# HBO sues Dish Network



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

Multichannel News reports that "HBO filed a lawsuit against EchoStar Communications seeking $90 million in what the network said it is owed in programming fees, the improper calculation of licensing fees and accrued interest payments."

According to the article, HBO itemizes that as $50 million in interest and late payment penalties plus $40 million of underpayment of fees. The HBO/Dish contract ended on Jan. 1.

E* says that it's all in retaliation for E* filing a program access complaint with the FCC in November, and implies that it also might have something to do with the dispute over sister channel Court TV. HBO says the lawsuit has nothing to do with any of that.

The article: http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6409241.html


----------



## garn9173 (Apr 4, 2005)

You know, if Charlie could ever keep his butt out of the courtroom, maybe, just maybe, he'd have enough money for programming deals.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

This is not good press for E. As a sub, I do not like this.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

The AP article on the topic: http://dtv.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=98995

"(T)he suit also claims that EchoStar owes HBO another $29 million, plus $2.6 million in accrued interest after the DBS company stopped participating in an incentive program aimed at offering, marketing and promoting HBO and sister service Cinemax on Dish." Sure sounds like that bundling issue to me.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

It sounds a little fishy... in that if Dish really has been underpaying HBO for that long, why did HBO wait so long to file a suit for lost income? It sounds like "I know you are but what am I" response to the Dish FCC complaint.

All told, probably both companies are playing hardball with one another and may be equally right/wrong... but I always doubt a lawsuit that is in response to another lawsuit as it tends to mean one or both sides are making some stuff up or exagerating.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The company that I collect paychecks from routinely runs into customers that pay only from monthly statements or pay only once a month. This is apparently not uncommon practice in business. It sounds to me like much of the contended dollars are interest charges as a result of a similar situation.

We regularly write off interest charges for customers who pay _regularly_, but not strictly according to terms.

We also don't usually charge interest on interest.

I would have to agree that there is a significant hint of retribution on the part of HBO in this lawsuit; especially given the timing.

I would miss HBO HD, but not much of their other programming. To me, HBO and SHO have become too much like the MTV of their respective industries.


----------



## bavaria72 (Jun 10, 2004)

Other than Rome and Sopranos, I wouldn't miss it too much either but it would suck to loose Rome. Could E* sustain the loss of HBO and is HBO willing to loose what 5 or 6 million subs? (I wonder just how many of the E* subs have HBO?) Of course I don't think it will ever come to that but will be interesting to watch.


----------



## hankmack (Feb 8, 2006)

I am getting fed up with E* continuing disputes, cancelling stations, breaking the law. It seems like their corporate model is of pushing the limits.:nono2:


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

FTA Michael said:


> Multichannel News reports that "HBO filed a lawsuit against EchoStar Communications seeking $90 million in what the network said it is owed in programming fees, the improper calculation of licensing fees and accrued interest payments."
> 
> According to the article, HBO itemizes that as $50 million in interest and late payment penalties plus $40 million of underpayment of fees. The HBO/Dish contract ended on Jan. 1.
> 
> ...


Now we know why there is a problem with CourTV.Charlie just didn't want subscribers to see him in court.:eek2:


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

I can just see it now. There is Charlie up against HBO on Court TV. Add Judge Judy and I'll bet that would get a 20+ share from subscribers. 

..Doyle


----------



## jacmyoung (Sep 9, 2006)

Charlie has a history of under cutting fees paid to the programming providers. He is a gambler, he bets on his success largely on being the lowest cost cable TV carrier, and I think the number proved he was right.

Apparently he is willing to lose a few HBO subs to prove a point, or if not will come to an agreement with HBO soon. Noticed he never was too hard on ESPN which charges the most outrageous fees, so he does pick the battle.

As a result we mainstream TV viewers who don't care about Court TV, do not sub to HBO, and hardly spend much time on ESPN, don't have to pay $80/mo. for cable, nor $70/mo. for DirecTV, but $50/mo. for E*.

