# White Maps Out DirecTV's Game Plan



## Gary16 (Oct 8, 2006)

> Satellite Giant Possibly Eyeing Sports Nets
> By Mike Farrell -- Multichannel News, February 18, 2010
> 
> On his first conference call with analysts since being named DirecTV CEO in November, Michael White mapped out his agenda for the satellite giant, which includes improving the customer experience through technologies like whole-home digital video recorders and 3-D TV and possibly adding to its stable of regional sports networks.


Read more: http://www.multichannel.com/article/449929-White_Maps_Out_DirecTV_s_Game_Plan.php


----------



## slimoli (Jan 28, 2005)

Doesn't look good. Loads of PPV, loads of RSNs and no mention whatsoever to new national HD channels.


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

well i am not in a contract anymore, so if we don't see alot of new hd channels, i will be gone. from the article it dosen't even mention more national HD. if i want to see a baseball game in 3d i will go to the game.

plus the fact that i have been a sub for 9 years and D* wants me to pay $299.00 for a HD DVR. after making me pay $200 for the hd reciever 2 years ago. should have got the dvr then, but still come on D*.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

What channels do you require to maintain your viewing pleasure? Personally, I don't care if they add more or not, just for the sake of adding them (knitting channel in HD anyone?). I'd rather see HD treated as standard, rather than premium or add-on. It's getting to that point.



jilardi2 said:


> well i am not in a contract anymore, so if we don't see alot of new hd channels, i will be gone. from the article it dosen't even mention more national HD. if i want to see a baseball game in 3d i will go to the game.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

jilardi2 said:


> *well i am not in a contract anymore, so if we don't see alot of new hd channels, i will be gone. *from the article it dosen't even mention more national HD. if i want to see a baseball game in 3d i will go to the game.
> 
> plus the fact that i have been a sub for 9 years and D* wants me to pay $299.00 for a HD DVR.


+1


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Of course he would be talking about new future technologies, that's what's interesting to his audience. 

They say the proof is in the pudding, even though that particular saying makes no sense. I'd say if summer rolls around and your favorite HD channels aren't on DIRECTV, we'll have that discussion then.


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

JeffBowser said:


> What channels do you require to maintain your viewing pleasure? Personally, I don't care if they add more or not, just for the sake of adding them (knitting channel in HD anyone?). I'd rather see HD treated as standard, rather than premium or add-on. It's getting to that point.


theres about 75 more national hd with alot of better programming then we get now. amc, chiller, travel. and so on, i want the biggest selection, especially since the commercial with the two tvs one E* one D* and D* says 200 hd channels.

and D12 could still fall back to earth. so how can D* say that.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

JeffBowser said:


> *What channels do you require* to maintain your viewing pleasure? Personally, I don't care if they add more or not, just for the sake of adding them (knitting channel in HD anyone?). *I'd rather see HD treated as standard*, rather than premium or add-on. It's getting to that point.


I agree, HD is no longer a "bell or whistle". I bet if DIRECTV was around in the 1950's they would have charged a fee for "color". :lol:

I'm only one HD channel away from "maintaining my viewing pleasure".


----------



## mobandit (Sep 4, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Of course he would be talking about new future technologies, that's what's interesting to his audience.
> 
> They say the proof is in the pudding, even though that particular saying makes no sense. I'd say if summer rolls around and your favorite HD channels aren't on DIRECTV, we'll have that discussion then.


Stuart, I disagree. We should be having this discussion now. D* is advertising that they have the capacity to have 200 national HD channels. I say, "Where are they?" If they want to bolster their position, then ADD THE CHANNELS! To claim the capacity, and do nothing with it, is bogus. D* hasn't added a new, national HD channel in how long? Their position is, in my opinion, tenuous at best. I also am no longer under contract. I became a D* subscriber for NFLST, and they have just about priced that out of my league...so I have to debate what else is there to keep me as a subscriber to D*? Better PQ? OK, but I am not a snob when it comes to PQ, I have seen my local cableco PQ, and it looks pretty good. More HD channels? Nope, sorry, D* is not the leader in the number of national HD channels, not by a long shot. For me, without adding something else to the mix, I may also be one of those D* subs that seeks my entertainment somewhere else. With the price increases, and potential additional fees for things like MRV...I am running out of justification to stay a D* subscriber pretty fast.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

So what you care about is bragging rights, versus there being channels you actually want to watch? I'd like to see AMC, Travel, and Chiller go HD, myself, but I'm not going to abandon DirecTV if I don't get them by this summer.



jilardi2 said:


> theres about 75 more national hd with alot of better programming then we get now. amc, chiller, travel. and so on, i want the biggest selection, especially since the commercial with the two tvs one E* one D* and D* says 200 hd channels.
> 
> and D12 could still fall back to earth. so how can D* say that.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> They say the proof is in the pudding, even though that particular saying makes no sense.


you need to watch the food network more, Alton Brown will tell you why the "proof is in the pudding"


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

JeffBowser said:


> So what you care about is bragging rights, versus there being channels you actually want to watch? I'd like to see AMC, Travel, and Chiller go HD, myself, but I'm not going to abandon DirecTV if I don't get them by this summer.


im just mad about how much they want me to pay for a hd dvr?

and seeing all the commercials about them being the hd leader and they haven't added a channel in a while in hd. lots of church and shopping though. and my bill is $134.68 a month. and out of about 50 premium channels theres like maybe 15 in hd.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

jilardi2 said:


> well i am not in a contract anymore, so if we don't see alot of new hd channels, i will be gone. from the article it dosen't even mention more national HD. if i want to see a baseball game in 3d i will go to the game.


I think this whole 3D thing is going to be a big bust anyway. Like the vibrating TV chairs or Smell-O-Vision. Unlike HD or stereo or multi-channel sound, it's just a novelty/gimmick that the vast majority of TV watchers can easily live without. Also (just heard this on TV so it must be true!  ) that MANY people who have astigmatism can't watch it anyway and lots of people have astigmatism.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

jilardi2 said:


> plus the fact that i have been a sub for 9 years and D* wants me to pay $299.00 for a HD DVR. after making me pay $200 for the hd reciever 2 years ago. should have got the dvr then, but still come on D*.





jilardi2 said:


> im just mad about how much they want me to pay for a hd dvr?


I've only been a sub for 6 years and last year I got a free H21 from them and I just checked the web site under add receiver and I could get another HR2X for $99 due to my good payment history. Have you checked the web site to see what it says for your account?


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

JeffBowser said:


> So what you care about is bragging rights, versus there being channels you actually want to watch? I'd like to see AMC, Travel, and Chiller go HD, myself, but I'm not going to abandon DirecTV if I don't get them by this summer.


Its really not a numbers thing to me, its all about getting my perceived value I am paying for every month.

