# Some hidden new fees



## p4594spa (Jul 20, 2006)

In addition to jacking up the rates on all the standard packages, all the movie channels, I noticed a new $2 fee Sport Connection access. I assume this is so I can see the two channels in the 600s that I could previously access for free, which are both Comcast sports channels.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

p4594spa;3179284 said:


> In addition to jacking up the rates on all the standard packages, all the movie channels, I noticed a new $2 fee Sport Connection access. I assume this is so I can see the two channels in the 600s that I could previously access for free, which are both Comcast sports channels.


It's not hidden. It's been discussed at length.

http://www.multichannel.com/distribution/directv-adds-sports-surcharge/140662


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

p4594spa said:


> In addition to jacking up the rates on all the standard packages, all the movie channels, I noticed a new $2 fee Sport Connection access. I assume this is so I can see the two channels in the 600s that I could previously access for free, which are both Comcast sports channels.


They are only charging that in certain areas. I love in Atlanta and will not be charged for this yaaa. NY and LA are the ones getting hit the hardest.


----------



## mikeren1 (Sep 13, 2008)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> They are only charging that in certain areas. I love in Atlanta and will not be charged for this yaaa. NY and LA are the ones getting hit the hardest.


Free LOVE in Atlanta !!!


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

mikeren1 said:


> Free LOVE in Atlanta !!!


Live damn auto correct on my computer. I guess its good to LIVE in an area that doesn't care about there sports teams. But then again I get EI and CI for my saint Louis teams.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> Live damn auto correct on my computer. I guess its good to LIVE in an area that doesn't care about there sports teams. But then again I get EI and CI for my saint Louis teams.


Who says "We don't care for our Sports Teams???"

However, it's Hard to Root for Teams that can't get to the Big Dance and Win!!! :lol:


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> Live damn auto correct on my computer. I guess its good to LIVE in an area that doesn't care about there sports teams. But then again I get EI and CI for my saint Louis teams.


Off topic, but the funniest website on the Internet: click here


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

Richierich said:


> Who says "We don't care for our Sports Teams???"
> 
> However, it's Hard to Root for Teams that can't get to the Big Dance and Win!!! :lol:


Well have you been to a braves game when I go to watch my cardinals we have more fans than Atlanta. Just wait till LA gets the falcons. Even when Atlanta had that big run back in the 90s they couldn't sell out the games.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Diana C said:


> Off topic, but the funniest website on the Internet: click here


You know how many times do i have to double check my post with this damn auto correct on my ipad, even though I can turn it off, But i'm too lazy to put apostrophes in my post and words I don't know how to spill... I'm mean spell


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

p4594spa said:


> I assume this is so I can see the two channels in the 600s channels.


Wow just two channels, I thought it was more markets that have 3 or more.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

acostapimps said:


> Wow just two channels, I thought it was more markets that have 3 or more.


Where I am in CT I get five, YES, SNY, MSG, MSG2, and NESN.


----------



## jamieh1 (May 1, 2003)

I get Fox Sports South and MASN, im not seeing a fee.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> They are only charging that in certain areas. I love in Atlanta and will not be charged for this yaaa. NY and LA are the ones getting hit the hardest.


That is a matter of opinion ... at least the people in NY and LA are getting several RSNs for only $2 more than those in single RSN areas. I'd say the people getting hit the hardest are those with only two or three RSNs who get the fee (wherever the threshold lies).

As for my market (South Bend, IN) DirecTV only carries one RSN in Choice (CSN Chicago). So no additional fee.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

So...I have a question. How is it a "hidden" fee if it is listed as a line item on the bill?


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Justin23 said:


> So...I have a question. How is it a "hidden" fee if it is listed as a line item on the bill?


hidden in a way they don't disclose it to people in markets with several rsn's before they hit you with the fee.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

acostapimps;3179556 said:


> hidden in a way they don't disclose it to people in markets with several rsn's before they hit you with the fee.


Like this bill insert/email/letter?

http://www.directv.com/businesspackages/feb/2013_Price Increase_RSN.pdf


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

acostapimps said:


> Wow just two channels, I thought it was more markets that have 3 or more.


It's actually dependent solely on the cost of the RSNs, the price D* pays. It could be a one RSN in a zip code, it just so happens that the ones that qualify now are two or more. It's also possible that a zip code with 2 RSNs does NOT have the RSN fee. It ultimately comes down to the cost D* incurs.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

acostapimps said:


> hidden in a way they don't disclose it to people in markets with several rsn's before they hit you with the fee.


All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

Satelliteracer said:


> All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


Well, actually, not always. I knew about the fee from reading about it here (here in the Yankees' market area, it is the cost of YES that incurs the charge) but I received no email or direct mail from DirecTV on the issue. We are on auto bill pay so we don't get a paper bill. I'm okay with the charge, but not everyone was notified in advance.


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

Nothing is ever hidden anymore. With websites such as this one DirecTV and dish do not get away with any of that. At some point we all will get hit with a fee its just when will it happen.


----------



## Cyber36 (Mar 20, 2008)

Yeah, but if the CUSTOMER has to mention/raise the issue, I guess its still considered "hidden".........


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Diana C said:


> Well, actually, not always. I knew about the fee from reading about it here (here in the Yankees' market area, it is the cost of YES that incurs the charge) but I received no email or direct mail from DirecTV on the issue. We are on auto bill pay so we don't get a paper bill. I'm okay with the charge, but not everyone was notified in advance.


You would have received an email or separate letter if you don't have a paper bill. You should check your spam folder in case it ended up there. Every customer has to be informed. They are very diligent on this and have a record on every customer when they were notified, how they were notified, etc.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Cyber36;3179694 said:


> Yeah, but if the CUSTOMER has to mention/raise the issue, I guess its still considered "hidden".........


The customer doesn't have to mention or raise the issue. All those affected have been notified.



Satelliteracer;3179561 said:


> All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

Can you opt out of it? Luckily I live in an area without the fee. I'd be pretty upset if I got charged extra for RSNs and couldn't drop them


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

JosephB said:


> Can you opt out of it? Luckily I live in an area without the fee. I'd be pretty upset if I got charged extra for RSNs and couldn't drop them


Only if you have a package without RSN's...


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

Justin23 said:


> Only if you have a package without RSN's...


So if you have something like Xtra, you can't drop the RSNs? That's kind of lame


----------



## crkeehn (Apr 23, 2002)

jamieh1 said:


> I get Fox Sports South and MASN, im not seeing a fee.


In Washington DC, you should get Comcast Mid Atlantic along with MASN. I guess when I lived in MD, I also got FSS.

In NC, I get Fox Sports Carolinas and MASN. The best of both worlds, my beloved Nationals and (this year) virtually all the Carolina Hurricanes games.


----------



## p4594spa (Jul 20, 2006)

So from this I am supposed to know...Which selected ZIP codes???

"Regional Sports Fee applicable in select ZIP codes where DIRECTV is
contractually obligated to distribute multiple Regional Sports Networks. "

I can't opt out of this fee. 

"They easily could have written "regional sport fee applicable wherever we
damn will want, but we won't tell you whether this effect you..haha!"


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

p4594spa said:


> So from this I am supposed to know...Which selected ZIP codes???
> 
> "Regional Sports Fee applicable in select ZIP codes where DIRECTV is
> contractually obligated to distribute multiple Regional Sports Networks. "
> ...


There were 2 versions of that price increase notification I posted above. If you saw the RSN fee in your version, then it affected you.

RSN Fee: http://www.directv.com/businesspackages/feb/2013_Price Increase_RSN.pdf

No RSN Fee: http://www.directv.com/businesspackages/feb/2013_Price Increase_GM.pdf


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

What they won't tell you is if your price does go up on these RSN fees you can get out of your contract without penalty. But then again where would you go to CABLE haha.


----------



## woj027 (Sep 3, 2007)

Satelliteracer said:


> All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


Can I get a RSN Rebate? DirecTV doesn't have CSN-NW nor Pac12 networks.

:hurah:

or is it


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> What they won't tell you is if your price does go up on these RSN fees *you can get out of your contract without penalty*. But then again where would you go to CABLE haha.


Um.....not too sure about that one.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

woj027 said:


> Can I get a RSN Rebate? DirecTV doesn't have CSN-NW nor Pac12 networks.
> 
> :hurah:
> 
> or is it


More like :beatdeadhorse:


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> What they won't tell you is if your price does go up on these RSN fees you can get out of your contract without penalty. But then again where would you go to CABLE haha.


Do you have some proof of this? Perhaps you have a link to it.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

p4594spa said:


> So from this I am supposed to know...Which selected ZIP codes???
> 
> "Regional Sports Fee applicable in select ZIP codes where DIRECTV is
> contractually obligated to distribute multiple Regional Sports Networks. "
> ...


If you got the version with the RSN fee listed, you live in one of those zip codes. If you got the version without the RSN fee listed on it, you don't live in one of those zip codes.

If a future zip code changes that will incur the fee, the customer would be notified as required. The zip codes may be subject to change because deals with RSNs are changing, new ones created, and the cost structure changes as a result.

There are about 45,000 zip codes in the USA. The vast majority are not impacted by this.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Directv should consider an opt out for those customers that don't want to pay the extra fee. Since as you say the vast majority of zip codes aren't included, it shouldn't be that difficult to set up. You could allow the customer to remove as many rsns as necessary to avoid the fee.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

studechip said:


> Directv should consider an opt out for those customers that don't want to pay the extra fee. Since as you say the vast majority of zip codes aren't included, it shouldn't be that difficult to set up. You could allow the customer to remove as many rsns as necessary to avoid the fee.


It's not as easy as it sounds.

RSN's (and most sports networks) want high penetration in packages so their carriage fees will be large. They need to make up the big bucks they spend for the content and exclusive deals they have.

So if it moved to an a la carte model the cost to add RSN's individually for the consumer would be pretty $$$.

Instead of passing the high RSN cost to all customers, D* chose to have that fee for those customers in the affected areas.

Is it "unfair"...? Some would argue that. But again you have the option in selecting a package without RSN's.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Justin23 said:


> It's not as easy as it sounds.
> 
> RSN's (and most sports networks) want high penetration in packages so their carriage fees will be large. They need to make up the big bucks they spend for the content and exclusive deals they have.
> 
> ...


I understand your point, but it's not really ala carte if you can remove one rsn to avoid the $2 fee.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

studechip said:


> I understand your point, but it's not really ala carte if you can remove one rsn to avoid the $2 fee.


D*'s contracts (as well as most providers) with the RSN's don't allow that removal.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3179914 said:


> I understand your point, but it's not really ala carte if you can remove one rsn to avoid the $2 fee.


DirecTV cannot just arbitrarily do that.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Justin23;3179917 said:


> D*'s contracts (as well as most providers) with the RSN's don't allow that removal.


+1


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

Justin23 said:


> D*'s contracts (as well as most providers) with the RSN's don't allow that removal.


Somebody has to stop this BS.

I don't want the government sticking it's nose into everything but there has to be some reasonable consumer protections put into place.

When two sat and one cable provider in any given area is forced into the same contracts with suppliers that force consumers to pay for stuff they don't want... how is that effectively anything different from a full monopoly?


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

unixguru said:


> Somebody has to stop this BS.
> 
> I don't want the government sticking it's nose into everything but there has to be some reasonable consumer protections put into place.
> 
> When two sat and one cable provider in any given area is forced into the same contracts with suppliers that force consumers to pay for stuff they don't want... how is that effectively anything different from a full monopoly?


It's not a monopoly...you can change your package to one that doesn't have RSN's.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

studechip said:


> Directv should consider an opt out for those customers that don't want to pay the extra fee. Since as you say the vast majority of zip codes aren't included, it shouldn't be that difficult to set up. You could allow the customer to remove as many rsns as necessary to avoid the fee.


Problem is that the RSNs demand that the channel be in those higher tier packages and are required under contract. That's one of the core issues. The RSNs (the teams, etc) want broad penetration for advertising eyeballs AND large fees from the distributor.


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

studechip said:


> Do you have some proof of this? Perhaps you have a link to it.


yes here is directv's link and i have also included the section.

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/legal/customer_agreement

(d) Our Programming Changes. Many factors affect the availability, cost and quality of programming and may influence the decision to raise prices and the amount of any increase. These include, among others, programming and other costs, consumer demand, market and shareholder expectations, and changing business conditions. Accordingly, we must reserve the unrestricted right to change, rearrange, add or delete our programming packages, the selections in those packages, our prices, and any other Service we offer, at any time. We will endeavor to notify you of any change that is within our reasonable control and its effective date. In most cases this notice will be about one month in advance. You always have the right to cancel your Service, in whole or in part, if you do not accept the change (see Section 5). If you cancel your Service, a deactivation fee (described in Sections 2 & 5(b)) or other charges may apply. Credits, if any, to your account will be posted as described in Section 5. If you do not cancel, your continued receipt of our Service will constitute acceptance.

(c) Our Cancellation. We may cancel your Service at any time if you fail to pay amounts owing to us when due, subject to any grace periods, breach any other material provision of this Agreement, or act abusively toward our staff. In such case, you will still be responsible for payment of all outstanding balances accrued through that effective date, including the deactivation fee described in Section 2. In addition, we may cancel your Service if you elect not to accept any changed terms described to you, as provided in Section 4.

(b) Your Cancellation. You may cancel Service by notifying us. You may be charged a deactivation fee as described in Section 2 and issued a credit as described below. Your notice is effective on the day we receive it. You will still be responsible for payment of all outstanding balances accrued through that effective date.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> What they won't tell you is if your price does go up on these RSN fees you can get out of your contract *without penalty*. But then again where would you go to CABLE haha.





studechip said:


> Do you have some *proof of this*? Perhaps you have a link to it.





donalddickerson2005 said:


> yes here is directv's link and i have also included the section.
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/legal/customer_agreement
> 
> ...