It is a business decision Charlie has made long time ago and nothing really has changed and will not change as long as he sees his sub numbers grow faster than anyone else.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

jacmyoung said:


> Charlie has a history of under cutting fees paid to the programming providers. He is a gambler, he bets on his success largely on being the lowest cost cable TV carrier, and I think the number proved he was right.
> 
> Apparently he is willing to lose a few HBO subs to prove a point, or if not will come to an agreement with HBO soon. Noticed he never was too hard on ESPN which charges the most outrageous fees, so he does pick the battle.
> 
> ...


I would have to disagree with your analysis. Where I live in central NJ, for $47 a month with one HD receiver $6, Directv offers its basic $30 package, $11 HD package, HD locals, two HD RSNs, YES HD and SNY HD, plus two other RSNs, MSG and FSNY with HD feeds of Rangers ice hockey. Yes, E has been aggressive to keep subscription rates down, but a lot of E's aggression translates to its bottom line, rather than lower rates for subs. My analysis is that competition has kept
E's rates low.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

DoyleS said:


> I can just see it now. There is Charlie up against HBO on Court TV. Add Judge Judy and I'll bet that would get a 20+ share from subscribers.
> 
> ..Doyle


I would love to hear Judge Judy say"Don't pee on my DISH and tell me it's Raining"!


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

If the E*/HBO contract ended on Jan. 1st, when will HBO pull the plug, and E* subs lose HBO?


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

SDizzle said:


> If the E*/HBO contract ended on Jan. 1st, when will HBO pull the plug, and E* subs lose HBO?


I wouldn't worry about it their just sparring in the ring.


----------



## jahgreen (Dec 15, 2006)

harsh said:


> I would miss HBO HD, but not much of their other programming. To me, HBO and SHO have become too much like the MTV of their respective industries.


Many would disagree. For example, IMHO HBO has the best show, by far, on television: The Wire. In addition, it has given us Deadwood (may it rest in peace), Rome, The Sopranos, Entourage, Extras, Curb Your Enthusiasm.

That's not MTV in my book!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

SDizzle said:


> If the E*/HBO contract ended on Jan. 1st, when will HBO pull the plug, and E* subs lose HBO?


This is another aspect of the HBO suit that makes me think something is fishy... If HBO is claiming that Dish owes them 50+ million dollars for underpaying or paying late AND there is currently no contract for carriage with Dish (expired the end of the year) then why on earth would they continue to provide HBO and Cinemax signals to Dish?

Its one thing when you let someone continue while they promise to pay you and you figure its better to keep good relations than to cut them off and risk having to sue them to get your money... but once you file the lawsuit, you've stopped being friendly... so if Dish truly owes HBO all that money why on earth would HBO let them continue to have signal?

Fishier and fishier.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

jahgreen said:


> Many would disagree. For example, IMHO HBO has the best show, by far, on television: The Wire. In addition, it has given us Deadwood (may it rest in peace), Rome, The Sopranos, Entourage, Extras, Curb Your Enthusiasm.
> 
> That's not MTV in my book!


I agree, HBO is not a cookie cutter, like NBC, FOX, CBS, CW & ABC. I can't stand MTV.


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

While I appreciate Charlie's looking out for my costs in my programming, I really think I'm getting a bit tired of his constantly taking his subscribers down this bumpy road. Personally, I can live without Court TV and that women's channel since I never watch them but HBO is too big a deal to lose. I rweally want him to fix his constant squabbles with these program providers and settle with HBO and bring us Cinemax HD as well. If I have to pay a buck or two more then let me make that decision. Eventually, if HBO prices themselves out of the market than they will lose all those subscribers. 

Additionally, I had heard that E* pockets most of the money from these subscriptions. If anyone has actual numbers it may be interesting to see out of a $15 per month charge what goes to Dish and what gets passed on to HBO. 