If I am paying DTV 100 dollars a month for XXXX and Another provider is offering XXXX and more for 80 dollars a month, its a no brainer. Now each individual person needs to evaluate what XXXX means to them and make a decision from there. Everytime another provider adds more and more and DTV sits idle their perceived value goes down.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

And it's in HD!!



ffemtreed said:


> you need to watch the food network more, Alton Brown will tell you why the "proof is in the pudding"


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

TBlazer07 said:


> I think this whole 3D thing is going to be a big bust anyway. Like the vibrating TV chairs or Smell-O-Vision. Unlike HD or stereo or multi-channel sound, it's just a novelty/gimmick that the vast majority of TV watchers can easily live without. Also (just heard this on TV so it must be true!  ) that MANY people who have astigmatism can't watch it anyway and lots of people have astigmatism.


while 3D has been around for 30 years, the technology is still in its infancy. I wouldn't buy into and claims of anything about it yet as its sure to change fairly quickly once 3D actually catches on.

There have been a couple attempts over the year to mainstream 3D and they failed each and every time.


----------



## Balestrom (Jan 12, 2007)

JeffBowser said:


> What channels do you require to maintain your viewing pleasure? Personally, I don't care if they add more or not, just for the sake of adding them (knitting channel in HD anyone?). I'd rather see HD treated as standard, rather than premium or add-on. It's getting to that point.


Very simply, every channel that broadcasts in HD should be provided in HD by DirecTV, Dish and cable or they will become antiquated. As you said, it should be the standard.

For me, I will not be satisified if DirecTV decides move off course from the goal of being the HD leader or if DirecTV chooses to be the token leader by adding only a handful of National HD from D12 and a mamoth amount of Per Per View channels.

Anything other then taking a great leap toward providing all national channels in HD, even the home knitting channel, is unsatisfactory to me.

I think DirecTV will be making a huge mistake by going in the direction of 400 titles if that means massive amounts of pay per view channels at the cost and restrictions that exist today.

Most of the general public is moving towards Netflix, movie downloads etc... For DirecTV to invest in an archaic format like pay per view, regardless of the short term benifits, mystifies me.

Financially, pay per view does not make sense when compared to the other movie renting options and with the 24 hour restriction on viewing it is far more limitted then other movie renting options.

I have been a DirecTV customer since 98' and I once was a loyal DirecTV customer. I will wait to see what D12 brings. However, I am no longer emotionally tied to DirecTV nor do I have any desire to invest my money into an inferior viewing experience. This is why I left cable. So if I find that Dish or cable or some other technology has taken the lead, then I will simiply go where the viewing is the best. No hard feeling, because I have no feelings on the matter other then the expectation that the I receive the best from the best.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

mobandit said:


> Stuart, I disagree. We should be having this discussion now. D* is advertising that they have the capacity to have 200 national HD channels. I say, "Where are they?" If they want to bolster their position, then ADD THE CHANNELS! To claim the capacity, and do nothing with it, is bogus.


We all know very well that the "capacity" claim is due to D12 having been launched successfully and nearly completed testing (testing that has been greatly extended due to the BSS-band testing) and nearing the move into final position. The capacity will certainly be there, but it isn't like DirecTV can just "turn on" channels before the sat gets to its final location.

But all indications are that we'll start seeing some new HD channels very soon after D12 gets "home." It usually takes a week or so of final testing (from the permanent uplink rather then the test one) after a sat is parked in final position before things start going live.

I just find it funny that folks are complaining about national HD channels so much right before what is clearly going to be a huge addition to those channels in the lineup. People are acting like DirecTV hasn't been doing *anything* to get additional HD up when in fact the decision to launch D12 just for that purpose was made almost 3 years ago. Wheels turn slowly in the sat business, but DirecTV has always been pretty good about being ahead of the curve. That's a big part of why they're testing the new BSS band now...


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

It's a pendulum. For a time one provider has better numbers (channel count and/or price), and for a time another leap-frogs them. It's a fools game jumping providers based on the specials and channel counts du-jour, unless, of course, you have plenty of time and patience to play that game on a yearly basis. I don't. I want my TV to be what it is - background entertainment. I don't want to have to think about it a lot, I just want it to work. If they lack some channel I might want, then oh well, I'll watch something else. TV in perspective - it's just mindless entertainment is all.



ffemtreed said:


> Its really not a numbers thing to me, its all about getting my perceived value I am paying for every month.
> 
> If I am paying DTV 100 dollars a month for XXXX and Another provider is offering XXXX and more for 80 dollars a month, its a no brainer. Now each individual person needs to evaluate what XXXX means to them and make a decision from there. Everytime another provider adds more and more and DTV sits idle their perceived value goes down.


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

RAD said:


> I've only been a sub for 6 years and last year I got a free H21 from them and I just checked the web site under add receiver and I could get another HR2X for $99 due to my good payment history. Have you checked the web site to see what it says for your account?


$299.99 with free installation. 

over nine years and about 3 late payments. so i would think that is good account history, no shut offs ever.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

BattleZone said:


> We all know very well that the "capacity" claim is due to D12 having been launched successfully and nearly completed testing (testing that has been greatly extended due to the BSS-band testing) and nearing the move into final position. The capacity will certainly be there, but it isn't like DirecTV can just "turn on" channels before the sat gets to its final location.
> 
> But all indications are that we'll start seeing some new HD channels very soon after D12 gets "home." It usually takes a week or so of final testing (from the permanent uplink rather then the test one) after a sat is parked in final position before things start going live.
> 
> I just find it funny that folks are complaining about national HD channels so much *right before what is clearly going to be a huge addition *to those channels in the lineup. People are acting like DirecTV hasn't been doing *anything* to get additional HD up when in fact the decision to launch D12 just for that purpose was made almost 3 years ago. Wheels turn slowly in the sat business, but DirecTV has always been pretty good about being ahead of the curve. That's a big part of why they're testing the new BSS band now...


I really hope you're right!


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Good Lord, man - you're setting yourself up for major disappointment, with nowhere to go for relief.



Balestrom said:


> Anything other then taking a great leap toward providing all national channels in HD, even the home knitting channel, is unsatisfactory to me.


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

jilardi2 said:


> well i am not in a contract anymore, so if we don't see alot of new hd channels, i will be gone. from the article it dosen't even mention more national HD. if i want to see a baseball game in 3d i will go to the game.
> 
> plus the fact that i have been a sub for 9 years and D* wants me to pay $299.00 for a HD DVR. after making me pay $200 for the hd reciever 2 years ago. should have got the dvr then, but still come on D*.


Just a question, not an argument. Where did the $299 price for the HD DVR come from? I just checked online and the price is $199. That's not a special deal, just the regular price.


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

Billzebub said:


> Just a question, not an argument. Where did the $299 price for the HD DVR come from? I just checked online and the price is $199. That's not a special deal, just the regular price.


two csr's over the last year. and my account page about 20 minutes ago.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Everything will be fine...



Satelliteracer said:


> When testing is completed....soon guys....soon.





Satelliteracer said:


> I did, I told everyone here that wasn't a Tigers fan....you must have been blocked from the info.
> 
> Just kidding.
> 
> ...





Satelliteracer said:


> There will be a festivus, probably several of them.....(what is the plural of festivus?)
> 
> Hang in there guys, I know you've been patient but good things ahead in the not too distant future (no, cannot elaborate on that only to say the timing has improved a bit).