So the reality is you can cancel your service, but NOT without penalty. They can still charge the early termination fee and/or "other charges" that may apply.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> yes here is directv's link and i have also included the section.
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/legal/customer_agreement
> 
> (b) Your Cancellation. You may cancel Service by notifying us. You may be charged a deactivation fee as described in Section 2 and issued a credit as described below. Your notice is effective on the day we receive it. You will still be responsible for payment of all outstanding balances accrued through that effective date.


You didn't include a very important part of what you quoted above:

" In addition to any deactivation or change of service fees provided in Section 2, if you cancel Service or change your Service package, *you may be subject to an early cancellation fee *if you agreed to a programming agreement with DIRECTV and have failed to maintain the required programming package for the required period of time"


----------



## gbubar (Feb 3, 2004)

Diana C said:


> Well, actually, not always. I knew about the fee from reading about it here...but I received no email or direct mail from DirecTV on the issue. We are on auto bill pay so we don't get a paper bill. I'm okay with the charge, but not everyone was notified in advance.


+1


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Satelliteracer said:


> All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


My notice from Directv was my Febuary Bill that just posted on line yesterday. Not really notice if you ask me.

And email would have been nice, since Directv emails me all kinds of other garbage almost daily.

My notice came from DBS talk.


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

Justin23 said:


> You didn't include a very important part of what you quoted above:
> 
> " In addition to any deactivation or change of service fees provided in Section 2, if you cancel Service or change your Service package, *you may be subject to an early cancellation fee *if you agreed to a programming agreement with DIRECTV and have failed to maintain the required programming package for the required period of time"


Just call DirecTV at 1-800-531-5000, reference "4. CHANGES IN CONTRACT TERMS" in the DirecTV contract and state you do not accept the changes detailed in the contract change notification that take effect February 9, 2010.

Don't say you want to cancel because your canceling incurs the Early Cancellation Fee (ETF), instead, simply state you do not agree to the change in contract terms and they will be forced to end your contract as they can not provide one customer different terms than another. If they don't listen to you, send a certified letter stating you do not agree to the terms. Remember *not* to say you wish to cancel, only that you do not agree to the change in terms and conditions.

this was for 2010 contract
The thing is you will pay for any charges for the current month but if and when you signed your contract this rsn fee was not there you can cancel.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

donalddickerson2005;3180047 said:


> Just call DirecTV at 1-800-531-5000, reference "4. CHANGES IN CONTRACT TERMS" in the DirecTV contract and state you do not accept the changes detailed in the contract change notification that take effect February 9, 2010.
> 
> Don't say you want to cancel because your canceling incurs the Early Cancellation Fee (ETF), instead, simply state you do not agree to the change in contract terms and they will be forced to end your contract as they can not provide one customer different terms than another. If they don't listen to you, send a certified letter stating you do not agree to the terms. Remember *not* to say you wish to cancel, only that you do not agree to the change in terms and conditions.
> 
> ...


Umm...no. That isn't how it works. Every place you lifted this claim from is full of people who attempted it and it didn't work. It's nonesense. The terms you initially agreed to stated that the terms are subject to change.



> Programming, pricing, terms and conditions subject to change.
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/legal/terms_and_conditions


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

"Hoosier205" said:


> Umm...no. That isn't how it works.


How many contract law classes have you taken?


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> Just call DirecTV at 1-800-531-5000, reference "4. CHANGES IN CONTRACT TERMS" in the DirecTV contract and state you do not accept the changes detailed in the contract change notification that take effect February 9, 2010.
> 
> Don't say you want to cancel because your canceling incurs the Early Cancellation Fee (ETF), instead, simply state you do not agree to the change in contract terms and they will be forced to end your contract as they can not provide one customer different terms than another. If they don't listen to you, send a certified letter stating you do not agree to the terms. Remember *not* to say you wish to cancel, only that you do not agree to the change in terms and conditions.
> 
> ...


Where does it state in the customer agreement that if you don't agree to the changes that there will be no penalty?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

raott said:


> How many contract law classes have you taken?


Enough to understand that a false claim copy and pasted from Slickdeals and/or Fatwallet isn't accurate. 

https://www.google.com/#q="Don't+sa...06,d.aWc&fp=a124333ff7819f1f&biw=1366&bih=651

You don't get out of your contract because the terms change when the terms you agreed to said that the terms were subject to change. If you choose to not agree to the new terms, they reserve the right to cancel your service and charge you the ETF.


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

Justin23 said:


> Where does it state in the customer agreement that if you don't agree to the changes that there will be no penalty?


Ok i am done doing all your work for you. I am not looking to get out of my contract. My bill is not going up because I do not live in the areas involved. Anyone trying to get out of something over a couple of dollars is an idiot. If you can't afford the 2 dollars then how about going down to just basic stations for $25. I for one am fine with my package that gets damn near everything CI, EI, Fox soccer plus, basic spanish because of the 4 sports stations on there. And next year I will be getting cricket ticket.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> Ok i am done doing all your work for you. I am not looking to get out of my contract. My bill is not going up because I do not live in the areas involved. Anyone trying to get out of something over a couple of dollars is an idiot. If you can't afford the 2 dollars then how about going down to just basic stations for $25. I for one am fine with my package that gets damn near everything CI, EI, Fox soccer plus, basic spanish because of the 4 sports stations on there. And next year I will be getting cricket ticket.


I am not trying to get out of anything....never said that. I am just asking you for clarification/evidence regarding your statement that D* will let you out of your agreement when the terms & conditions change.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> Ok i am done doing all your work for you. I am not looking to get out of my contract. My bill is not going up because I do not live in the areas involved. Anyone trying to get out of something over a couple of dollars is an idiot. If you can't afford the 2 dollars then how about going down to just basic stations for $25. I for one am fine with my package that gets damn near everything CI, EI, Fox soccer plus, basic spanish because of the 4 sports stations on there. And next year I will be getting cricket ticket.


Then why are you saying things, such as the post below, that are not true?



donalddickerson2005 said:


> What they won't tell you is if your price does go up on these RSN fees you can get out of your contract without penalty. But then again where would you go to CABLE haha.


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Then why are you saying things, such as the post below, that are not true?


I was just trying to help you all out. 
I was able to get out of my DISH contract early when they raised there rates, I was charged only for the time up till the date they started charging more. I have now been with DIRECTV for a few years. Not everything is online even though we think it is. 
My proof is that I was able to do it with the OTHER company.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> My proof is that I was able to do it with the OTHER company.


There we go....:nono2:


----------



## jmpfaff (Dec 13, 2004)

Justin23 said:


> Where does it state in the customer agreement that if you don't agree to the changes that there will be no penalty?


It doesn't have to say that. Basic contract law says that both parties have to agree to a change in terms. The DTV contract (and most contracts between a business and a consumer) state that inaction by the consumer is "acceptance" of the change in terms. The suggestion above is that you take affirmative action to refuse the change in terms

Why do we have to keep having this argument over and over and over? :nono2:

DTV will still try to assess the ETF :eek2:. When you don't pay it, DTV will not sue you, because they would lose, but will instead turn it over to a collection agency that will annoy you until you consider the ETF a cheap price to pay to regain your sanity. Unless you hold out against the collection agency, which will eventually give up because they too know that they will lose if they take it to court.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

jmpfaff said:


> It doesn't have to say that. Basic contract law says that both parties have to agree to a change in terms. The DTV contract (and most contracts between a business and a consumer) state that inaction by the consumer is "acceptance" of the change in terms. The suggestion above is that you take affirmative action to refuse the change in terms
> 
> Why do we have to keep having this argument over and over and over? :nono2:
> 
> DTV will still try to assess the ETF :eek2:. When you don't pay it, DTV will not sue you, because they would lose, but will instead turn it over to a collection agency that will annoy you until you consider the ETF a cheap price to pay to regain your sanity. Unless you hold out against the collection agency, which will eventually give up because they too know that they will lose if they take it to court.


So let me make sure I understand you correctly...

1. Customer refuses the new terms
2. D* assess the ETF
3. Customer doesn't pay the ETF
4. Customer gets taken to collections and hurts their credit score

Is that about right?

Again I am not asking this because I want to leave D*. I'm trying to find out the evidence behind the claim earlier in this thread that if a customer refuses the new terms/pricing that D* will let them out of their agreement?


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

The legal issues are not as clear cut as some people claim. For example, let's say the new RSN fee was $1000/month. There isn't a court in the land that would side with DirecTV regardless of the "Terms of service may change" clause.


----------



## cforrest (Jan 20, 2007)

Satelliteracer said:


> If you got the version with the RSN fee listed, you live in one of those zip codes. If you got the version without the RSN fee listed on it, you don't live in one of those zip codes.
> 
> If a future zip code changes that will incur the fee, the customer would be notified as required. The zip codes may be subject to change because deals with RSNs are changing, new ones created, and the cost structure changes as a result.
> 
> There are about 45,000 zip codes in the USA. The vast majority are not impacted by this.


Is Directv planning on putting out a list on their site so subscribers or potential new subscribers can see what zip codes are hit by the fee? Would make it easier for everyone IMO! Also could be updated on the fly by Directv if a new carriage deal comes into play resulting in no fee or stoppage of the fee for an area or an area gets the fee added.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> DirecTV cannot just arbitrarily do that.


So you have specific knowledge of Directv's contracts?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

cforrest said:


> Is Directv planning on putting out a list on their site so subscribers or potential new subscribers can see what zip codes are hit by the fee? Would make it easier for everyone IMO! Also could be updated on the fly by Directv if a new carriage deal comes into play resulting in no fee or stoppage of the fee for an area or an area gets the fee added.


Potential new subscribers will see the fee in their Shopping Cart (as long as they have entered their correct zip code on the site). For example, 90001 in LA shows the $3 fee. 20001 in DC does not. Current subscribers should be able to look at their bill.

It would be interesting to map out the tens of thousands of zip codes and see which ones have the fee ... perhaps even do an estimate by population of those codes instead of number of codes with the fee. But I don't see the point.

The fee is there ... assume you are going to pay it and be happy if you don't. Just like the $3 "fee" for local channels ... assume you are going to pay it and be "happy" if you don't have to. And just like the happiness over not paying $3 for locals is diminished by not having your locals the happiness over not paying $3 for expensive RSNs is diminished by not having more RSNs. But approaching the issue from a positive perspective can help.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3180136 said:


> So you have specific knowledge of Directv's contracts?


I know that they have contracts that they must honor. Their agreement for retrans of a channel is a contract. We know that these agreements, industry wide, specify how a channel will offered to a provider's customers.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> I know that they have contracts that they must honor. Their agreement for retrans of a channel is a contract. We know that these agreements, industry wide, specify how a channel will offered to a provider's customers.


So all you know is that they have a contract. We all know that. Aside that, you don't know anything about the contract, do you?


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> DirecTV cannot just arbitrarily do that.


Where did I say that it would be arbitrary Mr Strawman?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3180188 said:


> Where did I say that it would be arbitrary Mr Strawman?


That is my characterization of your earlier suggestion.



studechip;3179901 said:


> Directv should consider an opt out for those customers that don't want to pay the extra fee. Since as you say the vast majority of zip codes aren't included, it shouldn't be that difficult to set up. You could allow the customer to remove as many rsns as necessary to avoid the fee.


You cannot arbitrarily alter the terms of an existing contract, by selecting individual channels to remove from a package, on a whim.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3180187 said:


> So all you know is that they have a contract. We all know that. Aside that, you don't know anything about the contract, do you?


Read the very post you quoted. We know, and it has been mentioned at times by Satelliteracer, that contracts include specifics about how a channel will be offered to customers. You honestly believe that a content owner enters into a retrans agreement with DirecTV without knowing the parameters of these things?


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Read the very post you quoted. We know, and it has been mentioned at times by Satelliteracer, that contracts include specifics about how a channel will be offered to customers.* You honestly believe that a content owner enters into a retrans agreement with DirecTV without knowing the parameters of these things?*


I'm sure *they* do. I'm saying *you* don't have any idea what's in the contracts.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> That is my characterization of your earlier suggestion.
> 
> You cannot arbitrarily alter the terms of an existing contract, by selecting individual channels to remove from a package, on a whim.


I never said arbitrarily, did I? That is your word, not mine. It may well take renegotiation, but perhaps it would be a good idea to have the customer in mind when considering options to raising fees based on a region.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3180202 said:


> I'm sure they do.


Then there is nothing to argue about.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3180203 said:


> I never said arbitrarily, did I? That is your word, not mine. It may well take renegotiation, but perhaps it would be a good idea to have the customer in mind when considering options to raising fees based on a region.


I never said you used the word. That was my characterization of your suggestion. You never said anything about renegotiation until now. You said that it is something that they should consider and that it shouldn't be that difficult to set up. I said that DirecTV cannot just arbitrarily do that. It takes two to tango and agree to such a thing.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

studechip;3180203 said:


> I never said arbitrarily, did I? That is your word, not mine. It may well take renegotiation, but perhaps it would be a good idea to have the customer in mind when considering options to raising fees based on a region.


I think the customer was in mind when they decided to not pass this on to everyone...just in the regions that have a high RSN cost.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Justin23;3180209 said:


> I think the customer was in mind when they decided to not pass this on to everyone...just in the regions that have a high RSN cost.


+1


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Justin23 said:


> I think the customer was in mind when they decided to not pass this on to everyone...just in the regions that have a high RSN cost.


That is a reasonable way to look at it.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Then there is nothing to argue about.


I'm not arguing. I'm pointing out the fallacy of you making it seem as if you have insider knowledge of Directv's contracts. Apparently you agree since you clearly want to drop this part of the conversation.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> I never said you used the word. That was my characterization of your suggestion. *You never said anything about renegotiation until now*. You said that it is something that they should consider and that it shouldn't be that difficult to set up. I said that DirecTV cannot just arbitrarily do that. It takes two to tango and agree to such a thing.


I apologize if I didn't give you every point of my position at the beginning. It seemed obvious to me that it would require some changes in how the channels are made available.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3180215 said:


> I'm not arguing. I'm pointing out the fallacy of you making it seem as if you have insider knowledge of Directv's contracts. Apparently you agree since you clearly want to drop this part of the conversation.


