago and I don't have a clear path. Because of that it's either D* or Charter for me.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

For me I'm not looking at it as a DirecTV vs Dish, or FiOS or Cable for a few bucks difference that will be neutralized by next year's price increases. It's all just slightly different flavors of the same fare.

I have just reached a point where I am moved to take a comprehensive look at TV programming and delivery options and my viewing choices in their entirety. Not just provider A over provider B type evaluation.

I am slowly coming to the conclusion that the Provider/Subscriber model employed by the entire body of Cable, Satellite and Telecom providers is not my best option.

I need to do more homework because I would either lose some things I'm not fully realizing by cutting the cord and going to an OTA/Hulu/Netflix/Vudu solution...or it's a no brainer and time to make the switch.

But I think I'm having an epiphany here.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HarleyD said:


> For me I'm not looking at it as a DirecTV vs Dish, or FiOS or Cable for a few bucks difference that will be neutralized by next year's price increases. It's all just slightly different flavors of the same fare.
> 
> I have just reached a point where I am moved to take a comprehensive look at TV programming and delivery options and my viewing choices in their entirety. Not just provider A over provider B type evaluation.
> 
> ...


I usually go thru a period each year where I consider dropping D*. Then my family says, "NO". What to do? If I could get the HBO streaming service on something and a source for the YES channel, can't lose the Yankees games, I'd happily cut the cord. But I always get talked out of it. :nono2:

Rich


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

Rich said:


> I usually go thru a period each year where I consider dropping D*. Then my family says, "NO". What to do? If I could get the HBO streaming service on something and a source for the YES channel, can't lose the Yankees games, I'd happily cut the cord. But I always get talked out of it. :nono2:
> 
> Rich


That's the thing I need to ensure. That I won't be giving up something that I cannot get elsewhere and would not want to live without.

As far as family goes, it's my wife and I. And she's pretty well confined to network programming. If she can get the Shonda Rimes dramas and the competition shows like Idol, Bachelor, Dancing with the Stars, etc. she's happy. I would just have to get her set up with an OTA DVR option since she has grown entirely accustomed to time shifting, recording and watching at her convenience.

The biggest obstacle I can see is she records programmin in the living room and watches it in the bedroom. That would need to be addressed somehow and I know there are solutions for that.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

I'm at the point where I'm getting frustrated with all of it. Got about 25 channels that I watch often enough id hate to give them up. Unfortunately for me they require a fairly high base package.
Then there is the premiums. I seldom watch movies on any of them which would lead me to think I should get rid of the lot of them, but then I would miss the few truly wonderful original series and the upper level boxing. The problem is that the boxing isn't often enough considering the $30+ I end up spending on them.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HarleyD said:


> That's the thing I need to ensure. That I won't be giving up something that I cannot get elsewhere and would not want to live without.
> 
> As far as family goes, it's my wife and I. And she's pretty well confined to network programming. If she can get the Shonda Rimes dramas and the competition shows like Idol, Bachelor, Dancing with the Stars, etc. she's happy. I would just have to get her set up with an OTA DVR option since she has grown entirely accustomed to time shifting, recording and watching at her convenience.
> 
> The biggest obstacle I can see is she records programmin in the living room and watches it in the bedroom. That would need to be addressed somehow and I know there are solutions for that.


I started time shifting just about the time my wife and I got together, so she's used to it, too. With the advent of NF, I saw a different future, one that didn't involve setting VCRs or DVRs for new shows or movies all the time. Now if they just had sports programming I could probably cut the cord. But I don't see that happening.

My wife and I have been watching more and more shows on NF together and she's starting to see how much better the NF model is than the D* model. Already, NF has a much better MRV system than D* or anybody does. And you don't need much equipment to use it. Nothing complicated anyway.

Rich


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

lparsons21 said:


> Then there is the premiums. I seldom watch movies on any of them which would lead me to think I should get rid of the lot of them, but then I would miss the few truly wonderful original series...


That was my problem. But none of the series are something that I have to watch as soon as they air. My plan is to wait until a series or two finish their season run, sign up for the premium that has them for a month, download all of them via DoD and then cancel the premium. Not worth paying for 12 months of a channel when there's only 10 to 12 week of something that I want to watch on them.


----------



## Aridon (Mar 13, 2007)

This is what happens when you have a "Free" market run by a small handful of companies. Fact of the matter is there isn't enough competition because the industry has become so consolidated over the years. This is true not only for the providers of the content but also the distributors as well and especially true when it comes to internet.

Enjoy the ride as we move ever so closer to Zorg Industries.

At this point the only thing that will salvage the situation for consumers is for a Utility declaration and opening the lines to companies like Google so they can run fiber and use poles without having to deal with every local schmokel with the cable company or At&T in their back pocket.

If AT&T and others want to sit on what they have then competition should be allowed to move in and force them to actually compete.

http://www.engadget.com/2015/01/01/google-letter-fcc-title-ii/


----------



## n3vino (Oct 2, 2011)

HarleyD said:


> That's the thing I need to ensure. That I won't be giving up something that I cannot get elsewhere and would not want to live without.
> 
> As far as family goes, it's my wife and I. And she's pretty well confined to network programming. If she can get the Shonda Rimes dramas and the competition shows like Idol, Bachelor, Dancing with the Stars, etc. she's happy. I would just have to get her set up with an OTA DVR option since she has grown entirely accustomed to time shifting, recording and watching at her convenience.
> 
> The biggest obstacle I can see is she records programmin in the living room and watches it in the bedroom. That would need to be addressed somehow and I know there are solutions for that.


I've been looking at a Tivo with over the air antenna. Right now I have 4 receivers, one a genie and the other an hr24 with whole home. To get what I have now would require an antenna, a Tivo Roamio with min roamios, and a box that will handle the whole home. In order to get a two weeks worth of programming guide, requires a $15.00 subscribtion per month. Each box costs $150.00, the gadget for whole home is also expensive, and they all require an internet connection, wifi or ethernet. The Roamio has wifi capabilities. I'm not sure about the other boxes, but there is a bridge that can also be used.

The startup would be very expensive. With that I should be able to get all my local and area stations with sub stations over the air. The sub stations would probably be worthless because they are usually in SD. I don't watch SD. I also have Netflix. If it were just two TV's, I would probably just get to Tivo Roamios.. The Tivo Roamio is the only one that will support over the air, and it has four tuners.

Other HDDVR's don't require a subscription, but you only get a few hours programming guide. If anyone needs some info, Here's a link on information for Tivo's. There are reviews and Q & A. http://www.amazon.com/TiVo-Digital-Recorder-Streaming-TCD846500/dp/B00EEOSZK0/ref=sr_1_1/188-1346932-5865169?ie=UTF8&qid=1420065146&sr=8-1&keywords=tivo+roamio


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I wonder how the pricing will work if the merger is approved? Will they stick with these prices or use a combination of DTV's and UVerse TV's? I know they said the pricing will stay the same for three years after merger but I would think they would have to combine the channels, and bundle packages together after the merger? Or will that not take place until 3 years after also?


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

n3vino said:


> I've been looking at a Tivo with over the air antenna. Right now I have 4 receivers, one a genie and the other an hr24 with whole home. To get what I have now would require an antenna, a Tivo Roamio with min roamios, and a box that will handle the whole home. In order to get a two weeks worth of programming guide, requires a $15.00 subscribtion per month. Each box costs $150.00, the gadget for whole home is also expensive, and they all require an internet connection, wifi or ethernet. The Roamio has wifi capabilities. I'm not sure about the other boxes, but there is a bridge that can also be used.
> 
> The startup would be very expensive. With that I should be able to get all my local and area stations with sub stations over the air. The sub stations would probably be worthless because they are usually in SD. I don't watch SD. I also have Netflix. If it were just two TV's, I would probably just get to Tivo Roamios.. The Tivo Roamio is the only one that will support over the air, and it has four tuners.
> 
> Other HDDVR's don't require a subscription, but you only get a few hours programming guide. If anyone needs some info, Here's a link on information for Tivo's. There are reviews and Q & A. http://www.amazon.com/TiVo-Digital-Recorder-Streaming-TCD846500/dp/B00EEOSZK0/ref=sr_1_1/188-1346932-5865169?ie=UTF8&qid=1420065146&sr=8-1&keywords=tivo+roamio


Did you take a look at this one ? It is subscription free, has 2 tuners and if you hook it to the net it has a guide that is basically like a pay TV service.
http://www.channelmasterstore.com/DVR_Plus_1TB_built_in_p/cm-7500tb1.htm


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

CraigerM said:


> I wonder how the pricing will work if the merger is approved? Will they stick with these prices or use a combination of DTV's and UVerse TV's? I know they said the pricing will stay the same for three years after merger but I would think they would have to combine the channels, and bundle packages together after the merger? Or will that not take place until 3 years after also?