Satelliteracer said:


> Don't lose faith....good stuff coming in HD not that far down the road. In fact, the road may have just been shortened.





Satelliteracer said:


> I can assure you, the shopping channels aren't the ones going HD.





Satelliteracer said:


> Bubble....rumor has it that HD Extra Pack will be adding some more channels fairly soon.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Weird - I don't think I've seen an HD DVR at $300 for a very long time.



jilardi2 said:


> two csr's over the last year. and my account page about 20 minutes ago.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

JeffBowser said:


> It's a pendulum. For a time one provider has better numbers (channel count and/or price), and for a time another leap-frogs them. It's a fools game jumping providers based on the specials and channel counts du-jour, unless, of course, you have plenty of time and patience to play that game on a yearly basis. I don't. I want my TV to be what it is - background entertainment. I don't want to have to think about it a lot, I just want it to work. If they lack some channel I might want, then oh well, I'll watch something else. TV in perspective - it's just mindless entertainment is all.


Completly agree, i wouldn't switch over a few channels either, I stuck with DTV even after the D11 sat didn't give us much.


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

Just a question, not an argument. Where did the $299 price for the HD DVR come from? I just checked online and the price is $199. That's not a special deal, just the regular price.



jilardi2 said:


> two csr's over the last year. and my account page about 20 minutes ago.


do you think my account might be stuck in the past, with older pricing somehow?


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

JeffBowser said:


> Weird - I don't think I've seen an HD DVR at $300 for a very long time.


do you think my account might be stuck in the past, with older pricing somehow?


----------



## evan_s (Mar 4, 2008)

When D12 get to it's final home at 103 in a month or 2 it is expected to have capacity for 80 more HD Channels. 16tps at 5 channels per tp. As far as the cinema now channels go Tom pointed out that there are something like 6 or 8 ppv channels that are sd only and don't have an HD equivalent.

Using http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=172832 there are about a dozen RSN and sports specific channels on the list. Assuming they get all of those (which is unlikely as some aren't even present in SD CSN NW etc) and they move so all PPV are in both sd and hd you still have something like 60 channels of capacity left. That is still enough space left to put up most of the remaining list.

The channels are coming. Just need to be patient for a couple more months.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

evan_s said:


> When D12 get to it's final home at 103 in a month or 2 it is expected to have capacity for 80 more HD Channels. 16tps at 5 channels per tp. As far as the cinema now channels go Tom pointed out that there are something like 6 or 8 ppv channels that are sd only and don't have an HD equivalent.
> 
> Using http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=172832 there are about a dozen RSN and sports specific channels on the list. Assuming they get all of those (which is unlikely as some aren't even present in SD CSN NW etc) and they move so all PPV are in both sd and hd you still have something like 60 channels of capacity left. That is still enough space left to put up most of the remaining list.
> 
> The channels are coming. Just need to be patient for a couple more months.


The problem is they have shown recently that they are not willing to pay the carrier fees for the HD versions of channels.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

ffemtreed said:


> The problem is they have shown recently that they are not willing to pay the carrier fees for the HD versions of channels.


Where have they shown that? Maybe they haven't added HD versions of channels since they didn't have the space to add them?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

ffemtreed said:


> The problem is they have shown recently that they are not willing to pay the carrier fees for the HD versions of channels.


No they haven't. One carriage dispute alone cannot make your argument.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

RAD said:


> Where have they shown that? Maybe they haven't added HD versions of channels since they didn't have the space to add them?


Most recently, MSNBC right before the Olympics. Versus, and all those channels they said they wanted to add 2 years ago, like HBO, Cinemax, ESPNU. I know they are having a hard time right now with Fox over the soccer channel as well.

I think most of the people agree on this site that if D wanted to that they right now could put up a few additional national HD channels.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

I don't know what the deal is. You can even go to SolidSignal and get $199. Something is not right.

http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.as...G4-DVR-(HR23)-HD-DVR&c=DIRECTV Receivers&sku=



jilardi2 said:


> do you think my account might be stuck in the past, with older pricing somehow?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

ffemtreed said:


> Most recently, MSNBC right before the Olympics. Versus, and all those channels they said they wanted to add 2 years ago, like HBO, Cinemax, ESPNU. I know they are having a hard time right now with Fox over the soccer channel as well.
> 
> I think most of the people agree on this site that if D wanted to that they right now could put up a few additional national HD channels.


Oh...I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you were a part of those negotiations. Let's get the facts straight.

You do not know why MSNBC HD has not been added.
You do not know why additional HBO's have not been added.
You do not know why additional Cinemax's have not been added.
You do not know why ESPNU HD has not been added.
You do not know why FSC HD has not been added.

It's just amateur speculation on your part. I thought you actually had proof that DirecTV had not added a particular channel, over than Versus, because they didn't want to pay the price. Imagine my surprise when you offered the same old nonsense.


----------



## jilardi2 (Mar 6, 2008)

JeffBowser said:


> I don't know what the deal is. You can even go to SolidSignal and get $199. Something is not right.
> 
> http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.as...G4-DVR-(HR23)-HD-DVR&c=DIRECTV Receivers&sku=


ok just got off the phone with D*.

after a little back and forth, i asked them to come take the dish off my roof because that is where i want my new E* dish to be placed. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

for $149 they will give me a sd dvr for the bedroom and a hd dvr for the living room, they did not say which hd dvr it will be.

so i guess i have a new 2 year contract which they did not mention but from being on this site alot i kinda know that already.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

Hoosier205 said:


> Oh...I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you were a part of those negotiations. Let's get the facts straight.
> 
> You do not know why MSNBC HD has not been added.
> You do not know why additional HBO's have not been added.
> ...


Unless you can give another reason why we don't have these channels i'll go with the most likely cause that they couldn't agree on a contract.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

After we got hammered with HD PPV's on the last sat, you'd be naive to think it won't happen again.



> I did, I told everyone here that wasn't a Tigers fan....you must have been blocked from the info.
> 
> Just kidding.
> 
> ...


This is not as encouraging to us who would like some of the national hd channels, as many of you would like use to believe. And just because Satracer says we will have a festivus on several occasions, that could be many things:

More RSN's whoopie! 
Premiums whoopie! 
3D and PPV whoopie 

There are several, good HD channels that are out there, that we had better see when D12 goes live. BBCA and ESPNU would be two... And before any of you try and talk smack about ESPNU, look at polls and you'll see that most users would like ESPNU.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

ffemtreed said:


> Unless you can give another reason why we don't have these channels i'll go with the most likely cause that they couldn't agree on a contract.


...and what were the terms of those potential contracts? Placement, cost, length, etc. There are many, many factors involved besides the amount a provider is willing to pay.

You made the claim...



ffemtreed said:


> The problem is they have shown recently that they are not willing to pay the carrier fees for the HD versions of channels.


...now back it up. The burden of proof is on you.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Excellent, good for you! And yes, that will come with a new 2 year commitment.



jilardi2 said:


> ok just got off the phone with D*.
> 
> after a little back and forth, i asked them to come take the dish off my roof because that is where i want my new E* dish to be placed. :lol::lol::lol::lol:
> 
> ...