I have never made it seem as if I do. In fact, I have said that I do not. I do however know enough to cover the basics.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> *I have never made it seem as if I do*. In fact, I have said that I do not. I do however know enough to cover the basics.


I'm thinking there are a lot of posters here that would disagree with you.


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

Justin23 said:


> I think the customer was in mind when they decided to not pass this on to everyone...just in the regions that have a high RSN cost.


You know this is the smartest quote yet. I am happy that living in Atlanta I do not have to pay for sports programs for the people in new york and other areas.


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

Justin23 said:


> It's not a monopoly...you can change your package to one that doesn't have RSN's.


And if one wants *other* programming that is only in the package that contains the RSNs?

I always think of TV delivery services as *effective* monopolies. The fact that one has a very few choices does not change the effective result.

Maybe a better way to put it is illegal bundling/tying. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce):

_Tying (informally, product tying) is the practice of selling one product or service as a mandatory addition to the purchase of a different product or service._​
It's time someone started a class-action suit against this BS. And no, I can't, since I'm not in an affected area. But taking out this trash will help to cleanup other problems.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

unixguru said:


> And if one wants *other* programming that is only in the package that contains the RSNs?
> 
> I always think of TV delivery services as *effective* monopolies. The fact that one has a very few choices does not change the effective result.
> 
> ...


If a class-action suit would be brought (doubtful). It would be against the companies that own the content...they are the ones that specify channel placement in their contracts with the TV providers.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

unixguru said:


> And if one wants *other* programming that is only in the package that contains the RSNs?


 Then that is your choice. A "monopoly" leaves no other choices for the consumer. You may not like the choice you have in picking a package without RSN's, but that is what you must do to if you don't want the RSN fee and live in a zip code that has it.



unixguru said:


> I always think of TV delivery services as *effective* monopolies. The fact that one has a very few choices does not change the effective result.


This might have been true in the 1980's. But now most customers have 3 choices in their area for TV service: cable, satellite, telco.


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

Justin23 said:


> This might have been true in the 1980's. But now most customers have 3 choices in their area for TV service: cable, satellite, telco.


And they are all just middlemen. Content providers force the same deals on all of them and therefore all consumers.


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

Those affected should consider filing a complaint with the FTC: https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

unixguru said:


> Content providers force the same deals on all of them and therefore all consumers.


The deals are different for each. Placement, carriage fee, etc.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

unixguru said:


> Those affected should consider filing a complaint with the FTC: https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov


How would you word your complaint?


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

Lawyers and insiders everywhere....


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

Justin23 said:


> Then that is your choice. A "monopoly" leaves no other choices for the consumer. You may not like the choice you have in picking a package without RSN's, but that is what you must do to if you don't want the RSN fee and live in a zip code that has it.


It isn't black and white and whether the word monopoly is the one to use isn't all that important.

This line of thinking doesn't mesh with the outcome of the Microsoft browser bundling case. It was determined that Microsoft committed monopolization and tying in violation of antitrust law. Yet Microsoft wasn't a monopoly in your way of thinking - there were/are alternatives.

The difference is that they went after Microsoft because it was hurting other businesses, not because of the consumer protection aspect. Unfortunately.


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

Justin23 said:


> The deals are different for each. Placement, carriage fee, etc.


Give me a break. Tweaking 5% (probably much less) of the contract doesn't change the effective result. Probably a 50 page contract with name of carrier and $ amount changed.


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

242424 said:


> Lawyers and insiders everywhere....


I'm not a lawyer... nor an insider.

Sometimes the law is the only solution.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

Justin23 said:


> I think the customer was in mind when they decided to not pass this on to everyone...just in the regions that have a high RSN cost.


Not only this, but it's a separate fee because they market nationally. Comcast or Charter doesn't have this fee (necessarily...Charter does have a fee for locals) because they can and do price their packages by market. Since DirecTV has national pricing, they have to break out the RSN fee so that they don't have to come up with different prices for the base packages based on where you live (and, they don't have to raise the rates and therefore stay competitive with cable in "cheaper" RSN areas)


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

JosephB said:


> Not only this, but it's a separate fee because they market nationally. Comcast or Charter doesn't have this fee (necessarily...Charter does have a fee for locals) because they can and do price their packages by market. Since DirecTV has national pricing, they have to break out the RSN fee so that they don't have to come up with different prices for the base packages based on where you live (and, they don't have to raise the rates and therefore stay competitive with cable in "cheaper" RSN areas)


FiOS just started their RSN fee recently. I wouldn't be surprised if this is adopted by other TV providers shortly...

http://www.multichannel.com/telco-tv/verizon-tack-rsn-fee-fios-tv/141384


----------



## paco1986 (Mar 26, 2007)

Why is the San Diego market paying this RSN fee? Isn't DirecTV contractually obligated to only carry Fox Sports San Diego down here?


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

paco1986 said:


> Why is the San Diego market paying this RSN fee? Isn't DirecTV contractually obligated to only carry Fox Sports San Diego down here?


I just checked a random San Diego zip code (92101) via www.DIRECTV.com/RSN, and that area has 5 RSN's:

- Time Warner Cable Sportsnet
- Time Warner Cable Deportes
- FS West
- Prime Ticket
- FS San Diego


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

paco1986 said:


> Why is the San Diego market paying this RSN fee? Isn't DirecTV contractually obligated to only carry Fox Sports San Diego down here?


FS SD is just a sub feed of FS West / Prime Ticket


----------



## paco1986 (Mar 26, 2007)

Justin23 said:


> I just checked a random San Diego zip code (92101) via www.DIRECTV.com/RSN, and that area has 5 RSN's:
> 
> - Time Warner Cable Sportsnet
> - Time Warner Cable Deportes
> ...


Aren't 4 out of the 5 LA RSN's? San Diego is not LA. Hate it that they lump us together with LA.


----------



## paco1986 (Mar 26, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> FS SD is just a sub feed of FS West / Prime Ticket


As far as I know, it won't be for long. It should become full-time in the not too distant future.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

paco1986 said:


> Aren't 4 out of the 5 LA RSN's? San Diego is not LA. Hate it that they lump us together with LA.


The Lakers, Clippers, Ducks and Kings claim San Diego as part of their territory since you have no local NBA or NHL team.

You get TWC SportsNet for the Lakers. You get Fox Sports West for the Kings, and Prime Ticket for the Clippers and Ducks.

Most cable systems in the area carry TWC SportsNet, an alternate Kings only blackout feed of Fox Sports West and the 24/7 Fox Sports San Diego instead of Prime Ticket since the full time Fox Sports San Diego channel carries the Clippers and Ducks games from Prime Ticket.


----------



## paco1986 (Mar 26, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> The Lakers, Clippers, Ducks and Kings claim San Diego as part of their territory since you have no local NBA or NHL team.


That is what's upsetting, having to pay this fee for teams that are in LA. LA is the big market, not San Diego. Let them pay the fee. They should at least waive the fee for secondary markets. Wishful thinking, I know.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Satelliteracer said:


> *All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert*. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


I wasn't notified in any way SR. I knew it was coming, but I wasn't told.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

studechip said:


> I wasn't notified in any way SR. I knew it was coming, but I wasn't told.


Not sure what to say.

If you want, PM your account number and I can find it...we can tell you the exact type of communication sent (letter or email or bill insert, etc), day it was sent out, etc. Some states require different types of notifications which is why different tactics are used. Others don't receive a paper bill, which is another reason they may receive an email instead of a bill insert (obviously).

Can even tell you if an email was sent if it bounced back because of a wrongful email address... in that case D* has to then send a letter. Notifications are a strict requirement, taken *VERY SERIOUSLY*. I've had customers in the past here say they weren't notified, we looked it up for them and 100% of the time they were notified. Either the customer didn't see it in their email, or the spouse threw away the insert in the bill, or what have you. I've yet to come across a time where a customer literally wasn't notified. Anything is possible, but haven't seen it yet. 20,000,000 notifications went out this year to 20,000,000 customers. Taken VERY SERIOUSLY.

Again, happy to help if you want me to look into just for peace of mind.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

If I think about it long enough I'm actually probably more perturbed that I'm spending a whole lot more than $2 each month to cover the cost of a whole bunch of other channels in my package that I don't want. It just isn't broken out as a separate line item.

But if I want certain channels like several of the Discovery channels, I have to subscribe to a certain package and pay the cost of that package...even though it includes probably a couple of dozen channels I don't want and won't watch.

So I try not to think about it long enough.

My recourse is the same as anyone else's. I could switch providers and I am not inclined to do that.


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

HarleyD said:


> If I think about it long enough I'm actually probably more perturbed that I'm spending a whole lot more than $2 each month to cover the cost of a whole bunch of other channels in my package that I don't want. It just isn't broken out as a separate line item.
> 
> But if I want certain channels like several of the Discovery channels, I have to subscribe to a certain package and pay the cost of that package...even though it includes probably a couple of dozen channels I don't want and won't watch.
> 
> ...


Hopefully this stuff will finally get some legal action. Maybe DirecTV wants it to stop the providers from forcing things on them too.

I understand why a la cart is never going to happen. But if we had a set of bundles that one could pick from it would be better. Think of HBO or other movie channels as such a bundle (all are multiple channels). Maybe PREMIER is equivalent to a dozen bundles. Then people that like movies and not sports or vice versa can save some money.

Have a baseline fee for access (like I pay for cable internet because I don't have cable TV) and then discount that based on total subscription.

Screw the content providers who think they can demand that I accept their programming, never watch it, and demand I pay for it.


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

I could live with a package and 5-10 a la cart channels added by the customer


----------



## johnr9e (Nov 27, 2006)

studechip said:


> I wasn't notified in any way SR. I knew it was coming, but I wasn't told.





paco1986 said:


> That is what's upsetting, having to pay this fee for teams that are in LA. LA is the big market, not San Diego. Let them pay the fee. They should at least waive the fee for secondary markets. Wishful thinking, I know.


I'm also in San Diego. The Padres were absent from DirecTV until last year - I've learned to live without. The value of the LA RSNs to me is exactly $0. Never watch. Don't care.

This may be the straw-that-breaks-the-camels-back for me and Premier. I have been on the brink for a while. I would have dropped packages long ago except I have grandfathered DVR. Regardless of this fee, my leaning had been to drop to Entertainment because the main differences between the other tiers (Choice, Xtra, Ultimate) seems to be channels we rarely, if ever, watch. The RSN charge (and the indignation of having to pay extra for LA RSNs) plus the latest price increase is very likely to cause me to drop to the Entertainment package.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

HarleyD said:


> If I think about it long enough I'm actually probably more perturbed that I'm spending a whole lot more than $2 each month to cover the cost of a whole bunch of other channels in my package that I don't want. It just isn't broken out as a separate line item.
> 
> But if I want certain channels like several of the Discovery channels, I have to subscribe to a certain package and pay the cost of that package...even though it includes probably a couple of dozen channels I don't want and won't watch.
> 
> ...


The difference is that those packages are national, and have a uniform price across the DirecTV customer base. RSNs cost different in different regions, therefore some people pay the RSN fee and others don't. They keep it separate so they don't have to have different prices for the base packages.


----------



## paco1986 (Mar 26, 2007)

johnr9e said:


> I'm also in San Diego. The Padres were absent from DirecTV until last year - I've learned to live without. The value of the LA RSNs to me is exactly $0. Never watch. Don't care.


Exactly my point, we in San Diego don't care about LA sports. Just give us Fox Sports San Diego on a full-time basis and we will be happy campers!


----------



## inhd40 (Jan 26, 2013)

I pay a 3 dollar RSN fee for 3 channels. Two of which I will never watch but the third I would pay the three dollars to have. It still kind of stinks that I have to pay extra but it's not a deal breaker like the 9 dollars extra I had to pay to get BIG10 network from Dish.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Justin23 said:


> So...I have a question. How is it a "hidden" fee if it is listed as a line item on the bill?


What makes a fee a "hidden fee" is when they don't tell you about them in the sales cycle.

The DIRECTV home page implies that you can get a Genie system with locked in savings for two years for as low as $29.99 a month. You have to read the pixel print and the resist blue Offer Details pop-up under the View All Packages button as well as other research to discover that the price will be more than 25% higher than that if you actually get a Genie and that the two years of savings doesn't apply to the $29.99 package.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

harsh;3181554 said:


> What makes a fee a "hidden fee" is when they don't tell you about them in the sales cycle.


That is your own personal definition of a hidden fee. Every single customer being charged the RSN was notified.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> That is your own personal definition of a hidden fee. Every single customer being charged the RSN was notified.


You say things like this as if you have the definitive answer. Care to divulge how you know for an absolute certainty that I was notified? I know I wasn't. I don't care what you will reply, but I know it will say that I am wrong and that they did notify me.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3181607 said:


> You say things like this as if you have the definitive answer. Care to divulge how you know for an absolute certainty that I was notified? I know I wasn't. I don't care what you will reply, but I know it will say that I am wrong and that they did notify me.


I suppose you haven't taken him up on this offer.



Satelliteracer;3180751 said:


> Not sure what to say.
> 
> If you want, PM your account number and I can find it...we can tell you the exact type of communication sent (letter or email or bill insert, etc), day it was sent out, etc. Some states require different types of notifications which is why different tactics are used. Others don't receive a paper bill, which is another reason they may receive an email instead of a bill insert (obviously).
> 
> ...


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

Like it's a good idea to give some unknown guy on an internet message board your account number..... Want his SS number too? lol


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

242424 said:


> Like it's a good idea to give some unknown guy on an internet message board your account number..... Want his SS number too? lol


A respected forum member who is known to be employed by DirecTV. You forgot that part...


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

242424 said:


> Like it's a good idea to give some unknown guy on an internet message board your account number..... Want his SS number too? lol


Some people are not "unknown guy on the internet". SatelliteRacer is very well known here.

And if anyone wishes, I would be happy, in my role as moderator to liaison the information to DIRECTV. I know SatelliteRacer and several others who can help.

On the larger issue of notifications, DIRECTV sent notifications to everyone on the list. But that doesn't mean everyone received the notification or didn't throw it out before it was read. Things happen and wives throw out mail. (Husbands do too.)