They need to move the non movie channels out of U300 and need to have NHL network comeback as well.


----------



## WhatYeahOk (Jan 1, 2015)

So my Regional Sports Fee is going up to $3.63 (49009), decided to type in my old zip (49504) and the RSF is ZERO! It is the same viewing area! How the heck is that fair?!

--
Looks like my bill will be going up around $8. Putting my bill at just about $127 a month. Guess I will be dropping down a package. I will not pay over $125 a month for TV.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Kalamazoo being about 60 miles to the south of Grand Rapids, and near the midpoint between Chicago and Detroit makes a huge difference in the viewing area.

In addition to getting the Detroit teams via FSN Detroit, 49009 gets the Blackhawks and Bulls via CSN Chicago, while 49504 just gets the Detroit teams.


----------



## WhatYeahOk (Jan 1, 2015)

KyL416 said:


> Kalamazoo being about 60 miles to the south of Grand Rapids, and near the midpoint between Chicago and Detroit makes a huge difference in the viewing area.
> 
> In addition to getting the Detroit teams via FSN Detroit, 49009 gets the Blackhawks and Bulls via CSN Chicago, while 49504 just gets the Detroit teams.


I was getting FSN Detroit and CSN Chicago when I was in Grand Rapids (49504).


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

DirecTV's RSN lookup tool doesn't show that, so it might have changed since you last lived there.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> I wonder how the pricing will work if the merger is approved? Will they stick with these prices or use a combination of DTV's and UVerse TV's? I know they said the pricing will stay the same for three years after merger but I would think they would have to combine the channels, and bundle packages together after the merger? Or will that not take place until 3 years after also?


Where did Directv say the pricing would remain the same for three years? Maybe they did and I missed it, but if so that would go a long way towards explaining what some feel is an outsize increase this year. If they know they can't bump the price again for three years (assuming the merger is approved) they better get in a larger than normal one now!


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Where did Directv say the pricing would remain the same for three years? Maybe they did and I missed it, but if so that would go a long way towards explaining what some feel is an outsize increase this year. If they know they can't bump the price again for three years (assuming the merger is approved) they better get in a larger than normal one now!


I think this is what he means.

"*DirecTV continuance. For "at least three years" after closing, DirecTV's TV service will be available on a stand-alone basis at current prices that are the same for all customers."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/usanow/2014/05/18/att-buys-directv/9247795/


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

slice1900 said:


> Of course now those fees are nearly mandatory since *Directv doesn't let you sign up for service without HD*, which new customers pay for by paying for the first receiver when previously that was free. While you could avoid the advanced receiver fee by getting only receivers, few would consider that a valid option. A DVR went from a "wouldn't it be nice if someone made VCRs that used a hard drive" to a luxury item early adopters had to something most would consider a necessity for watching TV today.
> 
> .


Not true. You don't have to sign up for hd service.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

They don't install SD equipment on new customers anymore.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

dpeters11 said:


> They don't install SD equipment on new customers anymore.


That's correct, but you don't have to get hd service.


----------



## davidgcet (Jul 28, 2013)

I am seriously considering putting my media center PC back to work. With Plex on it I have a WHDVR solution, already have the Roku boxes. Plus we already have NF and Amazon Prime. For a few bucks I can add a couple more tuner cards to my MC and get all the OTA we need for simultaneous recording, though honestly we have found we prefer to stream as it has no or fewer commercials.

I am still debating it, but this looks like a more and more likely outcome by the time my contract is up in July. Sad to go after 13 years, but they have just about forced my hand on it. I CAN afford to keep D*, I am just tired of paying 100+ a month for basically 3 channels.


----------



## sangs (Apr 2, 2008)

Rich said:


> I usually go thru a period each year where I consider dropping D*. Then my family says, "NO". What to do? If I could get the HBO streaming service on something and a source for the YES channel, can't lose the Yankees games, I'd happily cut the cord. But I always get talked out of it. :nono2:
> 
> Rich


Different team and channel - SNY and Mets - but same boat. HBO, AMC, FX, ESPN & SNY are the only channels I'd need outside of the broadcast networks.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

studechip said:


> That's correct, but you don't have to get hd service.


How so? My understanding is that all new installs use HD receivers and all include HD service. New customers don't have a way of opting out of HD, because there is no separate charge for HD.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

dpeters11 said:


> I think this is what he means.
> 
> "*DirecTV continuance. For "at least three years" after closing, DirecTV's TV service will be available on a stand-alone basis at current prices that are the same for all customers."
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/usanow/2014/05/18/att-buys-directv/9247795/


OK, they aren't saying they won't increase prices for three years. All that really guarantees is that they won't start pricing it differently based on where you are for at least three years. After that, all bets are off and they could sell Choice for $39.99 in one city and $49.99 in another if they wanted, like how cable companies sell their services for different prices in different cities based on the competition.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> OK, they aren't saying they won't increase prices for three years. All that really guarantees is that they won't start pricing it differently based on where you are for at least three years. After that, all bets are off and they could sell Choice for $39.99 in one city and $49.99 in another if they wanted, like how cable companies sell their services for different prices in different cities based on the competition.


That's how I read it, but not looking forward to that point.


----------



## goober22 (Sep 8, 2004)

Just to update my post from here:
http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/215772-directv-2015-pricing/page-10#entry3323205

I just called and dropped my package from Premier to Ultimate. That will save me $50 under the new rates. CSR wasn't rude and offered me a 6 month discount of $25 per month, but I declined. We'll still have Encore & TMC e/w for movies (as well as our Amazon Prime) and there's always Redbox or netflix if needed and cheaper as well..


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> OK, they aren't saying they won't increase prices for three years. All that really guarantees is that they won't start pricing it differently based on where you are for at least three years. After that, all bets are off and they could sell Choice for $39.99 in one city and $49.99 in another if they wanted, like how cable companies sell their services for different prices in different cities based on the competition.


"No changes to DirecTV's offerings." With the RSN fee DirecTV is already in a position where in 2015 Choice is $5+ more in at least one market than it is in a $0 RSN fee market. DirecTV's prices and pricing structure will continue to follow their normal course of business ... which for the past few years includes annual increases.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> How so? My understanding is that all new installs use HD receivers and all include HD service. New customers don't have a way of opting out of HD, because there is no separate charge for HD.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

studechip said:


> That's correct, but you don't have to get hd service.


 yes, you do. You have only HD receivers. You have to have HD service. The difference is new customers pay for their primary tv instead of HD .

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Barcthespark said:


> I had Dish come out a few years ago and I don't have a clear path. Because of that it's either D* or Charter for me.


DISH made some changes in the last few years (adding a second "arc" for subscribers in the Eastern US) which may have opened them up as an alternative for you. Even if you don't want to switch, it is important that you know what's currently available.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Sgtsbabygirl1 said:


> yes, you do. You have only HD receivers. You have to have HD service. The difference is new customers pay for their primary tv instead of HD .
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I guess in a way it could be true in that I don't believe they require you have HD TVs


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

studechip said:


> That's correct, but you don't have to get hd service.


In the context of new DIRECTV residential intallations, they are all HD on or after July 24, 2014.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I wonder if you have both DTV and UVerse Internet if the two separate bills will automatically merge into one after the merger? Or if you would have to call AT&T to get them merged? It will also be interesting if that happens will we get that bill from AT&T and not DTV.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

slice1900 said:


> How so? My understanding is that all new installs use HD receivers and all include HD service. New customers don't have a way of opting out of HD, because there is no separate charge for HD.


You're right, I forgot about the change in how they charge new customers. I was thinking about previously how you could have mpeg4 boxes for locals but not have hd service.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

CraigerM said:


> I wonder if you have both DTV and UVerse Internet if the two separate bills will automatically merge into one after the merger? Or if you would have to call AT&T to get them merged? It will also be interesting if that happens will we get that bill from AT&T and not DTV.


As there are probably more than a few that have their broadband bill paid for by their employer or it is part of their rent, an automatic merge would be undesirable for that class. I suppose it would also work the other way for MDUs that offer a level of DIRECTV service as part of the package.

I suspect that as with most bundles today, they will make some sort of discounted offer available to bring you on the teat with the combination deal.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

harsh said:


> As there are probably more than a few that have their broadband bill paid for by their employer or it is part of their rent, an automatic merge would be undesirable for that class. I suppose it would also work the other way for MDUs that offer a level of DIRECTV service as part of the package.
> 
> I suspect that as with most bundles today, they will make some sort of discounted offer available to bring you on the teat with the combination deal.