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

elwaylite said:


> After we got hammered with HD PPV's on the last sat, you'd be naive to think it won't happen again.
> 
> This is not as encouraging to us who would like some of the national hd channels, as many of you would like use to believe. And just because Satracer says we will have a festivus on several occasions, that could be many things:
> 
> ...


Read the post again. You want national HD channels and that was exactly what was mentioned...with the long exception being the mention of local channels. Everything about that post from him is encouraging.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

BattleZone said:


> We all know very well that the "capacity" claim is due to D12 having been launched successfully and nearly completed testing (testing that has been greatly extended due to the BSS-band testing) and nearing the move into final position.


To be accurate, testing of D12 began just a few days ago. It is unlikely that testing is "nearly completed".


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> To be accurate, testing of D12 began just a few days ago. It is unlikely that testing is "nearly completed".


To be more accurate, you have no idea how long testing will be.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

I saw the word "Lemming" Stuart doesn't like that word, be prepared for a PT soon :lol:


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I don't believe all the *****ing about something that hasn't happened yet. 

If it's this summer and all we have is some more PPV's and RSN's then let's start b*tching about DirecTV not providing what the customers want. Until then IMHO you folks are just getting all worked up over nothing


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

Guys, play nice. Don't make more work for Stuart, Doug, Tom and the other mods. Seriously, if you can't make your point without calling people disparaging terms, just do everyone a favor and STFU. :nono:


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

OK, enough.

This is not a thread about whether or not it's valid to hold a particular opinion or whether or not anyone likes powdered sugary beverages. 

Let's discuss the points of the article, not each other. 

Thank you.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

To that point, several posts have been deleted. Please, let us play nice.

Unfortunately there were a few good points that were removed as they were in combination with the removed storm. Any polite and on-topic posts are welcomed.

Thanks,
Tom


----------



## Supramom2000 (Jun 21, 2007)

Tom, I thought I was losing my mind!! I clicked on page 3 and the 3 disappeared! It was pretty strange. But thanks for explaining.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Awww, man. All the clever repartee is gone :lol:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

JeffBowser said:


> Awww, man. All the clever repartee is gone :lol:


Thankfully I know you are quite capable of more clever posts all the time.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Ouch. I gracefully bow out of this one. 



Tom Robertson said:


> Thankfully I know you are quite capable of more clever posts all the time.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Hmm... I was trying to say you can make more posts that are clever all the time. Definitely didn't mean to ouch.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Hopefully new HD is essentially a done deal to DirecTV execs and is just waiting on teh new sat, so to him, it is nothing to talk about. Otherwise, there will be some mad people for sure.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

LameLefty said:


> Guys, play nice. Don't make more work for Stuart, Doug, Tom and the other mods. Seriously, if you can't make your point without calling people disparaging terms, just do everyone a favor and STFU. :nono:


Yea u say dont use disparaging words but then u swear.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

Hoosier205 said:


> ...and what were the terms of those potential contracts? Placement, cost, length, etc. There are many, many factors involved besides the amount a provider is willing to pay.
> 
> You made the claim...
> 
> ...now back it up. The burden of proof is on you.


The proof is all the other providers have these channels but not DTV. A lot of those other providers are also cheaper per month as well.


----------



## slimoli (Jan 28, 2005)

Lee L said:


> Hopefully new HD is essentially a done deal to DirecTV execs and is just waiting on teh new sat, so to him, it is nothing to talk about. Otherwise, there will be some mad people for sure.


I don't buy this. New National HD channels is HUGE and probably more important than "single DVR with up to 8 receivers". It's very strange that he didn't say anything about it and enphasized the 400 PPV.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

slimoli said:


> I don't buy this. New National HD channels is HUGE and probably more important than "single DVR with up to 8 receivers". It's very strange that he didn't say anything about it and enphasized the 400 PPV.


Perhaps because there wasn't anything else to say about the new HD that hasn't already been said--until the satellite is parked and HD launched. The investors already know HD is coming and the ads are already running.

Now, I'm betting next quarter, there will be an announcement at the investor's conference call--"We did it!" 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I think part of this is that you have to consider, Mr. White is talking about what will distinguish him from the competition, not simply bring his company up to par with them. 

No one's disputing that DIRECTV has a little catching up to do right now, but it's very temporary. The bird is already in the sky. So he's talking about stuff that is going to push the industry forward. I see no problem with that.


----------



## slimoli (Jan 28, 2005)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I think part of this is that you have to consider, Mr. White is talking about what will distinguish him from the competition, not simply bring his company up to par with them.
> 
> No one's disputing that DIRECTV has a little catching up to do right now, but it's very temporary. The bird is already in the sky. So he's talking about stuff that is going to push the industry forward. I see no problem with that.


At this point I think it would be very interesting, from the investor point of view, to know what are the plans to use the D12. All we have so far is sports and PPV. There is no need to mention anything specific but something like "30 new national HD channels" would sound like music to everybody, including investors and analysts. I worked as an investment banker for many years and can assure you that something like that would be very positive.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how positive is the plan to have 400 PPV. At 4-6 bucks a movie, very few people would cancel Netflix or Blockbuster to use this service. Too many chips on a single number is bad gambling.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I think part of this is that you have to consider, Mr. White is talking about what will distinguish him from the competition, not simply bring his company up to par with them.
> 
> No one's disputing that DIRECTV has a little catching up to do right now, but it's very temporary. The bird is already in the sky. So he's talking about stuff that is going to push the industry forward. I see no problem with that.


If they think that having 400 PPV is going to set them apart from the competition people better be selling their stocks now while its high.

I hope they have a lot more up their sleeves!


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

Guys,

One of the reasons D11 brought a bunch of PPV channels is because those channels were needed to provide overflow bandwidth for the NFL-ST and other sports events, which use PPV channel bandwidth while the games are on, since it wouldn't make sense to dedicate channels to sports when they'd be empty most of the time. This way, they are sports channels during the peak usage periods, and PPVs the rest of the time.

But the needed channels are already there; there isn't a need for many more. Clearly, most of the new bandwidth is going to be used for national HD channels. Yes, of course that includes channels that you won't get with Choice + HD; many of them will be premium movie channels that premium subscribers currently pay for but only get in SD, for example. But they are national channels nevertheless.

Of course DirecTV is going to be looking to bring high-rated networks like Travel and BBCA online. Will it happen? No one here can say for sure, as there are contractual issues and such, but it's no mystery that those are popular, highly-desired channels and are likely to show up sooner or later once D12 goes live.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

slimoli said:


> At this point I think it would be very interesting, from the investor point of view, to know what are the plans to use the D12. All we have so far is sports and PPV. There is no need to mention anything specific but something like "30 new national HD channels" would sound like music to everybody, including investors and analysts. I worked as an investment banker for many years and can assure you that something like that would be very positive.
> 
> On the other hand, I'm not sure how positive is the plan to have 400 PPV. At 4-6 bucks a movie, very few people would cancel Netflix or Blockbuster to use this service. Too many chips on a single number is bad gambling.