Peace,
Tom


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

I'm the president of GM, you need a car?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

242424 said:


> I'm the president of GM, you need a car?


You, on the other hand, are an "unknown guy on the internet" at this point, at least on this board.

I've met SR, talked to him several times, and he is a great person (who has a very intelligent son--who likes the Packers.)  

Send me your bona fides and lets talk about cars. I could use a new one. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

harsh said:


> What makes a fee a "hidden fee" is when they don't tell you about them in the sales cycle.


We can see the broad difference in the meaning of "hidden fees" based on who is reading it. If something was a line item on my bill and had a name attached to it such as "hd" or "dvr" or even "regional sports fee", I would not consider it hidden. I consider those fees labeled "additional fees or services"(which seem to be different every month) to be hidden fees.

As a side note, I would say something labeled "regional sports fee" to not be *hidden* based on the *definition* of the word.


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

Tom Robertson said:


> You, on the other hand, *are an "unknown guy on the internet" at this point, at least on this board.*
> 
> I've met SR, talked to him several times, and he is a great person (who has a very intelligent son--who likes the Packers.)
> 
> ...


I wouldn't be sending you my account info either, for all I know you and SR are the same person. lol Here's my site www.gm.com


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

All I can say is "wow".


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

harsh said:


> What makes a fee a "hidden fee" is when they don't tell you about them in the sales cycle.
> 
> The DIRECTV home page implies that you can get a Genie system with locked in savings for two years for as low as $29.99 a month. You have to read the pixel print and the resist blue Offer Details pop-up under the View All Packages button as well as other research to discover that the price will be more than 25% higher than that if you actually get a Genie and that the two years of savings doesn't apply to the $29.99 package.


Advertisements are meant to entice. The details are provided, but doing an ad for any service would look silly and gaudy if you tried to put all the info, especially with a service requireing an agreement, in big regular size print.
--
The details, would be disclosed by a sales agent at the time you sign up for the service.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

242424 said:


> I wouldn't be sending you my account info either, for all I know you and SR are the same person. lol Here's my site www.gm.com


If it is - why are you complaining about a lousy two bucks when you took the handout from the government with no complaints?:lol:


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

wingrider01 said:


> If it is - why are you complaining about a lousy two bucks when you took the handout from the government with no complaints?:lol:


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> If it is - why are you complaining about a lousy two bucks when you took the handout from the government with no complaints?:lol:


Wow, now thats funny!:hurah::lol:


----------



## boukengreen (Sep 22, 2009)

wingrider01 said:


> If it is - why are you complaining about a lousy two bucks when you took the handout from the government with no complaints?:lol:


cause he wants the government to bail him out of that as well


----------



## usnret (Jan 16, 2009)

If you don't like it, drop D.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Recently saw the $2 fee here as well and figured its just a way to recoup the fees to the RSN content providers. Better to do these fees by geography as there's different RSNs around the county.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Hoosier205 said:


> That is your own personal definition of a hidden fee.


Do you have an official DIRECTV "hidden fee" definition that you could cite?


> Every single customer being charged the RSN was notified.


That's your own personal definition of notification.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

harsh;3182068 said:


> Do you have an official DIRECTV "hidden fee" definition that you could cite?That's your own personal definition of notification.


When every customer being assessed a specific few was notified of it...they have been notified and the fee is not hidden. Very simple Harsh.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Sixto said:


> Recently saw the $2 fee here as well and figured its just a way to recoup the fees.


Making the fee regional still doesn't help those who aren't interested in the RSNs.

It seems like DIRECTV could do considerably more to bring the fees in line with where the costs are; especially when it comes to receiver fees (like the WHDS and RVU fees).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Hoosier205 said:


> When every customer being assessed a specific few was notified of it...they have been notified and the fee is not hidden. Very simple Harsh.


There have been at least a couple posters in this thread that have testified that they were not notified.

I'm guessing they must not understand what being notified entails or your statement is false.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

harsh;3182082 said:


> There have been at least a couple posters in this thread that have testified that they were not notified.
> 
> I'm guessing they must not understand what being notified entails or your statement is false.


Just read the post from Satelliteracer. Any of those posters can PM him for proof of their notification. All customers being assessed the fee were notified. The only customers not notified, were those customers not subject to the fee.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Just read the post from Satelliteracer. Any of those posters can PM him for proof of their notification. All customers being assessed the fee were notified. The only customers not notified, were those customers not subject to the fee.


So you are saying, without any exception, that it is impossible that one single solitary customer was missed in the notification process? How do you know that?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3182127 said:


> So you are saying, without any exception, that it is impossible that one single solitary customer was missed in the notification process? How do you know that?


Have you read the post from Satelliteracer? Have you taken him up on his offer?

You said you didn't receive it. If you can work with Satelliteracer to confirm that, you'd be the first out of 20 million! That would be amazing!



Satelliteracer;3180751 said:


> Not sure what to say.
> 
> If you want, PM your account number and I can find it...we can tell you the exact type of communication sent (letter or email or bill insert, etc), day it was sent out, etc. Some states require different types of notifications which is why different tactics are used. Others don't receive a paper bill, which is another reason they may receive an email instead of a bill insert (obviously).
> 
> ...


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Have you read the post from Satelliteracer? Have you taken him up on his offer?


I have contacted him and we are in the process. Now, will you answer my question? How do you know for certain that I was notified?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3182133 said:


> I have contacted him and we are in the process. Now, will you answer my question? How do you know for certain that I was notified?


Because you live in an area affected by the RSN fee and that status generates the notification. The same function that gives you access to your RSN's also ties you to the notification system. Notifying you is a requirement. It isn't something they just like to do. It is something they most do. If you can show that you did not receive it, we will have the first notification failure on record. The only reported notification failure out of 20 million.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Because you live in an area affected by the RSN fee and that status generates the notification. The same function that gives you access to your RSN's also ties you to the notification system. Notifying you is a requirement. It isn't something they just like to do. It is something they most do. If you can show that you did not receive it, we will have the first notification failure on record. The only reported notification failure out of 20 million.


So the correct answer is that *you* don't know. Why can't you just say that?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3182139 said:


> So the correct answer is that you don't know. Why can't you just say that?


I know that you received a notice because you fall under a group being assessed the RSN fee.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> I know that you received a notice because you fall under a group being access the RSN fee.


You can only know what you can verify for certain, which you can't do in this case. You may choose to believe what someone else has said, but you don't know. A lawyer would have a field day with you as a witness against his client.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3182143 said:


> You can only know what you can verify for certain, which you can't do in this case. You may choose to believe what someone else has said, but you don't know. A lawyer would have a field day with you as a witness against his client.


 Maybe you'll get a personal letter of apology from Mike White for being one in 20 million!


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

studechip;3182133 said:


> I have contacted him and we are in the process. Now, will you answer my question? How do you know for certain that I was notified?


Will you update us on the result?


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

dpeters11 said:


> Will you update us on the result?


Yes, I will.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Maybe you'll get a personal letter of apology from Mike White for being one in 20 million!


You have now completely avoided answering four of my direct questions. Want to try for five?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3182153 said:


> You have now completely avoided answering four of my direct questions. Want to try for five?


I know that you received the notification because you are among those who were notified. You'd have us believe you are the first of 20 million. Let us know when get confirmation of that.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

Hoosier205;3182155 said:


> I know that you received the notification because you are among those who were notified. You'd have us believe you are the first of 20 million. Let us know when get confirmation of that.


Maybe a better wording would be that he had the notification definitely "sent"? Maybe it got lost in the mail, spam email folder, etc?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Justin23;3182160 said:


> Maybe a better wording would be that he had the notification definitely "sent"? Maybe it got lost in the mail, spam email folder, etc?


I agree.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Hoosier205 said:


> When every customer being assessed a specific few was notified of it...they have been notified and the fee is not hidden. Very simple Harsh.


Notice is not when you see your bill and it says $2 RSN fee.

Notice would have been a letter,Email, or even a notice on their website 1 month prior.

I got none of this ,as I'm sure many other didn't either.
Not everyone knows or cares about satellite tv forums.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Hoosier205 said:


> I know that you received a notice because you fall under a group being assessed the RSN fee.


 Wow, you don't know Squat!.

Let me see your notice.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Justin23 said:


> Maybe a better wording would be that he had the notification definitely "sent"? Maybe it got lost in the mail, spam email folder, etc?


Since you claim your a Directv founder, Lets see the mass emails you sent out to your customers.:hurah:


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

This was my notice from Directv.

Current Charges for Service Period 02/13/13 - 03/12/13 

02/13 03/12 XTRA Monthly *70.99 *

02/13 03/12 HBO, STARZ!, SHOWTIME, & CINEMAX Monthly *47.00* 

01/16 04/15 DIRECTV HD EXTRA PACK 3 Months Free 0.00 

02/13 03/12 DIRECTV Protection Plan Monthly 5.99 

05/13 03/12 NFL SUNDAY TICKET 2012 0.00 

07/20 06/19 NFL SUNDAY TICKET MAX 2012 Upgrade Special Free Offer 0.00 

02/13 03/12 Advanced Receiver Monthly* 25.00 *

Fees 

02/14 *Regional Sports Fee 2.00 *

02/14 Additional TV 6.00 

02/14 Additional TV 6.00 

02/14 Additional TV 6.00 

02/14 Primary TV 6.00


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

Please take the "extra" comments to PM.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt;3182207 said:


> Since you claim your a Directv founder, Lets see the mass emails you sent out to your customers.:hurah:


"You're"

As SatelliteRacer mentioned previously...PM him your acct # and he will provide the date & method the notification was sent.

And as I said, the notifications were definitely "sent"...but perhaps not "received" for a variety of reasons.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Justin23 said:


> "You're"
> 
> As SatelliteRacer mentioned previously...PM him your acct # and he will provide the date & method the notification was sent.
> 
> And as I said, the notifications were definitely "sent"...but perhaps not "received" for a variety of reasons.


OK will do. I have atleast 15 Directv emails currently in my inbox.

None of which state a price increase of any kind!!!

So tell me how and why the delivery would be any different then the other 15?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

damondlt;3182291 said:


> OK will do. I have atleast 15 Directv emails currently in my inbox.
> 
> None of which state a price increase of any kind!!!
> 
> So tell me how and why the delivery would be any different then the other 15?


...



Satelliteracer;3179561 said:


> All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt;3182291 said:


> OK will do. I have atleast 15 Directv emails currently in my inbox.
> 
> None of which state a price increase of any kind!!!
> 
> So tell me how and why the delivery would be any different then the other 15?


Because maybe it wasn't sent via email?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Hoosier205 said:


> ...


Yep that statement was not true. Where was is?, I have every email Directv has sent me since May of 2012 as well as every statement and payment,and all the other Directv Cinema movie guide,and News.

No price increase or RSN fee notice at all!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Justin23 said:


> Because maybe it wasn't sent via email?


I have a mail box too.
I also have a cell phone.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt;3182309 said:


> I have a mail box too.
> I also have a cell phone.


Once again...PM Satelliteracer and he will tell you the date & method the notification was sent.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

It would seem this discussion has pretty much run it's course.

On the one hand, I believe DirecTV followed normal procedures to send notice to the customers affected by this change.

On the other hand, it is not at all surprising that a small percentage may not have received those notices for whatever reason, which could range from the notice not being sent to the customer getting it but not realizing they did.

To argue back and forth that "I didn't" , "Yes you did" is accomplishing nothing. I am certainly willing to accept that some did not, but I'm also willing to accept that isn't a big enough deal to warrant 160+ posts debating.


----------



## Alebob911 (Mar 22, 2007)

carl6;3182317 said:


> It would seem this discussion has pretty much run it's course.
> 
> On the one hand, I believe DirecTV followed normal procedures to send notice to the customers affected by this change.
> 
> ...


Amen!


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

damondlt said:


> OK will do. I have atleast 15 Directv emails currently in my inbox.
> 
> None of which state a price increase of any kind!!!
> 
> So tell me how and why the delivery would be any different then the other 15?


I'm happy to help. Just PM me your account number.

First, we are required by law to notify. We take it VERY SERIOUSLY. We have records of every notification, how it went out (bill insert, email, letter, etc), when it went out, etc.

Second, EVERY customer is notified one way or another.

As to your question above, how you are notified is dependent on many factors. For example, if you live in the state of Wisconsin you will get a paper notification (bill insert or letter) and cannot be notified via email. That is a state law there. If you receive other emails from D*, that doesn't mean you are notified of your price increase via email. Usually, if you receive an ebill, you received an email notification, unless some other legal requirement means a different type of communication. So in your case, you may have opted to receive emails for marketing reasons, etc, but if you get a paper bill you more than likely got a bill insert.

Now, here's another exception. If you have joint billing from a Telco because you bundle. For example, you have AT&T phone service and D* video but you get only one bill, from AT&T. In that case, you would have been sent a separate letter, not a bill insert, or an email.

Just a few examples of how different customers receive different communications dependent on state laws, or dependent on what type of bill you receive and who you receive your bill from.

I'm happy to check in your case when you were notified, how you were notified. Just PM me.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I have a mail box too.
> I also have a cell phone.


You cannot send price change notifications via phone...regulations do not allow for it.


----------



## Ed Campbell (Feb 17, 2006)

studechip;3182143 said:


> You can only know what you can verify for certain, which you can't do in this case. You may choose to believe what someone else has said, but you don't know. A lawyer would have a field day with you as a witness against his client.


Some of the silliest sophistry ever read. The moon isn't blue cheese either; but, you could dispute that the same way.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

Is there any way to opt out of the RSN fee and stop getting the RSN channels?

Better yet, how about a way to opt out of all the sports only channels and get a significant reduction in the monthly charge?


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

billsharpe said:


> Is there any way to opt out of the RSN fee and stop getting the RSN channels?
> 
> Better yet, how about a way to opt out of all the sports only channels and get a significant reduction in the monthly charge?


