# Disney launching four High-Def networks...



## Presence (Mar 14, 2004)

...on DirecTV. As someone in that section said, "Let the HD roll." Dish already cannot get a decent sports package to save their life, and you know DirecTV is going to make a big deal about this.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Links to discussion are appreciated!
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=82267

"... by early 2008."
"ABC Family HD, Disney Channel HD, ESPNEWS HD and Toon Disney HD"

As usual the press misreads the press release and reprints a claim that was not made ...
"DirecTV's plan to provide over 100 channels of HD programming this year"

It is capacity, not programming that is planned.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> Dish already cannot get a decent sports package to save their life, and you know DirecTV is going to make a big deal about this.


Maybe they aren't adding the sports channels so that they will have the room for the four channels you mentioned.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

DirecTV does not currently have the capacity yet. I wish folks (including DirecTV) would quit bragging until they actually have the capacity!

Most of the channels (by a wide margin) that DirecTV claims to be pursuing for HD once they have capacity, are channels that don't exist! Some of which won't exist until late 2007 (or in the case of the Disney channels 2008)! Again, I wish folks (including DirecTV) would quit bragging until those HD channels exist!

If and when DirecTV has the capacity AND the new HD channels exist AND DirecTV adds them... then if Dish does not have those same HD channels, that is when it would become appropriate to brag AND I would respond to such messages acknowleding the situation.

Until then, it is all rhetoric.


----------



## mssturgeon (Dec 8, 2004)

James Long said:


> As usual the press misreads the press release and reprints a claim that was not made ...
> "DirecTV's plan to provide over 100 channels of HD programming this year"
> 
> It is capacity, not programming that is planned.


Actually James, they HAVE announced plans for 100 channels of HD programming this year ... and announced CAPACITY for 150 channels.

Here is the relevant press release:
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/2007/01/directv_to_offe.php

- Shane Sturgeon


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I'm still in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp on that one ...


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener....aspx?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y


> In the earnings release, the company reiterated its dedication to HDTV. CEO Chase Carey confirmed "the launch of *up to *100 national HD channels in the second half of this year,"


Up to could be three, or four or 99. They dropped the 100 channel claim soon after they made it and started making the "UP TO" remark in all subsequent comments.


----------



## dei8fan (Feb 13, 2006)

Richard King said:


> http://www.fool.com/investing/gener....aspx?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y
> Up to could be three, or four or 99. They dropped the 100 channel claim soon after they made it and started making the "UP TO" remark in all subsequent comments.


But the question remains..

How long before E* adds some relevant channels to the HD list? RSN's? Regular Season Baseball is fast approaching..

Dennis


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> How long before E* adds some relevant channels to the HD list?


"Relevant" to who? I couldn't care less about RSN's in HD. I'd rather save the bandwidth for other (relevant) channels.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

Relevant to me is more HD movie channels, more like Sci-fi, & more like the Rave channel. So the sports channel you mention are not relevant to me. That doesn't mean that I don't want you to have them but I don't give a rats behind. The other national nets like CW, PBS HD ( I do have it OTA but have some multipath problems I can't eliminate). I don't have any access to MyNetwork or the I (PAX) channel in HD at all. So I sure want E* & D* to get the nets to start rolling out their HD versions. So now you see what is relevant to me.


----------



## HDTVFanAtic (Jul 23, 2005)

mssturgeon said:


> Actually James, they HAVE announced plans for 100 channels of HD programming this year ... and announced CAPACITY for 150 channels.
> 
> Here is the relevant press release:
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/2007/01/directv_to_offe.php
> ...


No, actually Shane, restating what James said, D* announced capacity - not 100 channels.

The press release you note in your url list 16 HD channels - not 100.

If you can supply us with a list from D* totally 100 HD Channels this year - and not capacity - I will gladly admit I am wrong.


----------



## HDTVFanAtic (Jul 23, 2005)

whatchel1 said:


> Relevant to me is more HD movie channels, more like Sci-fi, & more like the Rave channel. So the sports channel you mention are not relevant to me. That doesn't mean that I don't want you to have them but I don't give a rats behind. The other national nets like CW, PBS HD ( I do have it OTA but have some multipath problems I can't eliminate). I don't have any access to MyNetwork or the I (PAX) channel in HD at all. So I sure want E* & D* to get the nets to start rolling out their HD versions. So now you see what is relevant to me.


PAX doesn't have HD Channels - they have choosen to multicast mulitple SD channels instead.