From Satelliteracer we also have more premiums.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> From Satelliteracer we also have more premiums.


 and more locals


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Stuart Sweet said:


> No one's disputing that DIRECTV has a little catching up to do right now, but it's very temporary. The bird is already in the sky. So he's talking about stuff that is going to push the industry forward. I see no problem with that.


One take away from yesterdays call was that currently DirecTV has no new satellites on order to be built. White said that later this year they'd meet with the board to discuss ordering a (didn't use a plural) for backup or a replacement, no mention of something for new capacity with the RBS band that they've got licenses for. That was a bit worrying to me that nothing new is in the pipe after D12.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

RAD said:


> One take away from yesterdays call was that currently DirecTV has no new satellites on order to be built. White said that later this year they'd meet with the board to discuss ordering a (didn't use a plural) for backup or a replacement, no mention of something for new capacity with the RBS band that they've got licenses for. That was a bit worrying to me that nothing new is in the pipe after D12.


 Maybe they figure that they do not need to get much bigger. do they scramble to fill the space that they now have and use Junk HD channels.


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

curt8403 said:


> Maybe they figure that they do not need to get much bigger. do they scramble to fill the space that they now have and use Junk HD channels.


or they use the former DirecTV and current Dish Network mindset of HD lite with channels running at 1440x1080 and packing an extra 2 or 3 channels per TP.

Very concerning that no birds are on order. I would expect DirecTV to always have a standing order (maybe not being worked on directly) but a place at the top of the queue to get their hardware.

On the other end of the thought spectrum, at somepoint in the next 3-5 years, almost all IRDs should be MPEG4 capable, that would eliminate the need for the MPEG2 SD feeds, as the receiver could just center cut the HD feed. Then all the bandwidth on 101 in the KU spectrum would be available for re-purposing.

Or am I just freakin crazy there?


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

Why is everyone reading the 400 PPV offerings as channels? How about DoD? For that matter, I am not sure at all where the 15 today comes from. There are more than 15 PPV channels and there are more than 15 movies available from PPV channels and/or DoD. I just read that as being up there with Fios and Comcast in terms of PPV movies. That would include streaming and DoD as well as linear PPV.

I see nothing alarming in what he was saying. He was talking about newer ventures. Adding channels is not big news. Especially when DirecTV is already claiming they have them. LOL.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

jefbal99 said:


> or they use the former DirecTV and current Dish Network mindset of HD lite with channels running at 1440x1080 and packing an extra 2 or 3 channels per TP.
> 
> Very concerning that no birds are on order. I would expect DirecTV to always have a standing order (maybe not being worked on directly) but a place at the top of the queue to get their hardware.
> 
> ...


they may have a hotline to Boeing, and just have not told us


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

RAD said:


> One take away from yesterdays call was that currently DirecTV has no new satellites on order to be built. White said that later this year they'd meet with the board to discuss ordering a (didn't use a plural) for backup or a replacement, no mention of something for new capacity with the RBS band that they've got licenses for. That was a bit worrying to me that nothing new is in the pipe after D12.


I think there are several reasons for that. First, just because Directv doesn't have BSS satellites on-order yet is relatively meaningless. They have like, another year+ or something to have to even have a design review and 4-1/2 more years to get them launched before they risk losing their licenses. I wouldn't be surprised if these satellites have dual Ka/BSS payloads too, for use as on-orbit spare capacity just in case, kind of like the current D12/RB-2A configuration, but reversed.

Second, I think Directv could a have replacement D10/11/12-class satellite built and flown in well under two years if necessary - the design is a finished, proven thing and only the spotbeam configuration would vary depending on which bird they might need to replace. I also think, given the horsetrading that went on with D12's launch slot with ILS, that Directv could arrange a priority slot with a launch provider in short order if they needed it, given the good faith they've shown by allowing a competitor with a more urgent (Eutelsat) need take their initial slot. The aerospace industry isn't THAT big and favors like that can come back and reward you.


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

curt8403 said:


> they may have a hotline to Boeing, and just have not told us


They might very well hold options to order with some kind of priority, and still truthfully say that they don't have any actually on order - companies do things like this all the time.


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> Why is everyone reading the 400 PPV offerings as channels? How about DoD? For that matter, I am not sure at all where the 15 today comes from. There are more than 15 PPV channels and there are more than 15 movies available from PPV channels and/or DoD. I just read that as being up there with Fios and Comcast in terms of PPV movies. That would include streaming and DoD as well as linear PPV.
> 
> I see nothing alarming in what he was saying. He was talking about newer ventures. Adding channels is not big news. Especially when DirecTV is already claiming they have them. LOL.


I think the 15 are those that are available 24x7 and can be started at anytime. Prolly has a chunk of the movie on the "reserved" Hard Drive space and you can start at any time, the the bird streams to rest down.


----------



## ptuck874 (Aug 12, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I think part of this is that you have to consider, Mr. White is talking about what will distinguish him from the competition, not simply bring his company up to par with them.
> 
> No one's disputing that DIRECTV has a little catching up to do right now, but it's very temporary. The bird is already in the sky. So he's talking about stuff that is going to push the industry forward. I see no problem with that.


I was about to say the same thing, except you got to it first! :lol: seriously, he is talking about stuff that will make D* better than the competition, the HD stuff from what has been posted is going to be ok, I wouldn't sorry about that, let's see what happens in 2 or 3 months before *****ing about no new HD


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

maybe they are going to start sending *more *on demand via satellite. Dish does that already


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

So does DIRECTV... they send stuff to the reserved partition of your drive.


----------



## DJSix (Jan 19, 2004)

ffemtreed said:


> The proof is all the other providers have these channels but not DTV. A lot of those other providers are also cheaper per month as well.


I see that more as "semantics" than proof. Dish currently doesn't offer MSG, MASN, YES, or MLB Network in HD. As well as D* offers both more NFL and March Madness games in HD.

Lastly, being cheaper is not technically true in every case. If you like Starz/Encore: with E*, you'd have to add their Top 250 and the Starz package; with D*, you can pick any base package, then add Starz. It's possible that with D*, you could have a lower bill, it all depends on what your needs are.

Ryan


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> So does DIRECTV... they send stuff to the reserved partition of your drive.


Perhaps they will start encoding that MPEG4 (even for SD) so that they can better utilize the space.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

LameLefty said:


> I think there are several reasons for that. First, just because Directv doesn't have BSS satellites on-order yet is relatively meaningless. They have like, another year+ or something to have to even have a design review and 4-1/2 more years to get them launched before they risk losing their licenses. I wouldn't be surprised if these satellites have dual Ka/BSS payloads too, for use as on-orbit spare capacity just in case, kind of like the current D12/RB-2A configuration, but reversed.
> 
> Second, I think Directv could a have replacement D10/11/12-class satellite built and flown in well under two years if necessary - the design is a finished, proven thing and only the spotbeam configuration would vary depending on which bird they might need to replace. I also think, given the horsetrading that went on with D12's launch slot with ILS, that Directv could arrange a priority slot with a launch provider in short order if they needed it, given the good faith they've shown by allowing a competitor with a more urgent (Eutelsat) need take their initial slot. The aerospace industry isn't THAT big and favors like that can come back and reward you.