You can go to the entertainment package. There aren't any rsns, but ESPN may be in it.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

studechip said:


> You can go to the entertainment package. There aren't any rsns, but ESPN may be in it.


Correct, and ESPN is in it. Family Package is another option.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

studechip said:


> You can go to the entertainment package. There aren't any rsns, but ESPN may be in it.


Of course there are other channels that are not in the package, that are not sports related. Good solution to have, but not for everyone.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

No offence Satelliteracer, But I need a little more of your personal backround or even a Directv ID number or something that states your status with Directv accounts.

I'm not giving out my Account number so all my address,credit card number is flying around out in the open.

I don't need someone poking around my personal information if they are not autherized to do so by Directv.

I can call Directv too and ask where my notice was? They are not going to tell me it was sent if it wasn't.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt;3182523 said:


> No offence Satelliteracer, But I need a little more of your personal backround or even a Directv ID number or something that states your status with Directv accounts.
> 
> I'm not giving out my Account number so all my address,credit card number is flying around out in the open.
> 
> ...


<shaking head>


----------



## boukengreen (Sep 22, 2009)

Justin23 said:


> <shaking head>


+1


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

damondlt said:


> No offence Satelliteracer, But I need a little more of your personal backround or even a Directv ID number or something that states your status with Directv accounts.
> 
> I'm not giving out my Account number so all my address,credit card number is flying around out in the open.
> 
> ...


I would think you can contact DirecTV by phone or possibly email and make that inquiry. I'm not sure the person you contact would be able to find the answer, but if not they should be able to escalate it.

As to providing your account number to Satteliteracer, I will say two things. First, he has established his credibility in these forums over the past few years, which I think you will realize if you check his various postings. Secondly, if he is not an employee of DirecTV there is nothing he could do with your account number that would reveal to him any personal information of yours. So your risk is truly limited. But it is certainly your choice to not provide that information to him if that is your desire. He is only trying to help you resolve your question (as well as determine if something did not work properly in their systems - as he notes they take that requirement seriously).


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

damondlt said:


> Yep that statement was not true. Where was is?, I have every email Directv has sent me since May of 2012 as well as every statement and payment,and all the other Directv Cinema movie guide,and News.
> 
> No price increase or RSN fee notice at all!


Even though we knew about the price increase for months, and were sent a link to know how much the increase is, doesn't mean that directv shouldn't have to at least to some customers, especially paperless customers like me which i didn't receive yet by email.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

acostapimps said:


> Even though we knew about the price increase for months, and were sent a link to know how much the increase is, *doesn't mean that directv shouldn't have to at least to some customers, especially paperless customers like me which i didn't receive yet by email*.


Agree,

Do i really care why it wasn't sent, or what happend behind Directv doors. No! I don't! It doesn't change anything.

Fact is there was no letter, wording of anykind on my bill, or any Email from Directv stating

HBO ,Choice, MRV, increased or RSN fee would be assessed.

By the way, I called Directv back when DBStalk first posted the RSN fee, and Directv told me , I would not be charged because I live in the Scranton Wilkes Barre Market, Not the NY DMA. So what now? Maybe Directv needs to get their facts straight!

$11 increase . Gimmie a break.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Anyone who claims they were not notified can easily verify that they actually were by contacting Satelliteracer. If anyone chooses not to do that, they may as well be admitting that their claim was false.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

damondlt said:


> Agree,
> 
> Do i really care why it wasn't sent, or what happend behind Directv doors. No! I don't! It doesn't change anything.
> 
> ...


At present the best you can say is you didn't receive any notification. You can't say none was sent.

Do you have anyone else (like a spouse) who opens mail? Perhaps it was tossed before _you_ saw it.

Anyway, since you are in a different DMA, I would definitely take up SatelliteRacer's offer. While the other price increases are set, it could have happened that you really aren't supposed to be charged the RSN fee.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

damondlt;3182523 said:


> No offence Satelliteracer, But I need a little more of your personal backround or even a Directv ID number or something that states your status with Directv accounts.
> 
> I'm not giving out my Account number so all my address,credit card number is flying around out in the open.
> 
> ...


Honest question, if you were a dish customer, would you provide it to a DIRT team member?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Hoosier205 said:


> Anyone who claims they were not notified can easily verify that they actually were by contacting Satelliteracer. If anyone chooses not to do that, they may as well be admitting that their claim was false.


That appears to be an unnecessarily harsh description.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## unixguru (Jul 9, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> Anyone who claims they were not notified can easily verify that they actually were by contacting Satelliteracer. If anyone chooses not to do that, they may as well be admitting that their claim was false.


Anybody who uses this forum or anyone on it for interaction between a company and a customer is a fool.

DirecTV needs to come out of the stone ages and allow customers to interact with an online account to do EVERYTHING. Financial institutions (banks, brokerage, etc) seem to be able to do this, including archived notifications. There is *NO EXCUSE* for a $25B+ revenue company not to do this. Yesterday I tried to remove WH from my account online; F....ing unbelievable that one has to call to do that.


----------



## FLWingNut (Nov 19, 2005)

When I used to do collections for credit cards, some customers would say "you never sent me a statement." To which I would say, "I can verify it was sent, but that doesn't mean you received it." Those are two different issues. You can't hold Directv responsible for the US Postal Service, your junk mail settings, your ISP provider, your spouse who might have misplaced it or you, who might have thrown out what you thought was junk mail.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

unixguru;3182746 said:


> Anybody who uses this forum or anyone on it for interaction between a company and a customer is a fool.


Why? We know that Satelliteracer and the Dish DIRT people are legit. The presence and assistance is welcomed and appreciated.



unixguru;3182746 said:


> Yesterday I tried to remove WH from my account online; F....ing unbelievable that one has to call to do that.


It makes perfect sense for them to require a phone call.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

So far, I believe we have three or four people who claim they were not notified. Only one of them has told us they contacted Satelliteracer and will update us on the issue.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

unixguru said:


> Anybody who uses this forum or anyone on it for interaction between a company and a customer is a fool.
> 
> DirecTV needs to come out of the stone ages and allow customers to interact with an online account to do EVERYTHING. Financial institutions (banks, brokerage, etc) seem to be able to do this, including archived notifications. There is *NO EXCUSE* for a $25B+ revenue company not to do this. Yesterday I tried to remove WH from my account online; F....ing unbelievable that one has to call to do that.


There are things my banks and brokerages will NOT do via online chat, email, or other communication that isn't in person, regular mail, or phone. Fraud is a primary concern.

I suspect you can remove WH via email. I know I have been able to do things like this in the past.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Hoosier205 said:


> ...
> It makes perfect sense for them to require a phone call.


Nah. They can accept other means as well.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> *Anyone who claims they were not notified can easily verify that they actually were by contacting Satelliteracer*. If anyone chooses not to do that, they may as well be admitting that their claim was false.


As Tom pointed out, he can only verify that Directv sent a notice. I can only verify that it was or wasn't received. Why are you so willing to believe Satelliteracer and not me?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3182763 said:


> As Tom pointed out, he can only verify that Directv sent a notice. I can only verify that it was or wasn't received. Why are you so willing to believe Satelliteracer and not me?


If they sent a notification, you were notified. If you failed to receive it on your end for whatever reason...that's on you. It doesn't change the fact that you were notified however.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Tom Robertson;3182759 said:


> Nah. They can accept other means as well.


There is a reason why you must call, but you already know that. It serves a purpose.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Hoosier205 said:


> If they sent a notification, you were notified. If you failed to receive it on your end for whatever reason...that's on you. It doesn't change the fact that you were notified however.


Not quite right. That is not "on [intended receipient]." There are other causes for non-receipt of the notification that have nothing to do with either DIRECTV or the receiver.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

studechip said:


> As Tom pointed out, he can only verify that Directv sent a notice. I can only verify that it was or wasn't received. Why are you so willing to believe Satelliteracer and not me?


I don't have a problem with it. 

Things happen.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

If Comcast can do online chats why not Directv, yes it's not secured and somebody else with your information can make changes to your account, But if they implement a protected locked webchat for account pin or answer to a secret question that you setup online with(like some credit cards do) I don't see why I can't be done. I know they need CSR's for first time ordering or billing questions or anything disclosing personal information, But some people with disabilities or the deaf need online chats too with protected web pages which is not that hard to do.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> If they sent a notification, you were notified. *If you failed to receive it on your end for whatever reason...that's on you*. It doesn't change the fact that you were notified however.


If it was a property tax bill, then yes, it would be on me. I should be aware of it and that it is my responsibility. You are asking me to know that I was going to get a bill for something that I don't necessarily even know exists! Does that _*really*_ make sense to you?


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

unixguru said:


> Anybody who uses this forum or anyone on it for interaction between a company and a customer is a fool.


Bingo

And for those of you that actually thought I was serious about my claim to being the president of GM...... I am not. lol


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip;3182790 said:


> If it was a property tax bill, then yes, it would be on me. I should be aware of it and that it is my responsibility. You are asking me to know that I was going to get a bill for something that I don't necessarily even know exists! Does that really make sense to you?


We are talking about people who were notified, yet claim they were not. People such as yourself. Let us know when you have an update.

The initial accusation in this thread was that the fee is hidden. That is false. Then folk moved on to accusing DirecTV of never having notified them. That is also false. So far, you are the only member to publicly take Satelliteracer up on his offer to verify that a notification was sent.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

studechip;3182790 said:


> If it was a property tax bill, then yes, it would be on me. I should be aware of it and that it is my responsibility. You are asking me to know that I was going to get a bill for something that I don't necessarily even know exists! Does that really make sense to you?


To be absolutely sure someone actually got it and read it, they would need to go to a certified letter, and that would generate many more complaints.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> If they sent a notification, you were notified. *If you failed to receive it on your end for whatever reason...that's on you*. It doesn't change the fact that you were notified however.





studechip said:


> If it was a property tax bill, then yes, it would be on me. I should be aware of it and that it is my responsibility. You are asking me to know that I was going to get a bill for something that I don't necessarily even know exists! Does that _*really*_ make sense to you?





Hoosier205 said:


> We are talking about people who were notified, yet claim they were not. People such as yourself. Let us know when you have an update.
> 
> The initial accusation in this thread was that the fee is hidden. That is false. Then folk moved on to accusing DirecTV of never having notified them. That is also false. So far, you are the only member to publicly take Satelliteracer up on his offer to verify that a notification was sent.


You sidestepped my question completely. Are you saying that I should know what I don't know? Answer the question this time, or don't bother responding.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA (Dec 11, 2006)

Just curious how long ago did the notices go out?


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

JACKIEGAGA said:


> Just curious how long ago did the notices go out?


I think SatelliteRacer said between 12/26 and 2/6, depending on your bill cycle.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

JACKIEGAGA said:


> Just curious how long ago did the notices go out?


Per Satelliteracer:



Satelliteracer said:


> All customers that incur the RSN fee were notified either through mail, email, or their bill in an insert. The $2 fee was disclosed from December 26th through February 6th depending on the customer bill cycle.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA (Dec 11, 2006)

Thanks.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

studechip said:


> You sidestepped my question completely. Are you saying that I should know what I don't know? Answer the question this time, or don't bother responding.


I answered your question. You may not have understood the response however. You were sent a notice. It was sent to you. It was sent to everyone being charged the RSN fee. It was either sent either by email, by mail, or within their bill as insert. If you chose to disregard this communication, it was in your spam folder, or someone in your home discarded it...that's on you. To say that you were not notified is a false claim.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

We're stuck in a rut here. Unless anyone has something new to contribute to the notification discussion, please lets move on. It's unfair for a few to hijack the thread.

Please take it to PM if you have nothing new.

Thanks.

Mike


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

One way I find out about knowing if you'll get sports fee or not is to go to the Directv site without logging into my account, and add zip code on the package screen like if you're ordering for the first time, then add a receiver then checkout, It will show the total amount with credits and on the bottom it will shows sports fee amount for certain dma's, but also clear cookies and cache first.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> Honest question, if you were a dish customer, would you provide it to a DIRT team member?


Yes!


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

So they have sufficiently proven that they are with DirecTV, but SR, with mods confirming that he is legit, has not? I don't really follow the Dish side, but I remember the announcement of the project starting, after one of them posted on this side before the rules of the program went into effect, and I didn't see any evidence besides being told by the mods. Of course I trust our mods, but don't really see the difference between trusting that someone is really with DIRT as opposed to DirecTV.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> So they have sufficiently proven that they are with DirecTV, but SR, with mods confirming that he is legit, has not? I don't really follow the Dish side, but I remember the announcement of the project starting, after one of them posted on this side before the rules of the program went into effect, and I didn't see any evidence besides being told by the mods. Of course I trust our mods, but don't really see the difference between trusting that someone is really with DIRT as opposed to DirecTV.


All the Dirt Member can provide ID for the company, as well as contact info.

If satelliteracer wants to send me his Directv Email and ID number, I have no problem discussing it with him.

That has yet to happen.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Also Dirt Team is on more then just this forum.

I've yet to see Satellite racer offering his help on multiple sites.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

unixguru said:


> Anybody who uses this forum or anyone on it for interaction between a company and a customer is a fool.


No. There is no reason for the name calling. Some of us have participated on the forum for more than a decade. We know who to trust and who not to trust. One trusts a little, receives a little trust in return and the trust builds.

If you feel that you have not been able to build up trust in the forum and its members over the many years you have been here that is fine. Others have learned to trust ... and they don't need to be called names.

If you don't trust members here feel free to continue to use the DirecTV website, the telephone and any other method DirecTV offers to get help. But please don't insult those who trust and are trusted on our forums.

This gentle request applies to all ... not just unixguru. Lets keep it civil. And as Mike as requested, lets get away from the rut.

Thanks!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> If you feel that you have not been able to build up trust in the forum and its members over the many years you have been here that is fine. ...!


I don't trust people I've never met or even know their real name.
And tell me why I should, or why anyone should?

Scott Kocourek and RAD I trust . Thats about it.

No offense to anyone else but fact is you wouldn't trust me . So there it is.

Show me some ID.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> ...
> 
> No offense to anyone else but fact is you wouldn't trust me . So there it is.
> 
> ...