If someone has their bill paid by someone else, wouldn't it be in the other person's name?


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

studechip said:


> If someone has their bill paid by someone else, wouldn't it be in the other person's name?


Not necessarily. I pay for my mother's phone and it is in her name. My sister pays for her internet, security and TV service and it is in my mother's name also.
All you need to do is get the person that has the service to add your name as an authorized contact and it is done from then on.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

CraigerM said:


> I wonder if you have both DTV and UVerse Internet if the two separate bills will automatically merge into one after the merger? Or if you would have to call AT&T to get them merged? It will also be interesting if that happens will we get that bill from AT&T and not DTV.


Probably just like all the Telco and Directv bundles. My Directv bill comes on my Verizon bill for home phone and internet, and we get a discount for doing that.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

jimmie57 said:


> Not necessarily. I pay for my mother's phone and it is in her name. My sister pays for her internet, security and TV service and it is in my mother's name also.
> All you need to do is get the person that has the service to add your name as an authorized contact and it is done from then on.


I meant in a business sense like harsh was suggesting, not the way you are saying.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

studechip said:


> If someone has their bill paid by someone else, wouldn't it be in the other person's name?


It has a lot to do with service addresses and who is eligible for residential service.

I think some handle it as a reimbursement so that it isn't taxed as additional income.


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

I get reimbursed by my employer for my cell service; the account is in my name, and I fill out an expense report form each month.

A combined cell service/TV service bill would obviously be itemized with separate line items for each, and I would still have no issues filling out the expense report form.

While there may be legitimate reasons to have fear, uncertainty, and doubt about an AT&T takeover of DirecTV, it is _quite_ a leap to worry about combined billing as a possible problem.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

trainman said:


> _*I get reimbursed by my employer for my cell service; the account is in my name, and I fill out an expense report form each month.*_
> 
> A combined cell service/TV service bill would obviously be itemized with separate line items for each, and I would still have no issues filling out the expense report form.
> 
> _*While there may be legitimate reasons to have fear, uncertainty, and doubt about an AT&T takeover of DirecTV, it is quite a leap to worry about combined billing as a possible problem.*_


My wife has to go thru the same thing with her company supplied iPhone.

I does seem far to early to start worrying about billing problems. They'll have enough to keep them busy for quite awhile with the merger.

Rich


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

Ok so just caught up to this. So my Choice Xtra Classic will be jumping $4. Trying to figure out whats going to change on equipent charges. Currently I pay $35/mo for quipment fees. Thats $3 for whole home, $10 for HD $10 for DVR whats going to change there?

3.

Watch DIRECTV on Multiple TVs

12.00

3 TVs at $6 each; Save $6 off 1st TV

What on earth is that charge? If I am paying for a receiver on each TV, and whole home wouldn't that cover everything?


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

rahlquist said:


> Ok so just caught up to this. So my Choice Xtra Classic will be jumping $4. Trying to figure out whats going to change on equipent charges. Currently I pay $35/mo for quipment fees. Thats $3 for whole home, $10 for HD $10 for DVR whats going to change there?
> 
> 3. Watch DIRECTV on Multiple TVs 12.00 3 TVs at $6 each; Save $6 off 1st TV
> 
> What on earth is that charge? If I am paying for a receiver on each TV, and whole home wouldn't that cover everything?


The line item 3 is the new way of listing how many locations are watching the TV.
The $6 is going to $6.50 each.
You also need to use the link in one of these posts to see if you are going to now have an RSN fee that you did not use to have.
I am in zip 77591 and have never paid one. Mine is going to be $2.14 now.

Link to lookup for rsn fees.
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/rsn_fee


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

jimmie57 said:


> The line item 3 is the new way of listing how many locations are watching the TV.
> The $6 is going to $6.50 each.
> You also need to use the link in one of these posts to see if you are going to now have an RSN fee that you did not use to have.
> I am in zip 77591 and have never paid one. Mine is going to be $2.14 now.
> ...


Thanks for the clarification and the warning. Looks like I will have a $2.14 fee too and I never watch any sports but the super bowl. I guess there is no way to opt out of that. So a $7.14 increase. That will push me into the $120 a month range for something that my kid barely uses, my wife uses at most 4 hours a day and I use 3 hours. The dog watches more TV than the rest of us LOL.

Cord cutting is getting appealing.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

rahlquist said:


> Thanks for the clarification and the warning. Looks like I will have a $2.14 fee too and I never watch any sports but the super bowl. I guess there is no way to opt out of that. So a $7.14 increase. That will push me into the $120 a month range for something that my kid barely uses, my wife uses at most 4 hours a day and I use 3 hours. The dog watches more TV than the rest of us LOL.
> 
> Cord cutting is getting appealing.


Sorry dog, we're dropping DogTV.


----------



## Sgtsbabygirl1 (Dec 15, 2014)

rahlquist said:


> Thanks for the clarification and the warning. Looks like I will have a $2.14 fee too and I never watch any sports but the super bowl. I guess there is no way to opt out of that. So a $7.14 increase. That will push me into the $120 a month range for something that my kid barely uses, my wife uses at most 4 hours a day and I use 3 hours. The dog watches more TV than the rest of us LOL.
> 
> Cord cutting is getting appealing.


Depending on the time you've been with us and the status of your account, directv may have some offers to help offset that. Keep that in mind.


----------



## mrdobolina (Aug 28, 2006)

In years past I have never second guessed the annual price increase. Not that I like it, but I have always understood it. I still do understand it, but it has finally reached the point where I have to start doing the cost vs. utility analysis. Our monthly bill will be going up over $8, and even with credits after calling, it's just starting to get out of hand. I don't really watch my RSNs all that much (BTN being the exception, but even that I don't watch as much as I would like). Now that I'm paying $4/month for RSN fees, perhaps DIRECTV will add PAC12 to further justify that price to us? Not that I need that or would I watch it regularly (more regularly during hoops season, no doubt), but if they are going to raise my RSN fee by over 100% without adding services, that's not cool.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I think the RSN fee is what is really affecting the most. I didn't expect my parents, who are in the Knoxville Market, or my hometown in the Columbus Ohio market to get a fee, but they are.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

Well, I always hate when this thread pops up, because I know my bill is going up. This is the largest percentage increase since I signed up with DIRECTV. Just like with most subscribers, I get the new RSN fee of $2+ and an increase of $4 on my "Choice Xtra Classic". Which means an 8.4% increase this year. Time to suspend my account and use my OTA DVR for a month, to offset the price increase.

I read that Time Warner Cable is adding an RSN fee to all customers bills this year as well, so probably all providers are using this tactic to raise rates even higher than normal.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

RACJ2 said:


> I read that Time Warner Cable is adding an RSN fee to all customers bills this year as well, so probably all providers are using this tactic to raise rates even higher than normal.


They're raising rates even higher than normal because the programming costs are increasing for them not only for national networks, but also for RSNs on a more local/regional basis. It isn't like Directv & TWC invented this RSN fee as a way to make more profit, like some of the mysterious fees you see on cellular bills like "regulatory recovery fee".


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> It isn't like Directv & TWC invented this RSN fee as a way to make more profit


Umm... actually, that's *EXACTLY *why it was invented. That's kind of the definition of the word "fee". Yes, there are increased costs involved, but DirecTV simply passes them along to the customer. DirecTV has a few million more subs then Dish, so costs should be fairly similar (programming fees). How come Dish can beat DirecTV costs by $30/mo? How come DirecTV can knock $30/mo off your bill without breaking a sweat? DirecTV charges more soley for the purpose of making more profit LOL. Even if they ate a $5 RSN fee for all customers, they'd still be significantly more $$$ then Dish.

Proof speaks for itself. Lots of people in this thread and others are downgrading packages and dropping TVs because the cost has gotten too high.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Umm... actually, that's *EXACTLY *why it was invented. That's kind of the definition of the word "fee". Yes, there are increased costs involved, but DirecTV simply passes them along to the customer. DirecTV has a few million more subs then Dish, so costs should be fairly similar (programming fees). How come Dish can beat DirecTV costs by $30/mo? How come DirecTV can knock $30/mo off your bill without breaking a sweat? DirecTV charges more soley for the purpose of making more profit LOL. Even if they ate a $5 RSN fee for all customers, they'd still be significantly more $$$ then Dish.
> 
> Proof speaks for itself. Lots of people in this thread and others are downgrading packages and dropping TVs because the cost has gotten too high.