Philosophy- While I am down on DirecTV for it's poor HD quality, and questionable quality overall on hardware, I may find myself switching back to DirecTV as a primary provider if E* can't deliver it's promised programming that I contracted for. Maybe by 2008, D* will have the bandwidth and programming with quality that I can stomach watching them again. Maybe by 2008, their hardware will be broken in too.


----------



## jacmyoung (Sep 9, 2006)

Hound said:


> I would have to disagree with your analysis. Where I live in central NJ, for $47 a month with one HD receiver $6, Directv offers its basic $30 package, $11 HD package, HD locals, two HD RSNs, YES HD and SNY HD, plus two other RSNs, MSG and FSNY with HD feeds of Rangers ice hockey. Yes, E has been aggressive to keep subscription rates down, but a lot of E's aggression translates to its bottom line, rather than lower rates for subs. My analysis is that competition has kept
> E's rates low.


Yes in your particular case DirecTV is much more competitive because they give you all the free sports, keep in mind though they do so to compete with your local cable and most of us don't have such luxury, and E* never intended to capture the exclusive sports markets. How many times have you heard from Charlie when someone asked when E* is going to have NFL ST and he said not anytime soon, go get DirecTV please.

The mainstream E* subs are not sports fanatics, and maybe Charlie is thinking most of us are not premium movie fanatics either.

Look you can certainly have an opinion on him from your perspective, but if E* continues to gain subs more so than its rivals, then you can understand why he continues on that pass.


----------



## linuxworks (Dec 27, 2006)

hankmack said:


> I am getting fed up with E* continuing disputes, cancelling stations, breaking the law. It seems like their corporate model is of pushing the limits.:nono2:


ie, AN AMERICAN COMPANY.

face it, they're almost all shady, when it comes down to it. tax loopholes, payoffs, spying, underhanded tactics.

I think you HAVE to do that to be successful in a large fortune style company.

sad, but true. if you DO play by the rules, you get stepped on by those that don't.


----------



## hankmack (Feb 8, 2006)

linuxworks said:


> ie, AN AMERICAN COMPANY.
> 
> face it, they're almost all shady, when it comes down to it. tax loopholes, payoffs, spying, underhanded tactics.
> 
> ...


I strongly disagree with that premise about American companies.:nono2: Of course there are some bad apples but I believe most are honest and fair.


----------



## ClaudeR (Dec 7, 2003)

The only one making money is the lawyers. This country is going to pot in a big way.


----------



## AVITWeb (Jan 3, 2007)

You're right though...it has to stop...and I certainly do not want to miss Real Time w/Bill Maher!


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

I have D, and would be upset to lose HBO. I enjoy many of the previously mentioned shows along with REAL Sports with Bryant Gumbel. I can take or leave the movies since I just got the Pioneer BDPHD1 and the Toshiba HDXA2 and will be watching most of my movies that way.


----------



## zipbags (Oct 14, 2005)

This is why I left Dish. I gave them a year to work out a deal to get Yes Network. Each side blamed the other..yet nothing. Then finally Dish had the dispute with CBS. And we lost CBS, MTV for a week. It was enough.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

I no longer care about the premium movie channels as they are getting way to expensive especially HBO at $14.99 a month . BLock buster or netflix is a much cheaper solution and the picture quality is great at 720p or 1080i on my dvd player.


----------



## Zero327 (Oct 10, 2006)

hankmack said:


> I strongly disagree with that premise about American companies.:nono2: Of course there are some bad apples but I believe most are honest and fair.


Naive...

Enron was THE MODEL! ....of what not to do if you don't want to get caught.


----------



## linuxworks (Dec 27, 2006)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I no longer care about the premium movie channels as they are getting way to expensive especially HBO at $14.99 a month . BLock buster or netflix is a much cheaper solution and the picture quality is great at 720p or 1080i on my dvd player.