That's because you haven't given anyone a reason to, but Satelliteracer has over the years. You're not a newbie here, so I don't know why you doubt him.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> That's because you haven't given anyone a reason to, but Satelliteracer has over the years. You're not a newbie here, so I don't know why you doubt him.


 Because I've seen a number of people with the equipment to see what Directv has in testing. Not just here.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt;3183389 said:


> Scott Kocourek and RAD I trust . Thats about it.
> 
> No offense to anyone else but fact is you wouldn't trust me . So there it is.
> 
> Show me some ID.


What if both Scott & RAD confirm that Satelliteracer is legit and a D* employee? Will you allow him to research the method & date the notification was sent?


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Because I've seen a number of people with the equipment to see what Directv has in testing. Not just here.


You don't believe him because of others with equipment in testing?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> You don't believe him because of others with equipment in testing?


I don't give out personal account info to people I never met, or don't have ID to present for the business.

If you like doing that thats fine.

I don't!

And I didn't say anything about Equipment in testing.

I said just because he has the equipment to scan channels in testing doesn't mean that he can automaticlly be trusted , just because abunch of DBS talk members whom I've never delt with or met say its ok.

End of story, you guys do what you want, and then you are also the same guys who cry when someone has all your personal data and is running around all over the internet with it.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Justin23 said:


> What if both Scott & RAD confirm that Satelliteracer is legit and a D* employee? Will you allow him to research the method & date the notification was sent?


 No I wouldn't.

Just like I wouldn't give you it either even if you showed me ID.

If scott or rad wanted it I would give it.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> ...
> 
> And I didn't say anything about Equipment in testing.
> 
> ...


You didn't say that, and that's not what he does... Sixto does that.

By the way, your account number isn't very private information considering it's required for refer-a-friend.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> You didn't say that, and that's not what he does... Sixto does that.
> 
> By the way, your account number isn't very private information considering it's required for refer-a-friend.


What does that have to do with anything?, My refer a friend is my sister, for one, also refer a *FRIEND*. 

So again if you want to use people you don't know for a refer a friend be my guest. Thats on you not me.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> What does that have to do with anything?, My refer a friend is my sister, for one, also refer a *FRIEND*.
> 
> So again if you want to use people you don't know for a refer a friend be my guest. Thats on you not me.


I thought you were done? Remember you said, "End of story?" Man, you're right...you can't trust anyone on the internet.


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

damondlt said:


> I don't give out personal account info to people I never met, or don't have ID to present for the business.
> 
> If you like doing that thats fine.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt;3183438 said:


> No I wouldn't.
> 
> Just like I wouldn't give you it either even if you showed me ID.
> 
> If scott or rad wanted it I would give it.


What's the difference in giving it to Scott/RAD or either one of them confirming that SatelliteRacer is a D* employee?


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

damondlt said:


> What does that have to do with anything?, My refer a friend is my sister, for one, also refer a *FRIEND*.
> 
> So again if you want to use people you don't know for a refer a friend be my guest. Thats on you not me.


Just curious if you've ever given your credit card to a waiter/waitress at a restaurant?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Ok, one last chance to move on. 

:backtotop

Mike


----------



## Tekneek (Feb 19, 2013)

The real downside to this is that subscribers cannot simply drop the RSNs in their market and then not pay the fee. They must choose a package that will drop additional channels beyond the troublesome RSNs.

In a way, I am glad that this is happening. It further proves that asking everyone to subsidize the ever-growing expense of sports programming is unsustainable and will hasten the death of the "package/bundle" of channels.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I wonder what the backlash would be like if DirecTV instituted a "high priced locals" fee. Charge an extra $2 in any market that had more than six local channels. After all it is expensive to create and maintain spotbeams for local channels and people in those markets are using more space on the satellite than people in markets with less stations. Plus with retransmission consent, DirecTV may be paying more per station in a larger market than they do in a small market. (Not having WABC due to a contract dispute would be a bad thing.)

People want the option of dumping RSNs to save the fees ... how about dumping locals to save the fees?


----------



## Tekneek (Feb 19, 2013)

James Long said:


> People want the option of dumping RSNs to save the fees ... how about dumping locals to save the fees?


Back when I became a DirecTV subscriber, it was a choice to have locals or not. It wasn't required. Is it required now?


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

SR got back to me and gave me a date when their notice was sent. I did get my emailed bill that day and there is a link in the email to the new pricing list that contains the rsn fee. In that respect I was properly notified, but since there was no notice in the email itself, I don't think that is the way it should have been handled. There should have been an email with a specific notice about the rsn fee, or at least a specific notice on the bill, not just a link.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Notified


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

studechip;3183698 said:


> SR got back to me and gave me a date when their notice was sent. I did get my emailed bill that day and there is a link in the email to the new pricing list that contains the rsn fee. In that respect I was properly notified, but since there was no notice in the email itself, I don't think that is the way it should have been handled. There should have been an email with a specific notice about the rsn fee, or at least a specific notice on the bill, not just a link.


How is the link listed? Des it say something like "new pricing"?

Edit: Here's how I see it listed, "Effective 2/7/13, new pricing will be applied to DIRECTV programming packages and services. Click here for more complete details."


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Justin23 said:


> How is the link listed? Des it say something like "new pricing"?
> 
> Edit: Here's how I see it listed, "Effective 2/7/13, new pricing will be applied to DIRECTV programming packages and services. Click here for more complete details."


Yes, that is what it says. Like I said, it probably technically qualifies as being notified, but I think it should have actually said in the email that there will be an increase in the rsn fee. I shouldn't have to click on a link to find that information. I see there are already some that are gleeful. What a surprise.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

studechip said:


> Yes, that is what it says. Like I said, it probably technically qualifies as being notified, but I think it should have actually said in the email that there will be an increase in the rsn fee. I shouldn't have to click on a link to find that information. I see there are already some that are gleeful. What a surprise.


Personally, not gleeful but I appreciate you updating us.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

studechip;3183711 said:


> Yes, that is what it says. Like I said, it probably technically qualifies as being notified, but I think it should have actually said in the email that there will be an increase in the rsn fee. I shouldn't have to click on a link to find that information. I see there are already some that are gleeful. What a surprise.


I'm not gleeful...but I think they kept it general in the description because some customers wouldn't care about the RSN fee. Maybe some would care more about the DVR fee or package increase? By leaving it worded as they did it could cover all customers, not just those that care or were affected by the RSN fee. Just my .02


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

As to locals, I believe you can still ask to have them removed for a savings--but I might be wrong on that. I've never tried to drop locals.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

studechip;3183698 said:


> SR got back to me and gave me a date when their notice was sent. I did get my emailed bill that day and there is a link in the email to the new pricing list that contains the rsn fee. In that respect I was properly notified, but since there was no notice in the email itself, I don't think that is the way it should have been handled. There should have been an email with a specific notice about the rsn fee, or at least a specific notice on the bill, not just a link.


It used to be it was a separate email. I looked, and in December 2010, I got an email specifically about price changes.


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

Sounds like a piss poor way to notify you. But did you really expect them to be more upfront about it?


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

pdxBeav;3183746 said:


> Sounds like a piss poor way to notify you. But did you really expect them to be more upfront about it?


How is putting the notice on the one DIRECTV document people read & pay attention to the most (monthly bill) a bad thing?


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

Should have been highlighted in red in the main email without having to click on a link. Very simple to do. But I understand why they did it that way.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

pdxBeav;3183755 said:


> Should have been highlighted in red in the main email without having to click on a link. Very simple to do. But I understand why they did it that way.


Remember that SR said not all customers were notified the same way. Different laws in certain states...paperless billing, etc.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Justin23 said:


> How is putting the notice on the one DIRECTV document people read & pay attention to the most (monthly bill) a bad thing?


People read & pay attention to their bills? Or do they just look at the total and as long as it has not changed that is as far as they go?

Quite frankly I believe that there are a lot more people who don't look at the bill until the total changes than "read _and_ pay attention". I don't know how you reach those people. Big flashy bill inserts that says "your price is going up $x" in February? Special emails that could still be passed over as some promotion or spam?

I believe DirecTV has done their best to reach people ... but despite their best efforts and the promise that everyone was _sent_ a notice getting everyone to _receive_ a notice and understand it will always be a challenge. The best solution is to keep the price increases small. That way, even if people are ticked when they notice their price increase it is easier to accept the actual increase.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Justin23 said:


> How is putting the notice on the one DIRECTV document people read & pay attention to the most (monthly bill) a bad thing?


Like pdxBeav said, they didn't put a notice in the email. They put a link to the notice. Maybe that is good enough legally, but I think the notice really should have been in the body of the email.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

studechip;3183762 said:


> Like pdxBeav said, they didn't put a notice in the email. They put a link to the notice. Maybe that is good enough legally, but I think the notice really should have been in the body of the email.


In your case, the notification was on the bill: "Effective 2/7/13, new pricing will be applied to DIRECTV programming packages and services"

The details of the changes were: "Click here for more complete details."

You wanted all of the pricing changes to be listed on the bill?


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

James Long;3183761 said:


> People read & pay attention to their bills? Or do they just look at the total and as long as it has not changed that is as far as they go?


Oh I know most don't read their bills. But I do believe out of all the documents/letters D* sends to their customers, the bill is the one read in detail the most.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Let's face it, unless everyone is contacted by a human being, there will be some who miss the message. No matter how blatantly the message is placed. 

And there will be some who complain. It happens.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

Tom Robertson;3183773 said:


> Let's face it, unless everyone is contacted by a human being, there will be some who miss the message. No matter how blatantly the message is placed.
> 
> And there will be some who complain. It happens.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

And I should say this also: at DBStalk, everyone has the opportunity to vent, rant, and rage from time to time. 

We understand that happens too. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

studechip said:


> Like pdxBeav said, they didn't put a notice in the email. They put a link to the notice. Maybe that is good enough legally, but I think the notice really should have been in the body of the email.


It's a general document...there has to be 100's of different versions or permutations which is why the document links to the specific price changes. One person that has Entertainment and no DVR, no price increase. Another person with Entertainment and a DVR, price increase. Another person with Choice and no DVR but lives in a RSN area, different price increase than one with CHOICE with a DVR but not in a RSN area, so on and so forth. You would have so many different letters plus if a customer changed their package between the time the letter was sent and before it was received, you have another issue.

So instead, they keep it general and funnel everyone to the all the changes on document.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

studechip said:


> Yes, that is what it says. Like I said, it probably technically qualifies as being notified, but I think it should have actually said in the email that there will be an increase in the rsn fee. I shouldn't have to click on a link to find that information. I see there are already some that are gleeful. What a surprise.


Stude...thanks for being open about this. Appreciate it. Yes, the letter and email talk about the reasons for the price increase and get into a number of other things but specific pricing information is all in the insert \ website equivalent PDF that has been shown here at DBS Talk a number of times. Both the letter and email say for complete details see the enclosed (bill insert) or links to it in the case of the email for all the details. All pricing details are found on that document for anything that receives an increase.

So everyone can see, the link below is what the the letter looks like. The email version is identical except the border treatments are a little different, but the copy content is the exact same thing with the exception of one line difference...the last sentence in paragraph 4. Instead of saying "the enclosed insert includes complete details on programming pricing" (in the letter version), the email says "Click here for more complete details" (since it's impossible to "enclose" the bill insert into an email). The hyperlink links to the same bill insert in PDF format for those customers. That's the only change between letter and email. I believe the subject line for the email is something like IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR DIRECTV ACCOUNT or something to the effect. On the letter, the outside of the envelope says something very similar.

Hope that helps. Stude was very cool on this and I appreciate it. As mentioned prior, D* takes this stuff seriously and must inform every customer of any pricing changes.

http://i47.tinypic.com/20jicep.jpg


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Satelliteracer said:


> It's a general document...there has to be 100's of different versions or permutations which is why the document links to the specific price changes. One person that has Entertainment and no DVR, no price increase. Another person with Entertainment and a DVR, price increase. Another person with Choice and no DVR but lives in a RSN area, different price increase than one with CHOICE with a DVR but not in a RSN area, so on and so forth. You would have so many different letters plus if a customer changed their package between the time the letter was sent and before it was received, you have another issue.
> 
> So instead, they keep it general and funnel everyone to the all the changes on document.


Which makes perfect and reasonable sense.


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

It's not difficult to send out customized emails. It's actually very trivial. They did the minimum required which is to be expected. People shouldn't get too worked up over it.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Satelliteracer said:


> *It's a general document...there has to be 100's of different versions or permutations which is why the document links to the specific price changes. * One person that has Entertainment and no DVR, no price increase. Another person with Entertainment and a DVR, price increase. Another person with Choice and no DVR but lives in a RSN area, different price increase than one with CHOICE with a DVR but not in a RSN area, so on and so forth. You would have so many different letters plus if a customer changed their package between the time the letter was sent and before it was received, you have another issue.
> 
> So instead, they keep it general and funnel everyone to the all the changes on document.


That's true, but then again, everybody's bill is different, too. You don't send an email with a link to the monthly charges, they appear in the email. The new rsn charge could easily have appeared in the body of the email. It didn't, and that's just the way it is. No big deal really.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

James Long said:


> I wonder what the backlash would be like if DirecTV instituted a "high priced locals" fee. Charge an extra $2 in any market that had more than six local channels. After all it is expensive to create and maintain spotbeams for local channels and people in those markets are using more space on the satellite than people in markets with less stations. Plus with retransmission consent, DirecTV may be paying more per station in a larger market than they do in a small market. (Not having WABC due to a contract dispute would be a bad thing.)
> 
> People want the option of dumping RSNs to save the fees ... how about dumping locals to save the fees?


thought you could already do that


----------



## Tekneek (Feb 19, 2013)

Sounds like they did a less than ideal job of notifying, but that is (unfortunately) to be expected. DirecTV is just a cable company in the sky and engages in many of the same business practices. They hope you just keep paying every month without noticing that anything has changed. Making the notification real obvious would probably upset more people when some will pay the extra few dollars without ever noticing at all.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Tekneek said:


> Sounds like they did a less than ideal job of notifying, but that is (unfortunately) to be expected. DirecTV is just a cable company in the sky and engages in many of the same business practices. They hope you just keep paying every month without noticing that anything has changed. Making the notification real obvious would probably upset more people when some will pay the extra few dollars without ever noticing at all.


funny it seems like this is the same for every electronic bill that I receive - my last months electric bill had a line - "Price increase effective 02/01/2013 - details here", same with the water bill, the gas bill and almost every bill I get electronicly. It comes down to personal responsiblity - if you don't review the bills monthly, and just blinldy pay them the surprises are your bad.