And MyNetwork might have all of 2 hours of HD per night - CW doesn't even have that much - in others words the RSN could clearly have much more HD Content per week than any of those you listed - and I am certainly not a Sports Fan so I could care less about the RSNs.

As proven by MTV's move to long form programming, a Music Channel is very limited in appeal and considering the lack of HD Material, I dont think anyone will commit more channels outside of Rave and MHD in that genre for quite sometime.

EDIT :

EVEN MyNetworkTV has dropped their 2 hours of HD every night:

http://www.tvweek.com/page.cms?pageId=626

MyNet Drops Pure-HD Format
Shift From Soap Operas Brings Standard/HD Mix

Starting this month, MyNetwork will drop its status as the only pure high-definition broadcast network.

MyNet is scaling back its HD telenovelas to only two nights a week, instead opting for movies, ultimate fighting and reality specials that include a mix of HD and standard-definition content.

Monday's International Fight League competitions, for instance, will not be in HD. Telenovelas airing Tuesdays and Wednesdays will continue to be in HD. Thursday and Friday movie nights will sometimes be in the format; for example, an upcoming showing of "The Rundown" is in HD, but "Rocky IV" is not.

Similarly, MyNetwork's recently announced special "Anna Nicole Smith: A Centerfold Exposed" will not be in HD, but an Elton John concert special, "Happy Birthday Elton," will be.

When MyNet launched in September, it impressed the HD purists with its dedication to the format, airing telenovela-style soap operas shot in HD five nights a week. Although the network only had one type of programming, it was still the only pure-HD broadcast network on the air.

MyNetwork's ratings disappointed, however, and recently the network decided to scale back telenovelas to only two nights a week. Last week, MyNetwork President Greg Meidel said his upcoming round of telenovelas will be the network's last, and that MyNet would develop only unscripted content from here on.

Most unscripted broadcast programs, particularly reality shows, are shot in standard definition to keep production costs relatively low. (A few popular franchises such as "American Idol" have embraced the HD format.) Likewise, most recent big-budget theatrical movies are available in HD, but older titles need to be remastered in the format-which adds to the cost.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HDTVFanAtic said:


> No, actually Shane, restating what James said, D* announced capacity - not 100 channels.


The article Shane linked is a post Shane put up at HDTV magazine copying verbatum a press release:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=127160&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=948332&highlight=

Looks like D* made the mistake of saying "the planned launch and carriage of 100 national high-definition (HD) channels." They did not make that statement to shareholders, opting for the more safe (and likely accurate) statements on capacity instead of falsely promising 100 channels "will" be available.


----------



## grooves12 (Oct 27, 2005)

Richard King said:


> http://www.fool.com/investing/gener....aspx?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y
> Up to could be three, or four or 99. They dropped the 100 channel claim soon after they made it and started making the "UP TO" remark in all subsequent comments.


They also dropped that they will be "have" 100 channels in HD, and now state "capacity" for up to 100 channels.

It is meaningless.

Dish should start an ad compaign comparing what they DO carry... to DirecTV's broken promises.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

Thanx for latest info about the programming My Network TV from HDTVFanAtic. It shows how much it cost to produce HD and why the transition will be longer than we would like. The stations I listed are those I would prefer to get up on sat as opposed to what others were stating. 2nd thing the ads for D8 have scaled back to where they are only stating more HD than cable which in most cases isn't saying much. E* has already beat that right now.


----------



## grooves12 (Oct 27, 2005)

whatchel1 said:


> Thanx for latest info about the programming My Network TV from HDTVFanAtic. It shows how much it cost to produce HD and why the transition will be longer than we would like. The stations I listed are those I would prefer to get up on sat as opposed to what others were stating. 2nd thing the ads for D8 have scaled back to where they are only stating more HD than cable which in most cases isn't saying much. E* has already beat that right now.


Its not so much the cost of producing in HD that had them kill them... it was that they were lagging in the ratings because they were poor content.

So, they decided to pick up some other programming that will likely get them better ratings, but unfortunately that programming is not currently produced in HD.


----------



## tedb3rd (Feb 2, 2006)

...People keep crying for MORE MORE MORE high definition. I want quality, not quantity. Don't bog down the bandwidth with crappy channels so that the compression on GOOD HD channels is so high that you can't tell it's high definition. I have Atlanta locals so we were one of the first to come online w/HD locals. Ever since then, I can really tell the quality loss as more and more is added. Yes, it's still better than SD, but still irritating. $20/month to see 'blocks' at 1080i is pretty stupid. It would be cheaper to take an SD channel and put the big screen in stretch mode. It's not at that point yet, but there will be a day....


----------