I disagree with the notion that the rsn fee is just to make money. Completely. Its to try and balance the pricing they advertise nationally with each region instead of having to advertise higher rates than dish and others since their costs are so much different in different markets, and they want to be able to offer certain price points. Its all about marketing, not at all about profit directly. strictly indirectly.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> I disagree with the notion that the rsn fee is just to make money. Completely. Its to try and balance the pricing they advertise nationally with each region instead of having to advertise higher rates than dish and others since their costs are so much different in different markets, and they want to be able to offer certain price points. Its all about marketing, not at all about profit directly. strictly indirectly.


My point was that Dish has similar expenses to DirecTV. They have to pay the same RSN fees to the local teams / affiliates. Why can they do everything DirecTV can do, but for $30/mo cheaper? I can assure you that DirecTV is not giving out service for below cost to us DBSTalkers. If they are willing to knock $30/mo off your bill just like that and that's actually what Dish is charging, then there is plenty of more profit in the monthly bill.

Yeah, they're a business and they are supposed to make $$$, but people are dropping packages and TVs, so the tipping point is getting close.

Wasn't the last quarter only good because of a build up in, I want to say Mexico?

EDIT: Yup... checked it out... all the growth is now on LatAm. They actually lost 22,000 subs in the first half of 2014. Yup... lets keep raising fees . Dish actually added 40,000 subs in the same time frame .


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> My point was that Dish has similar expenses to DirecTV. They have to pay the same RSN fees to the local teams / affiliates. Why can they do everything DirecTV can do, but for $30/mo cheaper? I can assure you that DirecTV is not giving out service for below cost to us DBSTalkers. If they are willing to knock $30/mo off your bill just like that and that's actually what Dish is charging, then there is plenty of more profit in the monthly bill.
> 
> Yeah, they're a business and they are supposed to make $$$, but people are dropping packages and TVs, so the tipping point is getting close.
> 
> ...


Awh, but they don't pay anywhere NEAR the RSN fess Directv does. They are missing many of the most expensive ones in the biggest tow markets, including all the new york ones and the Lakers one here in LA. They are missing more in a few other markets to I think...

Yes the difference is big, but I have a feeling Directv has a bit high rates than dish does in some instances for other reasons... The wording of ESPN is differnt betwen DIsh and Directv. Directv seems to have picked up more games and channels than DIsh did with the espn3 channel that is evidently coming in some form. It will be interested to see if Dish gets that too. My point is Directv does have some things DIsh seems to not that I am sure will cost them some more. Granted DIsh has a few that DIrectv doesn;t but they are much smaller. The problem is in gauging how much a difference there is...

Plus, Sunday ticket costs a boat load.

As for where they are adding, well, yeah, the US is a stable market anymore, not really much to add lately for any carrier.


----------



## longrider (Apr 21, 2007)

I see the RSN fee as having two purposes. One, for a company like DirecTV with national marketing it allows them to charge different rates in different markets to reflect costs. Two, it helps show customers how much sports is affecting their bill. Service providers realize they are between a rock and a hard place in that customers are reaching their limit on what they will pay but the content providers force the issue with pricing and bundling requirements. It is going to be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few years.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> They're raising rates even higher than normal because the programming costs are increasing for them not only for national networks, but also for RSNs on a more local/regional basis.


Isn't that what the separate RSN fee is for?


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

SledgeHammer said:


> Umm... actually, that's *EXACTLY *why it was invented. That's kind of the definition of the word "fee". Yes, there are increased costs involved, but DirecTV simply passes them along to the customer. DirecTV has a few million more subs then Dish, so costs should be fairly similar (programming fees). How come Dish can beat DirecTV costs by $30/mo? How come DirecTV can knock $30/mo off your bill without breaking a sweat? DirecTV charges more soley for the purpose of making more profit LOL. Even if they ate a $5 RSN fee for all customers, they'd still be significantly more $$$ then Dish.
> 
> Proof speaks for itself. Lots of people in this thread and others are downgrading packages and dropping TVs because the cost has gotten too high.


RSNs are channels with expensive rights to carry local sports. The expense of carrying those rights is passed to the service providers who pass the cost on to the customers. It's the nature of any business. The only channels that are a necessity are local channels, local government channels, and news channels. The rest are a "luxury" and as I posted on another thread luxury is always expensive,


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> Awh, but they don't pay anywhere NEAR the RSN fess Directv does. They are missing many of the most expensive ones in the biggest tow markets, including all the new york ones and the Lakers one here in LA. They are missing more in a few other markets to I think...
> 
> Yes the difference is big, but I have a feeling Directv has a bit high rates than dish does in some instances for other reasons... The wording of ESPN is differnt betwen DIsh and Directv. Directv seems to have picked up more games and channels than DIsh did with the espn3 channel that is evidently coming in some form. It will be interested to see if Dish gets that too. My point is Directv does have some things DIsh seems to not that I am sure will cost them some more. Granted DIsh has a few that DIrectv doesn;t but they are much smaller. The problem is in gauging how much a difference there is...
> 
> ...


They have PLENTY to add. They can theoretically take customers from Dish, TWC, Cox, etc. They are not limited like a wired cable provider. They can have every household in the world.

If having a ton of sports adds $30/mo to your bill, I'm sure many, many, many folks who don't watch sports and could care less would LOVE to have a less sports centric package. DirecTV does have that in the entertainment package, but that package is such a joke, they leave out all the popular non-sports channels which was kinda the whole point of having a non sports package.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

SledgeHammer said:


> They have PLENTY to add. They can theoretically take customers from Dish, TWC, Cox, etc. They are not limited like a wired cable provider. They can have every household in the world.
> 
> If having a ton of sports adds $30/mo to your bill, I'm sure many, many, many folks who don't watch sports and could care less would LOVE to have a less sports centric package. DirecTV does have that in the entertainment package, but that package is such a joke, they leave out all the popular non-sports channels which was kinda the whole point of having a non sports package.


You keep throwing out how DIRECTV is $30/month more expensive then Dish. Can you please provide details on how you came up with that number?

I ask since I went to the Dish site and DIRECTV site and did some pricing, looking at the non-discounted/promotional pricing for both companies. On Dish I selected America Top 250 and 6 TV's and it said my pricing would be $139.99 per month. On DIRECTV I selected Ultimate and again 6 TV's and their mouthing pricing shows $132.99.

Do I agree with you that sports channels add a lot to the costs, hell yea and frankly I'd be happy if I could drop all the channels in the 600 range on DIRECTV and get a bill credit, but unless there's a major change on how these channels are negotiated that's not happening.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

SledgeHammer said:


> They have PLENTY to add. They can theoretically take customers from Dish, TWC, Cox, etc. They are not limited like a wired cable provider. They can have every household in the world.
> 
> If having a ton of sports adds $30/mo to your bill, I'm sure many, many, many folks who don't watch sports and could care less would LOVE to have a less sports centric package. DirecTV does have that in the entertainment package, but that package is such a joke, they leave out all the popular non-sports channels which was kinda the whole point of having a non sports package.


Dish's packages without sports channels are exactly the same way. As are cable packages without sports channels. No one has a package that carries the Disney channels but not ESPN, because Disney won't give that to anyone.

That's made all the more obvious by Dish's Sling TV package. That includes ESPN, when the reason many people have cut the cord is specifically to avoid paying for sports they don't watch. But if they wanted to include Disney and ABC Family they had to take ESPN. If they'd been allowed to drop ESPN/ESPN2 and TNT but keep the rest they could have offered it for $10/month instead of $20 (based on SNL Kagan's numbers showing ESPN costing providers over $6/month, and ESPN2 and TNT adding over $2 more) That would have been a far more attractive package for cord cutters or "cord nevers" than what Dish is actually offering, but they can't offer it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

RAD said:


> I ask since I went to the Dish site and DIRECTV site and did some pricing, looking at the non-discounted/promotional pricing for both companies. On Dish I selected America Top 250 and 6 TV's and it said my pricing would be $139.99 per month. On DIRECTV I selected Ultimate and again 6 TV's and their mouthing pricing shows $132.99.


I too doubt that the difference is that great for most.

Your pricing equality surely lies in setting the TV count to above average. It is notable that DIRECTV doesn't figure in the RSN fee (where applicable) nor do they account for the TV fee going up within a few weeks.

The difference in ARPU figures from Q4 was $26.29 so the average US DIRECTV customer is paying considerably more.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

harsh said:


> The difference in ARPU figures from Q4 was $26.29 so the average US DIRECTV customer is paying considerably more.


Since we have no idea what the average programming package is between the two services that really doesn't mean anything in a discussion about price differences between the services.


----------



## longrider (Apr 21, 2007)

harsh said:


> I too doubt that the difference is that great for most.
> 
> Your pricing equality surely lies in setting the TV count to above average. It is notable that DIRECTV doesn't figure in the RSN fee (where applicable) nor do they account for the TV fee going up within a few weeks.
> 
> The difference in ARPU figures from Q4 was $26.29 so the average US DIRECTV customer is paying considerably more.