Maybe the link should have been formated like this

"Effective 2/7/13, _*new pricing*_ will be applied to DIRECTV programming packages and services. _*Click here for more complete details*_


----------



## curbside (Jun 30, 2007)

I reviewed my bill for February and found a new $2 charge for Regional Sports Networks. I called DirecTV to complain about not being notified and told them I didn't want the regional sports networks anyways but they said it couldn't be removed. I told them I would downgrade my package and they said I would lose my $10 credit for HD for life. You can't win here. When I asked the CSR how much longer I had a commitment to DirecTV she transferred me to another department. I told the new CSR my story and he couldn't find where DirecTV notified me about the new charge. Alex, the CSR, also said this was a mandated fee from the FCC but he would credit me the $2 for one year. Oh well, better in my pocket.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Are you sure the email for your January bill didn't have language in it about the new pricing?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

curbside said:


> Alex, the CSR, also said this was a mandated fee from the FCC ...


:nono2:

Nice to see that you got a credit.


----------



## curbside (Jun 30, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> Are you sure the email for your January bill didn't have language in it about the new pricing?


I look at my bill online. I didn't see anything.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

curbside said:


> I look at my bill online. I didn't see anything.


Check your December bill, too. My January bill has a link in it to the new charges.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

258 messages about a $2 or $3 surcharge. Wow!

Life is too short, guys!


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

billsharpe said:


> 258 messages about a $2 or $3 surcharge. Wow!
> 
> Life is too short, guys!


for me it's not about the $2 or $3. It's about the way I was notified.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

dpeters11;3184785 said:


> Are you sure the email for your January bill didn't have language in it about the new pricing?


 I've had the RSN fee on my bill for a year now. I don't remember being notified but I remember it showing up last February.


----------



## wahooq (Oct 19, 2011)

everyone *****es if their viewing pleasure isn't available..yet they dont want to pay for it....hmmmmm.......This is pay tv peeps....if you dont wanna pay for it then cut the cord!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

wahooq said:


> everyone *****es if their viewing pleasure isn't available..yet they dont want to pay for it....hmmmmm.......


 If $178 per month isn't paying for then , maybe you should tell me what is.

I don't even have the Top Package either.

So don't tell me people don't already as you claim "Want to pay for it"

My Directv bill is Higher then my Electric bill, Property Taxes, Car insurance per month.

I took an $11 dollar increase. And for what?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

wahooq said:


> everyone *****es if their viewing pleasure isn't available..yet they dont want to pay for it....hmmmmm.......This is pay tv peeps....if you dont wanna pay for it then cut the cord!


It's a discussion. There's no need to attack those in the discussion.

For everyone, you don't have to read the thread if it is just gonna make you mad.

Keep it civil people and remember, discuss the topic and not other members.

Mike


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

damondlt said:


> If $178 per month isn't paying for then , maybe you should tell me what is.
> 
> I don't even have the Top Package either.
> 
> ...


Higher than your property taxes? Higher than your electric bill? I need to move to Pennsylvania. 

Just a question, when your Car Insurance bill goes up, do you get more protection? When your electric bill goes up do you get more electricity or better electricity? Etc? Usually bills go up because the source costs to provide those services go up. No different for television, electricity, etc. Programming costs go up, so rates go up.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Satelliteracer said:


> Higher than your property taxes? Higher than your electric bill? I need to move to Pennsylvania.


My electric bill is still smaller than the $178 stated ... but my property taxes are under $900 per year - which is a low bar if one wants other bills to be lower ($75 per month).

But I get his point. When one is looking at their bills picking off the highest ones and asking how do I get this one to be lower is valid.



> Just a question, when your Car Insurance bill goes up, do you get more protection? When your electric bill goes up do you get more electricity or better electricity? Etc?


Features can be added to car insurance when the rates go up. Perhaps the company adds "Accident Forgiveness" or "Vanishing Deductible" or some other feature that costs less than the increase. Electric companies can improve service - which is not normally seen unless there is an outage or frequent brown outs. The improvements are hidden.



> Usually bills go up because the source costs to provide those services go up. No different for television, electricity, etc. Programming costs go up, so rates go up.


With the DirecTV press releases and rate increase notices touting all the new stuff DirecTV is offering (and BTW here are our new rates) it would seem that DirecTV's problem is with added features ... including things added that their customers might not want to pay for ... along with the standard "cost of what you already have" rate increases.

While customers are technically not forced to pay for their RSNs the alternative has been made undesirable ... limiting the subscriber to a package that does not include valuable entertainment options. Customers can't get the Cooking Channel or IFC without paying for RSNs - or DIY, Biography, H2, Nat Geo Wild, Destination America, WGN, Fox Business and other channels. All are off the table unless the customer pays for their RSNs.

So customers have to suck it up, pay for RSNs and pay the additional RSN fee (in select markets) just to get those non-sports entertainment channels. Not exactly a "choice".


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Satelliteracer said:


> Higher than your property taxes? Higher than your electric bill? I need to move to Pennsylvania.


I've been trying to convince my wife to move to PA for years for just those reasons. But, PA has begun to raise property taxes along the Delaware River so that they're more in line with NJ property taxes.

We pay over $200 a month for D* service and that's one of our lower bills.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Satelliteracer said:


> Higher than your property taxes? Higher than your electric bill? I need to move to Pennsylvania.
> 
> Just a question, when your Car Insurance bill goes up, do you get more protection? When your electric bill goes up do you get more electricity or better electricity? Etc? Usually bills go up because the source costs to provide those services go up. No different for television, electricity, etc. Programming costs go up, so rates go up.


My car insurance went from $1600 a year down to $1200 a year with Geico, I haven't had an increase in about 9 years. 
And yes I have more insurance now then I did 5 years ago. And More expensive cars as well!

If you guys have constant car insurance increases, Maybe you should learn how to drive, or spend some time away from DBS talk and Directv and shop around a little.

Electric bill goes up and down , 2 years ago it was .10 and now it .755 per KLWH. So has my bill increased sure but it has also dropped. And its due for another drop as of March down to .725.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> I've been trying to convince my wife to move to PA for years for just those reasons. But, PA has begun to raise property taxes along the Delaware River so that they're more in line with NJ property taxes.
> 
> We pay over $200 a month for D* service and that's one of our lower bills.
> 
> Rich


If you move to PA School Tax is the Killer.

We have one property in Wayne County where I live with 10 acres and I pay About $500 per year in property taxes but school tax is $2800. This is not bad!

Now my rental houses in Monroe County 1 acre each are $1300 Each on Property Taxes, and $5200 each on School taxes. So depending on where you choose in Pa makes a big difference.

But we do Have electric choice too, which allows you to choose your own Generation company which can save you a few extra dollars on your power.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Satelliteracer said:


> When your electric bill goes up do you get more electricity .


 UM yes, since its based on what you use.

It also heats my hot water, washes and drys my clothes, Powers my lights, Computers and TV. And don't forget most of all Powers My HR34,HR23, 2 H25's and Swim 16.

Maybe I can send Directv a Bill for the power *their equipment *uses.:eek2:


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

James Long said:


> My electric bill is still smaller than the $178 stated ... but my property taxes are under $900 per year - which is a low bar if one wants other bills to be lower ($75 per month).
> 
> But I get his point. When one is looking at their bills picking off the highest ones and asking how do I get this one to be lower is valid.
> 
> ...


The question is, how much choice does the provider have when you factor in possible penetration rate requirements in their agreements? I'm assuming that's why ESPN is in so many of the lower packages, due to penetration rate requirements.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HinterXGames said:


> The question is, how much choice does the provider have when you factor in possible penetration rate requirements in their agreements? I'm assuming that's why ESPN is in so many of the lower packages, due to penetration rate requirements.


The carriers are passing on their lack of choice to customers who then have a lack of choice. It is a broken system ... but since there is no better it is the system we have to work with.

The carriers have more leverage than the customers in this matter. Perhaps that is how DirecTV managed to introduce an RSN free "Entertainment" package last year ... finding a way to offer and market a lower price point that avoids the cost of RSNs (at the price of giving up getting dozens of other channels).

The carriers are our advocates in the matter. They are the ones with the final answer whether a channel is carried on their system or not. They are the ones who set the pricing structure. And they are the ones who have us as customers.


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

James Long said:


> The carriers are passing on their lack of choice to customers who then have a lack of choice. It is a broken system ... but since there is no better it is the system we have to work with.
> 
> The carriers have more leverage than the customers in this matter. Perhaps that is how DirecTV managed to introduce an RSN free "Entertainment" package last year ... finding a way to offer and market a lower price point that avoids the cost of RSNs (at the price of giving up getting dozens of other channels).
> 
> The carriers are our advocates in the matter. They are the ones with the final answer whether a channel is carried on their system or not. They are the ones who set the pricing structure. And they are the ones who have us as customers.


I agree with most of that, though price setting I put more on the Networks than I do the carriers. I haven't heard of disputes because a network wants to lower their asking price, or even because a provider wants to lower their asking price. Most, from what i've read, stem from said Network wanting to raise their prices.
--
From the consumer standpoint though, it's alot easier to call and chew out your provider than it is a network. Which is why they have the leverage, because Network's dont' have to deal with the customer service end of the pricing like providers (nor suffer the competition of such).


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> If you move to PA School Tax is the Killer.
> 
> We have one property in Wayne County where I live with 10 acres and I pay About $500 per year in property taxes but school tax is $2800. This is not bad!


Geez, every time I want to buy another house, something else I never heard of pops up. But $3,300 for property taxes and school taxes (we pay for our schools with our property taxes) still would save us quite a bit. We are paying ~ $8,000 a year now and a 5 grand savings would be nice.



> Now my rental houses in Monroe County 1 acre each are $1300 Each on Property Taxes, and $5200 each on School taxes. So depending on where you choose in Pa makes a big difference.


And the closer you get to the Delaware River, the higher the taxes. And that's where we'd have to move.



> But we do Have electric choice too, which allows you to choose your own Generation company which can save you a few extra dollars on your power.


We have that too. On average, our electric bill is a bit less than $400 a month.

Rich


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HinterXGames said:


> I agree with most of that, though price setting I put more on the Networks than I do the carriers. I haven't heard of disputes because a network wants to lower their asking price, or even because a provider wants to lower their asking price. Most, from what i've read, stem from said Network wanting to raise their prices.


Very few buyers seek higher prices. Unless there is something wrong with the product they have been buying and they believe paying more would improve the product buyers seek lower prices.

Negotiations are secretive ... when they fall apart we occasionally get a glimpse as the providers and carriers make their claims in press releases and on websites. I have seen comments where it seemed that the demand of the network was a better tier placement and not specifically a higher price per subscriber. The gross payment to such a network would be higher if millions of subscribers were added - even at the same price or less per subscriber.



> From the consumer standpoint though, it's alot easier to call and chew out your provider than it is a network. Which is why they have the leverage, because Network's dont' have to deal with the customer service end of the pricing like providers (nor suffer the competition of such).


I agree. We are the customers of the carrier not the network. Without the business relationship we have no standing with the network.

The networks have an easy answer ... "other carriers are paying the same as we are asking of DirecTV". Proof? Not available. However it seems that what other carriers are paying seems to keep going up.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> And the closer you get to the Delaware River, the higher the taxes. And that's where we'd have to move.
> 
> We have that too. On average, our electric bill is a bit less than $400 a month.
> 
> Rich


My 2 retals are in East Stroudsburg, about 3 miles from Delaware River.

The Brough of East Stoudsburg is one of the Highest taxed Broughs in PA.

Our Electric Bill in Winter is less then $300, in summer less then $100. Our Yearly monthly average is $165 per month.

Thats for our house. Now my business is ran on the same grounds but Zoned commercial, so I have to pay more and seperate for my business.
I use Propane gas for heat as well, which runs about $225 per month for 4 months out of the year.
I built my own house spent a crapload on the modern Eco friendly crap.

The difference of this though and Directv, Is I will never walk away ahead of the game with Directv in any way shape or form.
Anything else I buy, nail, or plug in that cost me money ,I will own!

I like Directv , but sooner or later I think something needs to be done about these off that wall increases and prices year after.
RSN fees and MRV fees are a joke and a half!


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

damondlt;3185666 said:


> UM yes, since its based on what you use.
> 
> It also heats my hot water, washes and drys my clothes, Powers my lights, Computers and TV. And don't forget most of all Powers My HR34,HR23, 2 H25's and Swim 16.
> 
> Maybe I can send Directv a Bill for the power their equipment uses.:eek2:


I was talking about the cost per killowatt. If that goes up, you aren't getting more efficient electricity or "more electricity". Those costs when they go up are because the cost to provide it have gone up. Salaries for employees, cost to produce, etc. Directv equipment is energy star rated and won a number of awards in the industry as a result.

Yes, electricity does all those things, my point was rates go up and you had made the comment that DTV rates went up and "for what". Well, electric rates go up and the electricity didn't get any better. DTV rates went up and yet 20 new HD channels were launched, new channels were added, new services were added like Directv Everywhere, improvements to hardware, new hardware (Genie, etc), etc, etc. So I would argue that despite the rates going up (driven mostly by huge programming cost increases), DTV has tried hard to also provide more value in return, thus the "for what" comment left me scratching my head.

On the car insurance, well that depends on one's situation. I haven't had a ticket in over a decade and never an accident....but I live in California where chances of accident are higher, chances of theft, etc, are higher. I also have a teenager and another one not too far behind. So it's not a matter of learning to drive better, have that down just fine, but what the circumstances are.