That could all be well and good. But White said they would discuss it with the board in the fall, that's over 1/2 year away to even begin talking about it. And as I mentioned, he said one satellite, so what would it be for? Backup to one of the Ka birds or the Ku's? DirecTV 4S will be 9 years old this November, so does DirecTV go for a replacement there or for one of the newer Ka's?

Beyond that, what's their expansion plans for more HD? Unless they go to reduced resolution or reducing the bit rates on the existing HD channels once D12 is full that's it. I've seen lists that show there are more HD channels out there now that could be carried then what even once D12 goes live. With no new sats in the pipeline we could be back here in a year or so with folks b*tching about why DirecTV doesn't have such and such channel and saying to wait until DirecTV XX goes active.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

:lol:this is all speculation, but Maybe Directv plans to start using more terrestrial Microwave signals, and start putting up more Towers across this great land of ours. Just think, we could have 60's style TV again :lol:


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

Maybe in a few years, D* could require that you have HD mpeg4 box if you want to watch channel x,y,z in package a. That would free up some space on 101 to add additional channels. Not sure which year this might happen.


----------



## leww37334 (Sep 19, 2005)

http://www.tvpredictions.com/dsubs021810.htm

swanni Sez (for what it's worth) Directv new subscriber rate is plummeting.

I wonder if that could be tied to their HD performance (or lack thereof)

I am reminded of the cartoon with the two vultures sitting on a fence, the caption reads "Patience heck, I'm going to kill something"

I have reached the same point with the word soon.

My brother was having problems with recordings on his R15, he called Directv, they told him it was a software issue and that they may not ever fix it. I recommended he switch to Dish.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

leww37334 said:


> http://www.tvpredictions.com/dsubs021810.htm
> 
> swanni Sez (for what it's worth) Directv new subscriber rate is plummeting.
> 
> ...


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

slimoli said:


> Doesn't look good. Loads of PPV, loads of RSNs and no mention whatsoever to new national HD channels.


I haven't read the whole thread, just the first few posts....relax, national HD channels are coming.


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

leww37334 said:


> http://www.tvpredictions.com/dsubs021810.htm
> 
> swanni Sez (for what it's worth) Directv new subscriber rate is plummeting.
> 
> ...


Swanni is worthless, i'd avoid everything he writes...


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

leww37334 said:


> swanni Sez (for what it's worth) Directv new subscriber rate is plummeting.


Blah blah blah from the usual suspect. :lol:

If anyone's been paying attention, Directv has explicity said in investor conference and filings that they are trying to slow subscriber growth to cut their SAC and position themselves as a higher-end TV service than their competitors. They've massively cut down on freebies and promotions and tightened credit score requirements for certain things. As others have said, they're content to let the other providers fight for the "low hanging fruit" and improving their bottom line at the same time. Consequently, lower new subscriber numbers (especially in this economy) is exactly what should be expected.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

jefbal99 said:


> Swanni is worthless, i'd avoid everything he writes...


He's not quite worthless--he's often good for a laugh or two...


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

leww37334 said:


> http://www.tvpredictions.com/dsubs021810.htm
> 
> swanni Sez


I stopped reading right there...


----------



## ohioviper (Sep 18, 2007)

I don't post often but Im here most every day reading all the great info. One thing I have never figured out. Actions speak louder than words. If people stopped buying PPV all together they wouldn't have any reason to continue using up all the bandwidth with PPV channels. I have never bought one single PPV and never will. We use Netflix $17 a month and get all the Blue ray movies in the mail we could ever want and also watch streaming movies from netflix.

I pay Directv to supply me with national HD channels not PPV. If they make the decision to put a bunch of bs PPV channels and only a few national HD channels on D12 I and many others will make the move to a provider that will provide the most national HD channels. Are you listening Directv we want more national HD channels not PPV.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

ohioviper said:


> I don't post often but Im here most every day reading all the great info. One thing I have never figured out. Actions speak louder than words. If people stopped buying PPV all together they wouldn't have any reason to continue using up all the bandwidth with PPV channels. I have never bought one single PPV and never will. We use Netflix $17 a month and get all the Blue ray movies in the mail we could ever want and also watch streaming movies from netflix.
> 
> I pay Directv to supply me with national HD channels not PPV. If they make the decision to put a bunch of bs PPV channels and only a few national HD channels on D12 I and many others will make the move to a provider that will provide the most national HD channels. Are you listening Directv we want more national HD channels not PPV.


speculation only, but I think that maybe there is some sort of 3 way deal going on. to get the movies that air on the premium channels (Like starz or Showtime) maybe the movie channel people have asked their carriers like Dish and Directv to carry some PPV channels to air them first


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

In addition to the other reasons to carry PPV and dedicate channels to it . . . from a technical standpoint, what does Directv do if a satellite fails unexpectedly? For a replacement, it's a process measured in years rather than the day or two it might take BigCableCo to replace a line downed by a storm. Consequently, it's a prudent practice to have some "reserved" bandwidth that could, in case of technical disaster, serve to help bridge the gap. While I don't know this to be the absolute case, I seriously doubt it would cost them subscribers if Directv were forced to remove 20 PPVs in order to replace the "core" of most-watched HD channels (e.g., ESPN, CNN, TNT, etc) but the reverse probably WOULD. It would also probably cost Directv a lot less money to rework the PPV channel deals with the studios than it would to rework a bunch of individual deals with those highly-watched stations.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Let me toss this up for consideration - I STILL have Comcast cable TV lines hanging broken from the power poles across my backyard from the 2004 hurricane season. Don't assume the cablecos will always be quick to replace downed lines :lol: It was because of that that suddenly 90% of my neighborhood went with a sat provider, when 3 months passed and Comcast showed no interest in the line repair, even telling some customers that it was THEIR responsibility to repair the transmission line.



LameLefty said:


> In addition to the other reasons to carry PPV and dedicate channels to it . . . from a technical standpoint, what does Directv do if a satellite fails unexpectedly? For a replacement, it's a process measured in years rather than the day or two it might take BigCableCo to replace a line downed by a storm. Consequently, it's a prudent practice to have some "reserved" bandwidth that could, in case of technical disaster, serve to help bridge the gap. While I don't know this to be the absolute case, I seriously doubt it would cost them subscribers if Directv were forced to remove 20 PPVs in order to replace the "core" of most-watched HD channels (e.g., ESPN, CNN, TNT, etc) but the reverse probably WOULD. It would also probably cost Directv a lot less money to rework the PPV channel deals with the studios than it would to rework a bunch of individual deals with those highly-watched stations.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

This entire thread=much ado about nothing.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

I thought it was a Mid-Summer Night's Dream


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

I wish D* would STOP adding HD channels. No more HD. Every time they do, it's just more channels I have to go into my customized channel list and delete. We've got enough, stop it already.