I recently joined netflix for a free month trial. to be honest, I'm not sure I'm going to joing. or if I do, it won't be for the long run (whatever that may be).

a few times in the last weeks, I've gotton very badly scratched dvds. couldn't even hardware-force (retry-count set high) a good clean read. nothing ruins a movie like skips and audio dropouts.

(oh wait; I'm writing to the sat TV audience here. they KNOW of what I speak...)



sorry. couldn't help myself on that one 

but anyway, the grass isn't always greener. I'm getting dvd quality from the dvd's (when they aren't scratched all to hell) and some are anamorphic, which are -wonderful-. (btw, why isn't there anamorphic channels? a poor-man's HD, so to speak? was it ever tried?)

but if it takes a few days to get them and if you get enough duds that have to be resent, that gets equally annoying.

I suppose if they checked the discs more often (or just burned one, new, every N times, just as a matter of course) then the mail deals would be more worth it. right now, with the error rate and lack of 'caring' I'm seeing, Im not sure netflix is the answer.

if you're going to pawn bad discs off, at least let me go to a local store and visually check the goods before I leave, thus saving a LOT of valuable time..


----------



## linuxworks (Dec 27, 2006)

hankmack said:


> I strongly disagree with that premise about American companies.:nono2: Of course there are some bad apples but I believe most are honest and fair.


the big ones? you really think so?

okay......

seriously, it takes a certain kind of 'eat or be eaten' mentality to rise to the very very top. you know the saying about abs. power corrupting absolutely? I'm saying its impossible to resist, and when there is more than a 400 times factor (in the USA) between the CEO salary and that of the common guy, yes, I do think there's a basic structural problem, here. in europe, I'm told that this absurd figure (400) is not anywhere close to what they have. CEO's make more normal wages - not the princely sums that the Fortune class enjoys. and the parachutes - my god, don't even get me started on that!

the 400+ figure is uniquely american, I believe. something about our society pushes greed to levels never before seen. our corporate behavior shows this - as more and more stuff gets leaked and creates scandals all the time. its not about who did or didn't, but about how MUCH you've done 

what I'm saying is, I don't believe that 'saints' can exist in CEO shoes. not in an ultra capitalistic country like ths US. and when you make 400x of what I make - that DOES scare me. that's a LOT of power to wield.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

That's the beautiful thing about this country, if you want to make 5 million dollars a year, you can, there's nothing stopping you from doing so except for yourself. I'm thankful we're 'ultra capitalistic'.


----------



## Zero327 (Oct 10, 2006)

linuxworks said:


> the big ones? you really think so?
> 
> okay......
> 
> ...


THE POWER, flows through me!


----------



## linuxworks (Dec 27, 2006)

Steve Mehs said:


> That's the beautiful thing about this country, if you want to make 5 million dollars a year, you can, there's nothing stopping you from doing so except for yourself. I'm thankful we're 'ultra capitalistic'.


in electronics, there's the notion of 'soft clipping' or curbs that stop run-away. some feedback loop to stop things from getting TOO bad if they're on the wrong track.

in the US, we have NONE of that. and the congress is now a pawn of big business and so consumers have less rights now than we did 20 yrs ago (say).

this is NOT a good trend ;(

power, unchecked, never works out 'well' in the end. should be obvious to anyone who studies even high school history, I would think.


----------



## DishSubLA (Apr 9, 2006)

Dish is not the only company in disputes with content providers. Several cable companies across the country have disputes with local broadcasters and other "cable" content providers. These lawsuits are filed as leverage and often have no merit. Believe me, if Dish and Time Warner come to an agreement regarding HBO, TW will all of a sudden forget about the $90 million it now seems to think is the moral center of their universe. These exact tactics happen all the time. Direct is suing Lifetime; Direct is being sued by several companies, including some accusing Direct of using their technology without paying for it. Dish is not alone as defendant in the courts.