ARPU is not a valid comparison, DirecTV has always targeted higher level customers than Dish so of course ARPU will be higher. I did a comparison myself but at a lower package and TV count than RAD and came up with the same result. The difference is just a few dollars


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

RAD said:


> Since we have no idea what the average programming package is between the two services that really doesn't mean anything in a discussion about price differences between the services.


Whether the offering is more valuable or their nickel and diming you to keep their profit levels at industry highs, you're likely to spend considerably more with DIRECTV.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

harsh said:


> Whether the offering is more valuable or their nickel and diming you to keep their profit levels at industry highs, you're likely to spend considerably more with DIRECTV.


"Profits at industry highs?" There are only two competitors in the DBS industry in the US. Somehow I suspect if Dish had higher profit you would be claiming that is because Charlie is a better businessman, and Directv is poorly run.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> "Profits at industry highs?" There are only two competitors in the DBS industry in the US. Somehow I suspect if Dish had higher profit you would be claiming that is because Charlie is a better businessman, and Directv is poorly run.


I speak of the industry of Multichannel Video Programming Distributors (MVPDs). That covers DBS, cable and some telephone companies.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> They have PLENTY to add. They can theoretically take customers from Dish, TWC, Cox, etc. They are not limited like a wired cable provider. They can have every household in the world.
> 
> If having a ton of sports adds $30/mo to your bill, I'm sure many, many, many folks who don't watch sports and could care less would LOVE to have a less sports centric package. DirecTV does have that in the entertainment package, but that package is such a joke, they leave out all the popular non-sports channels which was kinda the whole point of having a non sports package.


While technically possible logically and mathematically they won't ever get ever customer. No one will. Things are pretty well balanced out right now.

And some of that is to do simply that they don't carry every single service. Pac12 for example. Philly is another. Just like plenty would never get dish in New York.

So they set up their system with channels and packages and market to certain demos and markets and they seem to be mostly maximizing what they are after.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

harsh said:


> I speak of the industry of Multichannel Video Programming Distributors (MVPDs). That covers DBS, cable and some telephone companies.


Where do you see the profits for Comcast, Verizon, TWC, etc. broken out to cover only their TV and lumped in with their internet business, networks they own, etc?

With the bundling everyone else does it is hard to even properly account for it. If you sell a particular TV package for $100 and a particular internet package for $50 but sell them for $120 bundled, does the TV side get credited for $70, $100, $85 or what? The company can allocate that however they wish, but the effect on the profitability of that division varies widely.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

harsh said:


> Whether the offering is more valuable or their nickel and diming you to keep their profit levels at industry highs, you're likely to spend considerably more with DIRECTV.


Of course that you spend a few dollars more with DIRECTV®. This tiny extra expense comes with a service that is committed to NOT drop channels as if there is no tomorrow!


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> I too doubt that the difference is that great for most.
> 
> Your pricing equality surely lies in setting the TV count to above average. It is notable that DIRECTV doesn't figure in the RSN fee (where applicable) nor do they account for the TV fee going up within a few weeks.
> 
> The difference in ARPU figures from Q4 was $26.29 so the average US DIRECTV customer is paying considerably more.


It was about a $30 difference when I checked about 2 to 3 weeks ago for a single TV setup on the Top 200 / Hopper vs. Choice Xtra Classic with HD and DVR. This is of course with all discounts from both sides removed. I rechecked today just for the sake of discussion and it was closer to $20 +/- a few bucks *today*. I think DISH raised prices on thier web site a bit while I haven't seen the new DirecTV pricing, but I do know that my package is going up ~$4, not sure about the RSN yet. Plus, I would theoretically need to add another $3/mo to get WHDVR so the DVR functionality is "equivalent". I have the HR24 now with no WHDVR. Remember, DISH doesn't charge for HD, so the DVR is less then half what DirecTV charges. Plus DISH doesn't have an RSN where-as my DirecTV RSN is pretty high ($3.63 before the increase).


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Here is a side by side comparison of both providers "top" offer for new customers

Click for large view - Uploaded with Skitch

The different is a mere $7.00 but at least with DIRECTV® you can almost bet your channels droppings with be kept to a minimum, not an every day thing a la Dish Network


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

peds48 said:


> Here is a side by side comparison of both providers "top" offer for new customers
> 
> Click for large view - Uploaded with Skitch
> 
> The different is a mere $7.00 but at least with DIRECTV® you can almost bet your channels droppings with be kept to a minimum, not an every day thing a la Dish Network


Remember the Dish AEP package does not include the extra RSN channels which are included in Premier, so if you add those channels I think we're even.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> Here is a side by side comparison of both providers "top" offer for new customers
> 
> Click for large view - Uploaded with Skitch
> 
> The different is a mere $7.00 but at least with DIRECTV® you can almost bet your channels droppings with be kept to a minimum, not an every day thing a la Dish Network


Why are you comparing bills with intro discounts?

I wouldn't really compare the discounts (as those are only for a year -- and I specifically said I took those off to get "real world" pricing). So its more like $138.99 DISH vs. $129.99 + $3.63 + $21 = $154.62... which is a ~ $24 difference, not $7.

Also (and this part I'm not sure about), why is your DVR fee only $15? When you get the premiere package, is HD included? Cuz normally the advanced receiver fee is $25 which would make the difference even worse ~ $34.

I took off all discounts from both sides as I specifically was talking about the posted prices and have been since day one. I have always stated it is possible to get ~ $30 knocked off your bill after you meet certain criteria, so with that $30 taken off, you are equal to DISH which I have also said repeatedly "If DirecTV wasn't matching DISH, I would jump ship in a second".

One other point I'm not sure about, is what qualifies you for the $30 discount. I know you are eligible for the bundling discount from day 1, but I doubt they'll knock off the other $25 after only a year. But I could be wrong...


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> Why are you comparing bills with intro discounts?
> 
> I wouldn't really compare the discounts (as those are only for a year -- and I specifically said I took those off). So its more like $138.99 DISH vs. $129.99 + $3.63 + $21 = $154.62... which is a ~ $24 difference, not $7.
> 
> Also (and this part I'm not sure about), why is your DVR fee only $15? When you get the premiere package, is HD included? Cuz normally the advanced receiver fee is $25 which would make the difference even worse. $34.


funny how you add fees to DirecTV but not dish. You are forgetting the hopper fee of $12., plus another fee which I forgot the name

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Why are you comparing bills with intro discounts?
> 
> I wouldn't really compare the discounts (as those are only for a year -- and I specifically said I took those off). So its more like $138.99 DISH vs. $129.99 + $3.63 + $21 = $154.62... which is a ~ $24 difference, not $7.
> 
> Also (and this part I'm not sure about), why is your DVR fee only $15? When you get the premiere package, is HD included? Cuz normally the advanced receiver fee is $25 which would make the difference even worse. $34.


New customers on DirecTV pay the $15 fee, not the $25. However they do pay for the primary receiver.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

RAD said:


> Remember the Dish AEP package does not include the extra RSN channels which are included in Premier, so if you add those channels I think we're even.


Pretty close. After the 2015 Price Increase DirecTV will be $136.99 base price for Premier, DISH will be $131.99 for AEP +11 for Multisport is $142.99. Beyond that the difference comes down to receivers. DISH has HD free for life (old customer or new) with no fee for the first receiver. $6.50 DirecTV receivers vs $7 DISH Joey or $10 2nd Hopper. All sorts of fees to add on (DVR, Whole Home, RSN).

I am sure one could construct a package that would make DISH look cheaper or DirecTV look cheaper. The companies are fairly close.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

James Long said:


> Pretty close. After the 2015 Price Increase DirecTV will be $136.99 base price for Premier, DISH will be $131.99 for AEP +11 for Multisport is $142.99. Beyond that the difference comes down to receivers. DISH has HD free for life (old customer or new) with no fee for the first receiver. $6.50 DirecTV receivers vs $7 DISH Joey or $10 2nd Hopper. All sorts of fees to add on (DVR, Whole Home, RSN).
> 
> I am sure one could construct a package that would make DISH look cheaper or DirecTV look cheaper. *The companies are fairly close*.


Awesome, UNBIASED comparison! Could not understand where that $30.00 difference came from.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

peds48 said:


> Could not understand where that $30.00 difference came from.


The "$30" comes from what the average DISH and average DirecTV subscriber buys.
Not everyone buys AEP or Premier. There are plenty of people subscribing to AT120 or Entertainment.