Finally, the property taxes...again, California. Despite Prop 13, depending on when you purchased here and due to the insane cost of homes (even in this economy), the idea of paying less $100 a month in property taxes out here is so foreign. I know many people spending $500 a month in property taxes alone for an average home. That's why I made the comment.

Just my two cents, but the average DTV customer spends about $3 a day for 24 hours of news, sports, entertainment, 100's of channels, many quality services. Many people realize this value equivalency. Others may not find it as valuable, that is an individual decision just as someone has to make that decision on their $150 a month mobile phone bill, or their $5 a day Starbucks habit, or whatever it is folks choose to spend their money on. There is a defined pie of dollars for each person, we try to bring a great service to folks. It's not for everyone, it is for others. Again, my two cents.

Enjoy the weekend.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Satelliteracer said:


> DTV rates went up and yet 20 new HD channels were launched, new channels were added, new services were added like Directv Everywhere, improvements to hardware, new hardware (Genie, etc), etc, etc. .


Yep all the stuff not everyone cares about , But is forced to pay for.

If you guys all have so much time on your hands to watch TV anywhere maybe you should get a job. Cause I would say vast majority of working Americans don't have time to eat let alone watch tv at work.

And Wow a satellite TV provider launched more channels , Stop traffic! Maybe they should get another award!

I donated $5000 grand last year to the red cross, Maybe I should get an award.

I also don't care about Directv Energy Star awards, Every appliance and electronic ,furnace, Hot Water Heater. Had Energy star approval many years ago. BIG DEAL!


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

Will someone please close this thread...otherwise it will keep going back and forth


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

damondlt said:


> I donated $5000 grand last year to the red cross, Maybe I should get an award.


For a $5,000,000 donation, yes you should get an award.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Yep all the stuff not everyone cares about , But is forced to pay for.


Ahhh yes... a company should never add to their product unless EVERY customer cares. That's genius!



> If you guys all have so much time on your hands to watch TV anywhere maybe you should get a job. Cause I would say vast majority of working Americans don't have time to eat let alone watch tv at work.


So TV Anywhere is of no value unless you're lazy and unemployed? Many people travel for work and not every hotel has decent tv options. Hospital stays can be extremely boring and TV Anywhere helps.



> And Wow a satellite TV provider launched more channels , Stop traffic! Maybe they should get another award!


What was DirecTV thinking? They shouldn't add any channels unless it's free & everyone wants them.



> I donated $5000 grand last year to the red cross, Maybe I should get an award.


Excellent job at bragging and using a horrible analogy. That definitely deserves an award, here you go....


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

I wasn't trying to be confrontational, unfortunately on the internet it is hard to determine voice, intent, tone. 

I'm off to a soccer tournament for my kids. An all day affair where we have 3 games over 8 hours. I'll be using my Directv Everywhere to keep us entertained between matches. I, and many others, like that flexibility.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Satelliteracer said:


> An all day affair where we have 3 games over 8 hours. I'll be using my Directv Everywhere to keep us entertained between matches. I, and many others, like that flexibility.


 Enjoy! you be the only one worried about TV.:lol:


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

Satelliteracer said:


> I wasn't trying to be confrontational, unfortunately on the internet it is hard to determine voice, intent, tone.
> 
> I'm off to a soccer tournament for my kids. An all day affair where we have 3 games over 8 hours. I'll be using my Directv Everywhere to keep us entertained between matches. I, and many others, like that flexibility.


Enjoy your day. Even though I don't sub any more, I do enjoy your input on DirecTV and your contributions to the forum.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> So TV Anywhere is of no value unless you're lazy and unemployed? Many people travel for work and not every hotel has decent tv options. Hospital stays can be extremely boring and TV Anywhere helps.
> 
> Ex]


 Yea I do travel for work,But I work 13 and 14 hour days on the road, the rest is for eating and sleeping.

I don't know about where you live ,But PA hospitals don't allow cell phone devices. Most people in the hospital aren't too concerned about TV at this point.:lol:


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Enjoy! you be the only one worried about TV.:lol:


You would be amazed at the number of streams each week utilized by customers on Directv Everywhere. Amazed.

Different strokes for different folks, we have to remember that how we view things or our own life experiences aren't the same for everyone, or even the majority. Every person is different and how they weigh the importance of one thing vs another is also different. I don't drink coffee, I can't comprehend spending $5 on a cup of coffee and doing it everyday. It doesn't compute for me. For others, the world would end if they don't get there Starbucks.

To each their own.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Yea I do travel for work,But I work 13 and 14 hour days on the road, the rest is for eating and sleeping.
> 
> I don't know about where you live ,But PA hospitals don't allow cell phone devices. Most people in the hospital aren't too concerned about TV at this point.:lol:


Good for you for working long days, but not everyone does that.

I guess our Texas hospitals have better technology because the last 3 I was at had WiFi, doctors & visitors on cells, and tvs...Hmmm, I wonder why there's tvs if most people in the hospital aren't too concerned about TV?


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

I have been following this thread since it started a couple of weeks ago.

There are several "bottom lines":

First, DirecTV is a "for profit" company and is going to raise prices at every opportunity. Not a matter of right / wrong / good / evil, just the way it is.

Second, despite claims to the contrary, there is no evidence to suggest or reason to believe that DirecTV is an advocate for their customers other than to the extent that it benefits DirecTV. Again, not a matter of right / wrong / good / evil, just the way it is.

Third, many (most?) customers are not thrilled with DirecTV price increases. Expecting otherwise is silly / naive / stupid.

Fourth, the same group of fan-boys, employees and super cheerleaders can be counted on to D*fend any and all DirecTV price increases and how price increases are communicated (or not). Expecting otherwise is silly / naive / stupid.

To quote Walter Cronkite, "That's the way it is".


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

damondlt;3186093 said:


> I don't know about where you live ,But PA hospitals don't allow cell phone devices.


This is not true.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> My 2 retals are in East Stroudsburg, about 3 miles from Delaware River.
> 
> The Brough of East Stoudsburg is one of the Highest taxed Broughs in PA.


Did that just happen or has it always been like that? I looked on Google Earth for your location and it would be too much of a commute for my wife.



> Our Electric Bill in Winter is less then $300, in summer less then $100. Our Yearly monthly average is $165 per month.


Geez, you're lucky, first sign of pollen and we've gotta turn the central air on, both my wife and son have bad allergies. That's why my electric bill is so high.



> Thats for our house. Now my business is ran on the same grounds but Zoned commercial, so I have to pay more and seperate for my business.
> I use Propane gas for heat as well, which runs about $225 per month for 4 months out of the year.


Didn't realize propane was that expensive.



> The difference of this though and Directv, Is I will never walk away ahead of the game with Directv in any way shape or form.
> Anything else I buy, nail, or plug in that cost me money ,I will own!
> 
> I like Directv , but sooner or later I think something needs to be done about these off that wall increases and prices year after.
> RSN fees and MRV fees are a joke and a half!


I own 9 out of 12 HRs and could sell them right now and make back what they cost. I could also live with just a subscription to NetFlix and a couple HRs and a basic package that would give me the Yes Network, but the wife and kids shot that idea down. There's enough stuff on NetFlix to keep me happy for a long time. I have a feeling satellite dishes are gonna go the way of carburetors.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Satelliteracer said:


> I was talking about the cost per killowatt. If that goes up, you aren't getting more efficient electricity or "more electricity". Those costs when they go up are because the cost to provide it have gone up. Salaries for employees, cost to produce, etc. Directv equipment is energy star rated and won a number of awards in the industry as a result.
> 
> Yes, electricity does all those things, my point was rates go up and you had made the comment that DTV rates went up and "for what". Well, electric rates go up and the electricity didn't get any better. DTV rates went up and yet 20 new HD channels were launched, new channels were added, new services were added like Directv Everywhere, improvements to hardware, new hardware (Genie, etc), etc, etc. So I would argue that despite the rates going up (driven mostly by huge programming cost increases), DTV has tried hard to also provide more value in return, thus the "for what" comment left me scratching my head.
> 
> ...


Almost sounds like California is cheaper to live in than NJ.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

carl6 said:


> For a $5,000,000 donation, yes you should get an award.


Good catch, missed that one, I did. :lol:

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> Good for you for working long days, but not everyone does that.
> 
> I guess our Texas hospitals have better technology because the last 3 I was at had WiFi, doctors & visitors on cells, and tvs...Hmmm, I wonder why there's tvs if most people in the hospital aren't too concerned about TV?


In your last post you mentioned lazy and unemployed people. That would be me...and I love it!

I don't think I've been in a hospital in NJ in the last few decades that doesn't have TVs (another stream of money for them) and now Wi-Fi.

Rich


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Rich said:


> In your last post you mentioned lazy and unemployed people. That would be me...and I love it!
> ...


Me too. :lol:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Rich said:


> I don't think I've been in a hospital in NJ in the last few decades that doesn't have TVs (another stream of money for them) and now Wi-Fi.


I'm certainly not going to speak for every hospital in the state, especially for one in a state that I don't live in, but I have a friend that works in a hospital and I was surprised how much cell phone use happens in the building.

The official hospital cell phone policy limits usage to the waiting rooms and bans cell phones from the floor with the nursery and babies and from ICU. However the hospital has installed a system of cell phone repeaters in the building to intentionally improve coverage for those devices. Even in areas where cell phones are "banned".

It turns out that doctors have cell phones ... and doctors want their cell phones to work for voice and text messages wherever they are in the hospital - even at patient bedsides. And patients have cell phones ... and their close family visitors have cell phones. As long as the cell phone use is not disruptive of other patients and staff the ban simply is not enforced.

At least at that hospital. Not speaking for every hospital in the state or any other state.

As for TVs they are everywhere and served from the local cable system. Most are special sets designed for bedside use and are mounted on adjustable arms where the patient has private viewing. They don't allow the patient to view premium channels, PPV or the content of their home DVRs but they do provide a good level of service.

I don't see a problem with DirecTV's everywhere service ... I generally do not have a need for such service but I would not deny it from others. But developing such services costs money. I hope the majority of subscribers see the benefit.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> I don't see a problem with DirecTV's everywhere service ... I generally do not have a need for such service but I would not deny it from others. But developing such services costs money. I hope the majority of subscribers see the benefit.


Totally agree.

And while I may be amazed at the amount of customers that use Directv Everywhere. I bet its marginal at best.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> Good for you for working long days, but not everyone does that.
> 
> I guess our Texas hospitals have better technology because the last 3 I was at had WiFi, doctors & visitors on cells, and tvs...Hmmm, I wonder why there's tvs if most people in the hospital aren't too concerned about TV?


 I would love to see a supporting Number where you acually believe these Doctors and Visitors are Streaming Directv Everywhere.

I'm sure the supplied TV's are more then OK.

Texting and Talking on cell phone has nothing to do with Streaming Directv content. Nice try though.

I would love to see a supporting Number of people streaming Netflix in hospitals? I bet thats not nearly as High as you make it out to be, Let alone Directv.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

damondlt;3186228 said:


> I bet its marginal at best.


Apparently not.



Satelliteracer;3186106 said:


> You would be amazed at the number of streams each week utilized by customers on Directv Everywhere. Amazed.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> Did that just happen or has it always been like that? I looked on Google Earth for your location and it would be too much of a commute for my wife.
> 
> Rich


Since about 2004, Its been climbing ever since, Foreclosure rate is through the roof, they built all these schools and now enrollment is way down, They promised New Yorkers the world, and sold all of them houses that cost way over apprasied Value so it would look good for the morgage companys , now they aren't worth crap.

They forced all the senior Residents out, turned it into little NY. Crime is very high in Monroe county.

Its sad ! East Stroudsburg was in its day an awesome country mountain Vaction getaway in the Heart of the Pocono Mountains. Now it sucks!


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I would love to see a supporting Number where you acually believe these Doctors and Visitors are Streaming Directv Everywhere.


Please tell me where I said that... I'll wait.



> I'm sure the supplied TV's are more then OK.


Yes, for some.



> Texting and Talking on cell phone has nothing to do with Streaming Directv content. Nice try though.


Again... Please tell me where I said that... I'll wait.



> I would love to see a supporting Number of people streaming Netflix in hospitals? I bet thats not nearly as High as you make it out to be, Let alone Directv.


And how high did I make it out to be?

By the way, you're very wrong about Pennsylvania hospitals banning cell phones.


----------



## jabber217 (Feb 24, 2013)

hi.....i bought a leased hd dvr (directv) from a private owner.....is there any way around it?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> By the way, you're very wrong about Pennsylvania hospitals banning cell phones.


Never said Banned, Big signs throughout the Hopitals requiring Cell Phones TO BE SHUT OFF!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> Please tell me where I said that... I'll wait.
> 
> .


*I guess our Texas hospitals have better technology because the last 3 I was at had WiFi, doctors & visitors on cells, and tvs...Hmmm,*


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> *I guess our Texas hospitals have better technology because the last 3 I was at had WiFi, doctors & visitors on cells, and tvs...Hmmm,*


That doesn't say..."... Doctors and Visitors are Streaming Directv Everywhere."


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> That doesn't say..."... Doctors and Visitors are *Streaming Directv Everywhere*."


 Thats what we were talking about.:lol:


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Never said Banned, Big signs throughout the Hopitals requiring Cell Phones TO BE SHUT OFF!


You said, "PA hospitals don't allow cell phone devices." That's incorrect.

Here's just one link of proof. St. Clair Hospital is in Pittsburgh and one of the top 100 hospitals in the country.
http://www.stclair.org/207/about#Cell Phone


> Cell phone policy
> 
> *Patients and visitors are permitted to use cell phones in the Hospital, *providing the phones and phone conversations do not disrupt patient care or recovery. If necessary, staff will ask that cell phones be placed in the vibrate mode and cell phones not be used in patient care areas, including patient, treatment and procedure rooms.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

This thread is played out. There is a thread about the DIRECTV price increases. Take the discussion there.

Mike


----------