----------



## Dishrat (Jan 4, 2007)

Dishnetwork is telling it's employees to push Showtime and Starz. If you go to Dishnetwork's website and select 'movies' on the programming tab, you won't even see Cinemax listed now.


----------



## Zero327 (Oct 10, 2006)

Dishrat said:


> Dishnetwork is telling it's employees to push Showtime and Starz. If you go to Dishnetwork's website and select 'movies' on the programming tab, you won't even see Cinemax listed now.


Would you list a company that is suing to attempt at strongarming you? I wouldn't. I WOULD cut a deal with two or three of their competitiors to add insult to injury though.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

Dishrat said:


> Dishnetwork is telling it's employees to push Showtime and Starz. If you go to Dishnetwork's website and select 'movies' on the programming tab, you won't even see Cinemax listed now.


Telling their employees to push Showtime and Starz?? I have a couple of friends who work there and they haven't been told to "push" anything. Or just because you don't see Cinemax on the website (which hasn't been there for a few months now) you are assuming?


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> consumers have less rights now than we did 20 yrs ago


Can you name a few of these "rights" that I have lost in the last 20 years. I never noticed.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

linuxworks said:


> I recently joined netflix for a free month trial. to be honest, I'm not sure I'm going to joing. or if I do, it won't be for the long run (whatever that may be).
> 
> a few times in the last weeks, I've gotton very badly scratched dvds. couldn't even hardware-force (retry-count set high) a good clean read. nothing ruins a movie like skips and audio dropouts.
> 
> ...


 I have gotten two dvds that were problems with some of the movie being skipped and I reported to blockbuster.com and they sent another one out free. I can also go to my neighborhood Blockbuster store and trade it in for a free dvd at the store and they still send another one in my queue right out. In fact if I don't want to wait I can trade all of my dvds into the store and get new ones for free right now and they will still send me more in my collection from blockbuster.com as soon as the store sends the returned dvds in. Try blockbuster.com before you give up on the rentals.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

The whole thing is getting too expensive. next thing will see is HBO AT $15.99 per month. And the disadvantage is Timewarner is a cable company. There unfair to 12 million dish subs. If HBO goes it goes. But if anyone wants HBO, then turn Dish Network off, goto lifeline cable or DirecTV.  I will give up my HBO, because of greedy timewarner people.


----------



## SMosher (Jan 16, 2006)

All the drama surrounding E*. Seems a slow beat down by the man. I'm a long time E* guy and stand behind the company 100%. Today I'm probably at 90%. Is it time to blow the layers of dirt off the BUD? Probably. I am finding my self watching more and more FTA after I installed the 4 foot dish and motor. I'm thinking, 'Do I need E* still?' The answer to that I'll find in the next couple months. All this drama surrounding E*. SHEESH!


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

garn9173 said:


> You know, if Charlie could ever keep his butt out of the courtroom, maybe, just maybe, he'd have enough money for programming deals.


You honestly believe that Mr. Ergin, or Echostar for that matter, is short on money?


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

linuxworks said:


> I recently joined netflix for a free month trial. to be honest, I'm not sure I'm going to joing. or if I do, it won't be for the long run (whatever that may be).
> 
> a few times in the last weeks, I've gotton very badly scratched dvds. couldn't even hardware-force (retry-count set high) a good clean read. nothing ruins a movie like skips and audio dropouts.
> 
> ...


Hmmmm in two years I have only had 2 bad disks with Blockbuster. Funny thing is that people always said Netflix was better. IMHO they are both good.

Do you have a local Blockbuster? If so then the Blockbuster deal is a ton better. If not then it really depends on which company has a closer distribution center from what I have been told.

The only issue I have from time to time is late delivery with Blockbuster. I give them 2 extra days from the delivery date and then I report the disk missing and request that the next one be sent. The late disk shows up eventually but they allow a 4th disk to be send while you wait. Can't ask much more than this esp since the late delivery is usually the post office.