In both cases the average subscriber's bill is less than the base price the top level package.
DirecTV just manages to sell more to their subscribers ... higher tiers and more add ons.
The price is not much different ... what is sold is different.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> funny how you add fees to DirecTV but not dish. You are forgetting the hopper fee of $12., plus another fee which I forgot the name
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I included the hopper fee. But sorry, you are right, minor math snafu though LOL... diff is $15.63 based on your screenshots. My bad. That's what I get for wanting to go home LOL.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> I included the hopper fee. But sorry, you are right, minor math snafu though LOL... diff is $15.63 based on your screenshots. My bad. That's what I get for wanting to go home LOL.


Apologies accepted... !rolling !rolling


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

peds48 said:


> Apologies accepted... !rolling !rolling


Well, it wasn't $7 either !rolling !rolling.


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

James Long said:


> $7 DISH Joey or $10 2nd Hopper.


Just a minor correction here, it is $7 for a Joey, but it's $10 for a SuperJoey and $12 for a 2nd Hopper.


----------



## mrdobolina (Aug 28, 2006)

The point is, as James Long stated, that either company can be cheaper or more expensive. It all depends on what any customer may want. Whichever provider suits your particular needs/wants and budget is the one you should go with. 

I personally would most likely ever move to DISH. For one thing, I've been with DIRECTV for so long and know where everything is channelwise and how to operate and troubleshoot their technology. Another thing is that every time I've interacted with DISH equipment I've had a terrible experience, probably because I am so used to my setup. If I ever did leave DIRECTV it would most likely be for Comcast for the savings with bundling in my Internet. Even then, though, the savings would only last a year, maybe two. I know plenty of people near me that pay way more for Comcast TV and internet now that their deal has expired than I pay for full price DIRECTV and full price Comcast internet 20gb service.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

mrdobolina said:


> The point is, as James Long stated, that either company can be cheaper or more expensive. It all depends on what any customer may want. Whichever provider suits your particular needs/wants and budget is the one you should go with.
> 
> I personally would most likely ever move to DISH. For one thing, I've been with DIRECTV for so long and know where everything is channelwise and how to operate and troubleshoot their technology. Another thing is that every time I've interacted with DISH equipment I've had a terrible experience, probably because I am so used to my setup. If I ever did leave DIRECTV it would most likely be for Comcast for the savings with bundling in my Internet. Even then, though, the savings would only last a year, maybe two. I know plenty of people near me that pay way more for Comcast TV and internet now that their deal has expired than I pay for full price DIRECTV and full price Comcast internet 20gb service.


One thing to keep in mind, the UI is very different across boxes. I can't stand my brother-in-law's DVR, but I have been told that it is nothing compared to a Hopper in the UI.


----------



## phodg (Jan 20, 2007)

Got my new bill today. 3 receivers and Premier for me went from $161 to $171. I think I'm going to have to rethink my TV choices. I've just been too lazy to do it before, but this might make me finally get off my ass.


----------



## Oli74 (Nov 19, 2014)

phodg said:


> Got my new bill today. 3 receivers and Premier for me went from $161 to $171. I think I'm going to have to rethink my TV choices. I've just been too lazy to do it before, but this might make me finally get off my ass.


Same here my bill went up to $171 and change so I called them and got some discounts now back down to about 141 and change. Loyal customers discount and others you should call them

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cmasia (Sep 18, 2007)

Last week I called to get a discount on MLBEI as Dodger games are blacked out in my area, 275 miles from Dodger Stadium.
Last year they gave me $60 off.

They ended up giving me $210 over the next 12 months through a combination of package discounts.

If you've been spending over $150 per month, and you DON'T call and ask for a discount, you're missing out.

Should we have to call in to get something? In a perfect world, no.

But DirecTV has worked like this as long as I've been a subscriber.


----------



## Oli74 (Nov 19, 2014)

cmasia said:


> Last week I called to get a discount on MLBEI as Dodger games are blacked out in my area, 275 miles from Dodger Stadium.
> Last year they gave me $60 off.
> 
> They ended up giving me $210 over the next 12 months through a combination of package discounts.
> ...


It does help to be a loyal customer. Anyone over 5 years with the same satellite tv provider should get some kinda discounts

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

cmasia said:


> If you've been spending over $150 per month, and you DON'T call and ask for a discount, you're missing out.
> 
> Should we have to call in to get something? In a perfect world, no.
> 
> But DirecTV has worked like this as long as I've been a subscriber.


While this works for most people, it doesn't work 100% of the time. I spend over $150/month and called in when my discounts expired. The only offer I got was to lower my programming package. And that was after three calls to retention. lol.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

I have never called to ask for discounts but twice DirecTV has called me to offer a discount. I'm currently receiving a $20/month discount with no strings attached.


----------



## thomas_d92 (Nov 29, 2004)

I switched to Dish because of the fees Directv was charging. I have one 211 with dvr upgrade. I run 6 tv's with this one box. I have no dvr, hd or multiple receiver fees. I am paying only for programing I l;ive alone so no need for a second box. I can only watch one tv at a time. I could not do this with Directv.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Well actually you can split a signal from any provider to six tvs. And if you had Hi Definition you could have done it with Hi Definition. But the DVR fee is not something you can get around with DIRECTV.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> But the DVR fee is not something you can get around with DIRECTV.


Maybe. I was looking at newest the Lease Addendum and it appears that the ARS fee only applies now to Genies only and dual DVRs would be the same as an HD receiver. Perhaps one of the CSRs that hangs on here can confirm


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

peds48 said:


> Maybe. I was looking at newest the Lease Addendum and it appears that the ARS fee only applies now to Genies only and dual DVRs would be the same as an HD receiver. Perhaps one of the CSRs that hangs on here can confirm


What other DVRs does DIRECTV lease to new customers these days?

We know from the online applet that they charge the ARS fee for HR2x but it isn't expressly mentioned in the ELA except as it applies to the THR22.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The disclaimer on the online sales app says:
"All equipment is leased. Advanced Receiver Service ($15/mo). A monthly fee of $6.50 applies for each receiver and/or Genie Mini/DIRECTV-ready TV/Device on your account. Minimum 2-room set up required for free Genie upgrade offer."

This disclaimer is on both the section with the Genie and the "HD DVR" section, and $21.50 is added if the HD DVR is added.

I would count on paying $15 if one chooses the HD DVR or the Genie.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

James Long said:


> The disclaimer on the online sales app says:
> "All equipment is leased. Advanced Receiver Service ($15/mo). A monthly fee of $6.50 applies for each receiver and/or Genie Mini/DIRECTV-ready TV/Device on your account. Minimum 2-room set up required for free Genie upgrade offer."
> 
> This disclaimer is on both the section with the Genie and the "HD DVR" section, and $21.50 is added if the HD DVR is added.
> ...


That sounds about right and what I always thought. The Lease Addendum makes it sound a bit confusing


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

peds48 said:


> The Lease Addendum makes it sound a bit confusing


At least they've managed to get rid of all of the "up to" references that might have given hope that the fee could be reduced or removed.


----------



## lokar (Oct 8, 2006)

You guys are confusing me, I have one HR20 and a currently suspended account. When I reactivate, I am going to be paying $15 DVR fee plus $10 HD fee? The $20 HD + DVR fee was ridiculous enough. Will I still get the $6.50 charge and credit back for my first (and only) receiver? Exactly how much plus the listed package price will I be paying every month?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

lokar said:


> You guys are confusing me, I have one HR20 and a currently suspended account. When I reactivate, I am going to be paying $15 DVR fee plus $10 HD fee? The $20 HD + DVR fee was ridiculous enough. Will I still get the $6.50 charge and credit back for my first (and only) receiver? Exactly how much plus the listed package price will I be paying every month?


It depends on what tier you get when you re enable your service. If they put you in the new tier, you will pay $15 plus the $6.50 outlet fee. If the put you on the old tier, it could be $10 HD + $10 DVR with no outlet fee (it gets credit it back)


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

peds48 said:


> That sounds about right and what I always thought. The Lease Addendum makes it sound a bit confusing


So you are paying $15 any DVR?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

lokar said:


> You guys are confusing me, I have one HR20 and a currently suspended account. When I reactivate, I am going to be paying $15 DVR fee plus $10 HD fee?


The DVR fee was never $15. The highest fee was the early ARS fee for $25 that included HD, DVR and WHDS. It didn't matter that you couldn't effectively use WHDS, you still had to pay the fee. Old timers pay $10 ARS DVR plus a $10 ARS HD fee.

The latest fee schedule has someone with your configuration paying a $15 ARS fee (DVR, WHDS) and a $6.50 TV fee so it would only be a dollar more than the old way per month.

What they do when you come out of suspension is likely of great interest to others and the only way you'll know for sure is when it happens.