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

JeffBowser said:


> Let me toss this up for consideration - I STILL have Comcast cable TV lines hanging broken from the power poles across my backyard from the 2004 hurricane season. Don't assume the cablecos will always be quick to replace downed lines :lol: It was because of that that suddenly 90% of my neighborhood went with a sat provider, when 3 months passed and Comcast showed no interest in the line repair, even telling some customers that it was THEIR responsibility to repair the transmission line.


There's ALWAYS an exception. :grin:

Actually, my area has underground utilities - we've lost power maybe 6 times in the last 8 years, the longest time for about 20 minutes once when some numb-knuckle ran into a corner utility box a few blocks away. I actually have Com-crap internet and VOIP so if aliens arrive and zap all the satellites, I can run by the local TV office and pick up one of their crappy digital boxes to hook up. But I know a lot of people don't have that emergency option.

Anyway, all I meant to do was remind people that there are operational considerations of how satellites actually work (and the fact that they are planned 15 year life assets that cost a LOT of money and effort to replace) that goes into figuring out how many channels they can or even should be allocated in light of the total bandwidth necessary to provide a certain level of service.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

spartanstew said:


> I wish D* would STOP adding HD channels. No more HD. Every time they do, it's just more channels I have to go into my customized channel list and delete. We've got enough, stop it already.


 550 HD channels, with endless reruns of Flipper and Lassie, not to mention the channel where they send the test patterns for HD adjustment


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

SPACEMAKER said:


> This entire thread=much ado about nothing.





curt8403 said:


> I thought it was a Mid-Summer Night's Dream


It's a tempest.

(In a digital teapot, at that).


----------



## leww37334 (Sep 19, 2005)

ATARI said:


> I stopped reading right there...


not a surprise


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

spartanstew said:


> I wish D* would STOP adding HD channels. No more HD. Every time they do, it's just more channels I have to go into my customized channel list and delete. We've got enough, stop it already.


Remember the old Springsteen song from around the early 90's? "Fifty-seven channels and nothin' on . . . " :lol:


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

:lol:

My wife is stuck in the stone age - she will only browse 4-34 and 224-279, and completely ignores anything else. I keep having to remind her she can find movies in the 500's, music videos in the 300's, music in the 800's, etc......... She's gonna be really lost down the road.



spartanstew said:


> I wish D* would STOP adding HD channels. No more HD. Every time they do, it's just more channels I have to go into my customized channel list and delete. We've got enough, stop it already.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

jefbal99 said:


> Perhaps they will start encoding that MPEG4 (even for SD) so that they can better utilize the space.


The pushed SD will won't be MPEG4 because it's only being pushed to MPEG2 SD DVRs, and I would assume that all the pushed HD is already MPEG4.

I really don't care how well they utilize the space as long as they don't try to grab a bigger part of the disk for their reserved area.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

JeffBowser said:


> :lol:
> 
> My wife is stuck in the stone age - she will only browse 4-34 and 224-279, and completely ignores anything else. I keep having to remind her she can find movies in the 500's, music videos in the 300's, music in the 800's, etc......... She's gonna be really lost down the road.


The guide that I use 90% of the time has less than 30 channels on it.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

I like to sample a wide variety of things, so I only hide shopping and porn. Gotta say, though, that MTV and BET don't do much for me :lol:



spartanstew said:


> The guide that I use 90% of the time has less than 30 channels on it.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Everyone has different desires. Hard to make everyone happy.

I really only care about adding BBCA and Travel in HD at this point. I have no desire for any more sports channels and no need for things like Chiller.

Also for those that complain about receiver costs, factor in monthly costs. Even Dish rips you a new one on the monthly rate. DirecTV's rate is the cheapest I have seen for additional boxes.


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

jilardi2 said:


> two csr's over the last year. and my account page about 20 minutes ago.


Go to Best Buy, you can get an HR22 for $199.


----------



## slimoli (Jan 28, 2005)

Billzebub said:


> Go to Best Buy, you can get an HR22 for $199.


My Costco had them for 167.00 last week.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

leww37334 said:


> http://www.tvpredictions.com/dsubs021810.htm
> 
> swanni Sez (for what it's worth) Directv new subscriber rate is plummeting.
> 
> ...


I've often wondered how someone who is so wrong could be believed so often, Perhaps Swanni could run for a political office.


----------



## slimoli (Jan 28, 2005)

Satelliteracer said:


> I haven't read the whole thread, just the first few posts....relax, national HD channels are coming.


I am now relaxed and I trust you. Thank you for your support.


----------



## celticpride (Sep 6, 2006)

I thought you could get an hd dvr at best buy for $199.00?


----------



## evan_s (Mar 4, 2008)

ohioviper said:


> I don't post often but Im here most every day reading all the great info. One thing I have never figured out. Actions speak louder than words. If people stopped buying PPV all together they wouldn't have any reason to continue using up all the bandwidth with PPV channels. I have never bought one single PPV and never will. We use Netflix $17 a month and get all the Blue ray movies in the mail we could ever want and also watch streaming movies from netflix.
> 
> I pay Directv to supply me with national HD channels not PPV. If they make the decision to put a bunch of bs PPV channels and only a few national HD channels on D12 I and many others will make the move to a provider that will provide the most national HD channels. Are you listening Directv we want more national HD channels not PPV.


People may not have really liked what they used D11 for but it is all understandable.

RSNs are remapped to provide the HD feeds for their sports packs like MLB extra innings and NBA League pass.

Mirroring the old mpeg 2 hd channels was needed to provide higher quality versions of the channels and to allow the use of the SL3 which saves costs on the lnb and makes LoS much easier. Same for the DNS networks.

The PPV HD channels are used as a buffer for part time channels like Sunday ticket or their special sports channels for events like the masters or the Olympics. No one would be happy if they had to go back to turning off TNT when they needed to do sunday ticket.

They were running 16 tps off of D10 to get a little extra space until D11 was launched.

Yes, all of these things did end up using a large portion of the space D11 added.

We don't have nearly as many RSN's left that can be added. We don't need to mirror the MPEG2 hd channels or DNS anymore. We may see some additional PPV HD channels but we already have a large number in place and we don't have any extra tps in use that will be shut off. D12 should see a lot more noticeable additions to the line up for National channels.


----------



## evan_s (Mar 4, 2008)

RAD said:


> Beyond that, what's their expansion plans for more HD? Unless they go to reduced resolution or reducing the bit rates on the existing HD channels once D12 is full that's it. I've seen lists that show there are more HD channels out there now that could be carried then what even once D12 goes live. With no new sats in the pipeline we could be back here in a year or so with folks b*tching about why DirecTV doesn't have such and such channel and saying to wait until DirecTV XX goes active.


That is kinda the way the sat tv works. You launch a new sat and it gives you a bunch of new potential. You fill it most of the way up and things slow down from there. With that said there some areas I could potentially see DirecTV tapping.

1) Extra Conus TPs on d10/d11. D10 was running 16 conus Tps before D11 launched and D12 specs list that as expected normal operation. They could fire up those 2 extra tps on both D10 and D11 and that would be 20 more channels. This would probably require shuffling around locals to balance power usage but seems possible.