Remember that if you were under a programming commitment before you suspended, the commitment countdown clock was halted as well and won't restart until the end of the suspension.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

damondlt said:


> So you are paying $15 any DVR?


This is an odd question of someone who, IIRC, doesn't pay for DIRECTV service.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

peds48 said:


> It depends on what tier you get when you re enable your service. If they put you in the new tier, you will pay $15 plus the $6.50 outlet fee. If the put you on the old tier, it could be $10 HD + $10 DVR with no outlet fee (it gets credit it back)


I don't believe suspending an account changes it in any way. When he resumes his service he should have the same $10 fee for HD and $10 fee for DVR service, $20 total, and his first receiver should be free (or charged and then credited back if they do it that way to tax it like they do for some).

Suspending his account and then turning it back on doesn't give him a new account number, or make him a new subscriber, so he shouldn't be changed to the new subscriber pricing methodology.

All that said, the new pricing methodology isn't all that bad, and I wouldn't be suprised if they eventually switch everyone over to it. A lot of people's bills would actually be a little bit cheaper if they did. The only customers that would see a bill increase are SD customers, or people who have HD-DVRs but not whole home DVR service.

Currently old customers pay $10 for HD, $10 for DVR, and $3 for Whole home for a total of $23 (first receiver free).
Slightly newer customers pay $25 for HD, DVR, and Whole Home (first receiver free).
New customers pay $15 for HD, DVR, and Whole Home (whether they use it or not) and pay $6.50 for the first receiver for a total of $21.50.

So many older customers could save $1.50 or $3.50 per month switching to the new system. Older customers without Whole Home DVR service would see their bill go up by $1.50 which isn't that big of a deal. Old customers without HD or DVR service (or both) would see their bills increase anywhere from $11.50 to $21.50, they are the ones that would be getting screwed.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

harsh said:


> The DVR fee was never $15. The highest fee was the early ARS fee for $25 that included HD, DVR and WHDS. It didn't matter that you couldn't effectively use WHDS, you still had to pay the fee. Old timers pay $10 ARS DVR plus a $10 ARS HD fee.
> 
> The latest fee schedule has someone with your configuration paying a $15 ARS fee (DVR, WHDS) and a $6.50 TV fee so it would only be a dollar more than the old way per month.
> 
> ...


Again you are wrong. The DVR fee has been $15 for three years or more now. There also hasn't been a mrv fee in three years either. So stop saying that too. And the fee was 25 only if you had hd too. Stop sending out bad info.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> The DVR fee has been $15 for three years or more now.


https://support.directv.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3267/related/1



DIRECTV Advanced Receiver Service-DVR said:


> By selecting a DVR or an HD DVR receiver, you'll automatically be enrolled in Advanced Receiver Service-DVR. The cost of this service is $10.00/month, no matter how many DVR receivers you select.


Do you not have ARS-HD, ARS-DVR and WHDS charges on your bill?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

If hd service costs 10 a month and the total is 25 with hd and dvr included how much is dvr fee?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> If hd service costs 10 a month and the total is 25 with hd and dvr included how much is dvr fee?


$10 as my previous message spoke to. You silently omitted the WHDS component in your "word problem".

In DIRECTV's description of ARS, they combine DVR and WHDS (the first bullet item) with HD Service (the second bullet item).



DIRECTV Advanced Receiver Service said:


> Whole-Home DVR: The ability to record and watch shows in any room, with one HD DVR. (Requires a Genie® HD DVR and one Genie Mini for each additional TV, or a DIRECTV Plus HD DVR and an HD receiver for each additional TV)
> Access to HD programming
> Thousands shows and movies On Demand
> Live TV on your tablet or mobile device anywhere in your home
> ...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

harsh said:


> $10 as my previous message spoke to. You silently omitted the WHDS component in your "word problem".
> 
> In DIRECTV's description of ARS, they combine DVR and WHDS (the first bullet item) with HD Service (the second bullet item).


There has not been a separate line item for new customers for mrv service in three years. Stop saying there has been one because there hasn't been one.

You just hate to admit/type you are wrong, probably because if you did the repetition of typing that would ware out the keys on your keyboard.

But let me repeat one last time. No new customers as of three years ago have ever or will ever be charged for mrv as a separate line item. They got rid of that entire fee.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

We are on the old $10 HD fee and $10 DVR fee and the first Receiver fee is free. So with the new pricing its $15 for the Advanced DVR fee and now they charge for the first receiver fee and Whole Home DVR is included? If so its $1.50 more to include the Whole Home DVR? If so would old customers be able to get that plan with just regular HD DVR's and not the Genie? Also do all the Receivers and HD DVR's need to be connected to the internet for Whole Home DVR to work or can it just work through the coax? Thanks.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

DVR is $10
HD Access is $10
WHDVR is $3

ARS $25 with credit for primary receiver
ARS $15 without credit for primary receiver 
ARS Includes HD, DVR and WHDVR services.

The fee structure you're on is based on when the account was originally activated. At this point you cannot select to change which fee structure you are on.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

CraigerM said:


> Also do all the Receivers and HD DVR's need to be connected to the internet for Whole Home DVR to work or can it just work through the coax? Thanks.


Internet connection is not required for Whole-Home. The receivers use DECA for networking purposes


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Shades228 said:


> The fee structure you're on is based on when the account was originally activated. At this point you cannot select to change which fee structure you are on.


A question remains: what account-level events, if any, might cause a subscriber to transition from an older package or fee structure to a current package and/or the new fee structure.


----------



## longrider (Apr 21, 2007)

harsh said:


> A question remains: what account-level events, if any, might cause a subscriber to transition from an older package or fee structure to a current package and/or the new fee structure.


If you already have all the services nothing changes it. The price difference is insignificant. The only thing I dont know is if you are a legacy customer with just HD service and you add DVR do you pay the individual fees or do you get changed to ARS?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> A question remains: what account-level events, if any, might cause a subscriber to transition from an older package or fee structure to a current package and/or the new fee structure.


Once someone is transitioned from the old rates to the new I hope that they report it here. It has been seven months ... if there were transitions going on I suspect we would hear about them.

It is a good questions for DirecTV subscribers. Have you transitioned between a old price plan (first receiver credited) and a new price plan (first receiver charged)? No speculation needed ... just reports.



longrider said:


> The only thing I dont know is if you are a legacy customer with just HD service and you add DVR do you pay the individual fees or do you get changed to ARS?


A good question for someone who has done that. Has anyone reading added a DVR to an account that previously did not have one? If so, what monthly charges did you end up with?

Data collection beats speculation ... so hopefully a few subscribers who have had subscription changing events will chime in.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

There were some people earlier in this thread who said they dropped to a lower level package due to the price increases, and none reported that they started getting charged for the first receiver (or that their HD fee went away)


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

inkahauts said:


> There has not been a separate line item for new customers for mrv service in three years. Stop saying there has been one because there hasn't been one.
> 
> You just hate to admit/type you are wrong, probably because if you did the repetition of typing that would ware out the keys on your keyboard.
> 
> But let me repeat one last time. No new customers as of three years ago have ever or will ever be charged for mrv as a separate line item. They got rid of that entire fee.


I signed up in August 2012 with an HR24, H25 and two D-12s. I've never had anything different than the $25 ARS fee.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

harsh said:


> A question remains: what account-level events, if any, might cause a subscriber to transition from an older package or fee structure to a current package and/or the new fee structure.


The only account level event, at this time, which would impact it would be to disconnect and be gone for 2 years resulting in a new account which would have a new original activation date.



James Long said:


> Once someone is transitioned from the old rates to the new I hope that they report it here. It has been seven months ... if there were transitions going on I suspect we would hear about them.
> 
> It is a good questions for DirecTV subscribers. Have you transitioned between a old price plan (first receiver credited) and a new price plan (first receiver charged)? No speculation needed ... just reports.
> 
> ...


As I stated above there is nothing that can be done to select which fee structure at this time which includes but not limited to changing packages, ordering new equipment, moving, disconnecting and reconnecting.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

The only one I can think of is if it is a long term standard def customer updating to HD with DVR. Would they get the separate HD, DVR, MRV fees for $23 total, the $25 ARS fee, or the $15 ARS fee with a charge for first receiver? My guess is the separate fees totaling $23 but I'm not sure.

But I agree, I don't think there is any way for a customer with the separate fees totalling $25, or the $25 ARS fee to switch to the newer $15 ARS fee.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

mrknowitall526 said:


> I signed up in August 2012 with an HR24, H25 and two D-12s. I've never had anything different than the $25 ARS fee.