2) Coding method and Error correction. Currently DirecTV is using 8psk with a high error correction rate on their KA conus tps. Using qpsk and/or a lower error correction rate could allow them get more usable bandwidth per TP to squeeze in some additional channels but may result in more weather fade issues. On the other hand we do see people posting some really low Signal strengths and still being able to get a picture so they may have some margin here.

3) At some point in the future it will make sense to start converting more things over to Mpeg 4 than just the HD channels and locals in a few areas. Personally I think we will see things like the International channels start the conversion to Mpeg 4 sd in the near future. This process will allow them to free up bandwidth. This in turn can lead to capacity for more channels.

There may be other options out there too. These are just some that I've seen from reading topics on the forums here.


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

evan_s said:


> People may not have really liked what they used D11 for but it is all understandable.
> 
> RSNs are remapped to provide the HD feeds for their sports packs like MLB extra innings and NBA League pass.
> 
> ...


Great post


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

slimoli said:


> I don't buy this. New National HD channels is HUGE and probably more important than "single DVR with up to 8 receivers". It's very strange that he didn't say anything about it and enphasized the 400 PPV.


the 400 ppv may be them adding more to On demand to keep up with cable On Demand that has quite alot on on demand / ppv.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

slimoli said:


> At this point I think it would be very interesting, from the investor point of view, to know what are the plans to use the D12. All we have so far is sports and PPV. There is no need to mention anything specific but something like "30 new national HD channels" would sound like music to everybody, including investors and analysts. I worked as an investment banker for many years and can assure you that something like that would be very positive.
> 
> On the other hand, I'm not sure how positive is the plan to have 400 PPV. At 4-6 bucks a movie, very few people would cancel Netflix or Blockbuster to use this service. Too many chips on a single number is bad gambling.


4-6 seems to be the price for new movies with the older ones at 2-3


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

JeffBowser said:


> I like to sample a wide variety of things, so I only hide shopping and porn.


Porn is 10 of the 30.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

DJSix said:


> I see that more as "semantics" than proof. Dish currently doesn't offer MSG, MASN, YES, or MLB Network in HD. As well as D* offers both more NFL and March Madness games in HD.
> 
> Lastly, being cheaper is not technically true in every case. If you like Starz/Encore: with E*, you'd have to add their Top 250 and the Starz package; with D*, you can pick any base package, then add Starz. It's possible that with D*, you could have a lower bill, it all depends on what your needs are.
> 
> Ryan


Direct tv is also cheaper then cable even more so when you look at the cost to rent a cable box.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

With four HD DVR's and three HD receivers there's no way that Dish will be cheaper for me then DirecTV for equal programming.


----------



## dstout (Jul 19, 2005)

I thought it was interesting they are looking at starting more RSNs.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

dstout said:


> I thought it was interesting they are looking at starting more RSNs.


They should buy csn chicago before NBC / comcast can mess it up.


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> They should buy csn chicago before NBC / comcast can mess it up.


Actaully FSN Chicago failed and CSN Chicago was started by Comcast and the sports teams. Each team owns 20% (Bulls, Blackhawks, White Sox, and Cubs) and Comcast owns the last 20%. The teams won't allow Comcast to screw it up, that is one of the good Comcast RSNs


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Well get new HD when the new sat is in place.. They could add one channel now, because we know vs was up, but what happens if suddenly they agree to terms tomorrow and vs can come back and space is gone.. Nope, they are doing it right.. When the new sat is in place, then light up some new channels...


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

LameLefty said:


> Remember the old Springsteen song from around the early 90's? "Fifty-seven channels and nothin' on . . . " :lol:


I believe that was pink floyd.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

JoeTheDragon said:


> Direct tv is also cheaper then cable even more so when you look at the cost to rent a cable box.


How can you make such a blanket statement when cable is so local as to pricing?


----------



## Darkscream (Mar 8, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> I believe that was pink floyd.


No It was Bruce...

http://www.brucespringsteen.net/songs/57Channels.html

Perhaps you mean this song by Pink Floyd..

http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric....s-Pink-Floyd/D38A47A781043A18482568A10005F355

"Nobody Home " which includes these lyrics...

"I Got thirteen channels of s### on the T.V. to choose from"


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

jefbal99 said:


> Actaully FSN Chicago failed and CSN Chicago was started by Comcast and the sports teams. Each team owns 20% (Bulls, Blackhawks, White Sox, and Cubs) and Comcast owns the last 20%. The teams won't allow Comcast to screw it up, that is one of the good Comcast RSNs


I didn't think that it failed, it was just that the teams wanted to own the network so they could keep more of the income from it.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

RAD said:


> I didn't think that it failed, it was just that the teams wanted to own the network so they could keep more of the income from it.


No the teams wanted to have to more control of the network and FSN was not giving them that.

They better not let them take away there own sets and merge them with NBC chicago.


----------



## thelucky1 (Feb 23, 2009)

I just find it funny that folks are complaining about national HD channels so much right before what is clearly going to be a huge addition to those channels in the lineup. People are acting like DirecTV hasn't been doing *anything* to get additional HD up when in fact the decision to launch D12 just for that purpose was made almost 3 years ago. Wheels turn slowly in the sat business, but DirecTV has always been pretty good about being ahead of the curve. That's a big part of why they're testing the new BSS band now...[/QUOTE]

Your are spot on! Just a little more patience and I think we will see alot of national HD channels light up. Just as Satracer said!


----------



## thelucky1 (Feb 23, 2009)

Hoosier205 said:


> Everything will be fine...


Perhaps we should let DIrectv prove themselves first (when they state up to 200 channels) before we start complaining. Really all this negative speculating isn't/doesn't accomplishing anything! You either believe what DTV/satracer says or you don't.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

JeffBowser said:


> What channels do you require to maintain your viewing pleasure? Personally, I don't care if they add more or not, just for the sake of adding them (knitting channel in HD anyone?). I'd rather see HD treated as standard, rather than premium or add-on. It's getting to that point.


I couldn't have said it better!


----------



## hombresoto (Sep 10, 2006)

jilardi2 said:


> theres about 75 more national hd with alot of better programming then we get now. amc, chiller, travel. and so on, i want the biggest selection, especially since the commercial with the two tvs one E* one D* and D* says 200 hd channels.
> 
> and D12 could still fall back to earth. so how can D* say that.


any of the satellites could fall back to earth at any time. Chances are they wont


----------



## hombresoto (Sep 10, 2006)

jilardi2 said:


> $299.99 with free installation.
> 
> over nine years and about 3 late payments. so i would think that is good account history, no shut offs ever.


That's funny, i've had several shutoffs due to taking almost a 50% pay cut because of the economy (not as many people want custom home theaters installed these days, or to pay for any custom work whatsoever.) and almost every time I talk to D* they give me some sort of deal, whether it be free HD for a year, or $10/mo off for 6 months, free movie channels, etc. I think they need to treat their existing customers better (not me, i'm happy), but it seems to be a crap shoot. $300 for a HD DVR upgrade for an existing, loyal customer is asking for trouble.
EDIT: I thought I might add that I have never asked for any of these deals either.


----------