May 2012 It was $20. 
That price was honored until May 2013 during the Increase for new customers when it went to $25, Existing customers that signed up when the Fee was $20 and while under contract during the increase got a $2 discount for the remainder of their 24 month commitment.

It was tricky I signed up in May 2012, Was paying $20, that was the Advanced receiver fee for a Genie. 
Then came the $5 increase.
I'm fairly sure that wasn't until February 2013 but it may have been During summer of 2012.

So they kept me at $20 for year 1,and $23 for year 2.


----------



## minimonster17 (Dec 20, 2014)

Beerstalker said:


> The only one I can think of is if it is a long term standard def customer updating to HD with DVR. Would they get the separate HD, DVR, MRV fees for $23 total, the $25 ARS fee, or the $15 ARS fee with a charge for first receiver? My guess is the separate fees totaling $23 but I'm not sure.
> 
> But I agree, I don't think there is any way for a customer with the separate fees totalling $25, or the $25 ARS fee to switch to the newer $15 ARS fee.


i fit your scenario exactly. i recently upgraded within the past month and a half from 3 years SD to HD w/ DVR. I wound up now paying the $25 extra a month. no programming changes were made at time of upgrade.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

damondlt said:


> May 2012 It was $20.
> That price was honored until May 2013 during the Increase for new customers when it went to $25, Existing customers that signed up when the Fee was $20 and while under contract during the increase got a $2 discount for the remainder of their 24 month commitment.
> 
> It was tricky I signed up in May 2012, Was paying $20, that was the Advanced receiver fee for a Genie.
> ...


Oh, you're right. I do remember something about getting a credit for the advanced receiver fee. In fact now that I think about it, I think I was getting a $15 credit? Does that seem right at all? No, I don't think so! But I remember the bill going up by a LOT when it expired. Maybe it was part of my Verizon bundle.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

minimonster17 said:


> i fit your scenario exactly. i recently upgraded within the past month and a half from 3 years SD to HD w/ DVR. I wound up now paying the $25 extra a month. no programming changes were made at time of upgrade.


This is consistent with having subscribed between February 9, 2012 and July 23rd, 2014.

Thank you for your data point.


----------



## bills976 (Jun 30, 2002)

Holy crap, I just got my first bill under the new rates:

TC: $72.99
HD Fee: $10
DVR Fee: $10
RSN Fee: $5.64
Taxes: $1.34

Total: $99.97

So basically $100 for tv on a single outlet, with HD/DVR service, on a mid-tier programming package. This might be the straw that breaks the camel's back...


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

I got the new bill today with the RSN fee and the added price of the package and the receiver.
My bill is up $9.?? per month.


----------



## crkeehn (Apr 23, 2002)

I haven't received my formal bill yet, however the amount due is on the website. I'm looking at about a $5 increase from last year. That's with two televisions, Choice xtra classic and two dvrs. No RSN fee.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Oddly, when I check my zip with Directv I see no RSN fee. But my cable company is charging me over $2 for a RSN fee, and nearly $5 for a locals fee. I'm at $87 for Mediacom and that's with expanded basic - no sports, digital or movie tiers and paying only $1.99/month for a cable card for my Tivo. If I was getting the cable company DVR I'd be over $100 with my rather minimal package and a single TV!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Holy crap, Mediacom sounds expensive.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Holy crap, Mediacom sounds expensive.


Mediacom's retail pricing certainly is expensive, but just like Dish and Direct, you can call and get deals and discounts along the way. I've just signed up with them and got their Family Plus which is pretty much most of channels I will watch, the Sports & Info digital pack, HBO/SHO, 50/5 internet for $125/month with no contract. Add in about $13/month for my Tivo fee and I'm at $138 which is more than $30 less than having Dish/Direct plus the cost of internet only with Mediacom.

They are a bit harder to deal with and that's why I didn't want a contract.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

lparsons21 said:


> Mediacom's retail pricing certainly is expensive, but just like Dish and Direct, you can call and get deals and discounts along the way. I've just signed up with them and got their Family Plus which is pretty much most of channels I will watch, the Sports & Info digital pack, HBO/SHO, 50/5 internet for $125/month with no contract. Add in about $13/month for my Tivo fee and I'm at $138 which is more than $30 less than having Dish/Direct plus the cost of internet only with Mediacom.
> 
> They are a bit harder to deal with and that's why I didn't want a contract.


Mediacom is always ready to give you discounts if you spend MORE, i.e. they'll give you premium packages for free for three months in exchange for extending your contract, or give you a bunch of upgrade packages for a year for only $10 extra, or give you a great deal if you add their cable modem and/or phone service. They won't give you squat if you just want to pay less for a simple package like I have, any "deals" I could get require me to spend MORE which is not a deal in my book!

I probably could get a deal if I switched to another provider and they wanted to win me back. Unfortunately I can't play that game, I don't have the option of satellite, I have 80 ft oak trees in my front and back yards, it would require a pretty sizable investment in tree trimming that would more than outweigh any possible savings! Not to mention, seeing what Directv and Dish offer with their substandard DVRs, I'd have a really hard time giving up my Tivo!  I just wish I had a competitor for cable, in the city 30 minutes to the north there are two cable companies, and Mediacom charges less for the same stuff, go figure!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Mediacom is always ready to give you discounts if you spend MORE, i.e. they'll give you premium packages for free for three months in exchange for extending your contract, or give you a bunch of upgrade packages for a year for only $10 extra, or give you a great deal if you add their cable modem and/or phone service. They won't give you squat if you just want to pay less for a simple package like I have, any "deals" I could get require me to spend MORE which is not a deal in my book!
> 
> I probably could get a deal if I switched to another provider and they wanted to win me back. Unfortunately I can't play that game, I don't have the option of satellite, I have 80 ft oak trees in my front and back yards, it would require a pretty sizable investment in tree trimming that would more than outweigh any possible savings! Not to mention, seeing what Directv and Dish offer with their substandard DVRs, I'd have a really hard time giving up my Tivo!  I just wish I had a competitor for cable, in the city 30 minutes to the north there are two cable companies, and Mediacom charges less for the same stuff, go figure!


Try to imagine living about 25 miles or so as the crow flies from NYC and only having one provider that has decent Internet Service. I use Cablevision, for $79 a month I get 100+ down. And that's the only realistic choice I have.

Rich


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

What was the effective date of the rate increases? Just got my Verizon bill for "March" with Directv charges from 2/8 - 3/7 on it. The STB fees increased to $6.50, but my package stayed at $73.99 - I thought it was going to go up to $77.99.

I just checked previous bills and my rate didn't increase from $71.99 to $73.99 until sometime around September or October 2014. What's up with that?

Does Verizon purchase DTV at a discount? Or do they give them some kind of special rate? I'm certainly not complaining, just a bit confused!


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The new rate schedule went into effect on February 5th. I'd expect some sort of correction from Verizon.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

I finally dropped the Premium package today. They gave me three months of HBO, Showtime and Cinemax, so I can happily await the HBO NOW service. I spent a pleasant half hour talking to a CSR from Retention who set me up with that rather than the usual credits to get my monthly fee below $200 a month. 

Rich


----------



## ARKDTVfan (May 19, 2003)

Up to 97.82
DVR, HD and RSN fee
I may call and see if I can get it down to $80


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I wish I could drop down from Xtra, but it's not worth it to lose Golf and DIY. I might be more agressive on dropping HBO once GoT is over, until Westworld comes out.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

Snapshot of my Verizon bill that came today.

It says off to the side "price includes $2 and $2 bundle discounts". Previously my bill used to state $2 bundle discount and a $2 advanced receiver credit, which now aren't listed .... Very odd that the price is still $73.99! This is for 2/8 - 3/7.

When I check online with DTV, since I have bundle billing I can't see the bill. But I can see recent activity, it clearly shows the $77.99.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

mrknowitall526 said:


> Snapshot of my Verizon bill that came today.
> 
> It says off to the side "price includes $2 and $2 bundle discounts". Previously my bill used to state $2 bundle discount and a $2 advanced receiver credit, which now aren't listed .... Very odd that the price is still $73.99! This is for 2/8 - 3/7.
> 
> ...


This sounds right to me. $77.99 on DTV website minus $2 and $2 for bundling DTV = $73.99 on Verizon bill.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

But the two $2 credits have always been there...before the price went up!


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

mrknowitall526 said:


> But the two $2 credits have always been there...before the price went up!


Maybe Verizon is holding your price to a certain date because you are bundled. I would just be happy they have not gone up.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

jimmie57 said:


> Maybe Verizon is holding your price to a certain date because you are bundled. I would just be happy they have not gone up.


Yeah! The receiver fees still went up though.

After the last price increase, it didn't change on my bill until October of last year.


----------