If you have a local Blockbuster the free rental coupon each month as well as the free disk swap make my rentals about $1 each. A heck of a deal for me.

I have heard nothing but good things about netflix, however, so I am surprised to hear about a rash a scratched disks.

Did you report the bad disks or just send them back? Often people will just return them upon which they just send out the bad disk to the next person.

I agree that they should visually inspect each disk but with the number of disks they are processing I guess the minimal wage people can be a little lax 

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

linuxworks said:


> the big ones? you really think so?
> 
> okay......
> 
> ...


For some reason (not just with business) we have gotten into our heads that our compensation has little to do with "actual" work but more to do with stutus.

I make more $$$ than you so I am better seems to be the thinking.

If someone makes 400 times the pay over another then they, IMHO, should do 400 times the work and I do include any schooling needed to qualify for that job.

Now how much schooling and prior experience would qualify someone to make 400 times what another make?

Nothing in my book. It's greed greed GREED and once you make your fortune then everything else is just greed than makes me sick.

Bill Gates is worth billions. Did he work for what he is worth, got lucky or a little of both. Should he take a pay cut and raise everyones pay a bit? Maybe but at least he gives away a ton of money each year. How many other people of $$$ give away as much as a percentage of their worth?

You do not have to do anything as it's your $$$ but that does not make it right.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> That's the beautiful thing about this country, if you want to make 5 million dollars a year, you can, there's nothing stopping you from doing so except for yourself. I'm thankful we're 'ultra capitalistic'.


So "I" can make 5 million a year without compromising my morals, values and still maintaining a family life?

Tell me how.... I need to know 

IMHO "ultra" anything is an extreamist view that can be replusive to me. Dog eat dog seems great when you are doing the eating.

What goes around comes around. Sad that this does not apply to all people during their lifetime but eventually everyone gets their due.

-JB


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

Just remember that Charlie Ergen's acutal salary is $1 million a year. The only reason he is worth over $6 billion is because of the stock he owns.

So the answer to the question is start a business and own a majority of the voting stock. When it goes public, you run the business and become a billionaire if the stock takes off.


----------



## TechnoCat (Sep 4, 2005)

DonLandis said:


> While I appreciate Charlie's looking out for my costs in my programming, I really think I'm getting a bit tired of his constantly taking his subscribers down this bumpy road. <snip> I may find myself switching back to DirecTV as a primary provider if E* can't deliver it's promised programming that I contracted for.


Have you actually _experienced_ a bumpy road? Or are you perhaps too tied up in the back-room politics that seldom have any practical impact?

Put another way, how many of these were you _personally_ really impacted by:

Charlie's battle with Viacom
Charlie's battle over distant locals
The Oxygen channel (or whatever that woman's channel was)
The Tivo lawsuit
This HBO issue
Okay, sure, if you're a 24/7 news-addict junkie, remote control surgically implanted, I could see these far-future and hypothetical losses causing you a Malox moment... but even so, just a single solitary moment. Mostly it's just like the play-by-play for a sports match. We want our team to win, but in the end it has very little impact on our puny little lives.


----------



## mruk69 (Jul 26, 2003)

As this thread is about HBO here is something you may want to know.

I am in the Lodging Business (hotel) and everytime they do an industry survey on the guests favorite premium movie channel, HBO wins unanimously. Over 80% would stay at a hotel with HBO than a hotel with another premium channel. The other popular channel is the Fox News Channel.

Lets face it Charlie is a greedy bastar* we all know it he thinks he is god. Well i think he has finally met his match. He will end up begging Time Warner when they threaten to pull all of their channels from E*.


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

jonsnow said:


> Let me get this straight. Dish is being nasty to HBO, meanwhile HBO announces that it is going to adapt George R.R. Martin's epic fantasy masterpiece. Perfect timing dish. Of course I'll just rent the whole thing once it's on dvd since I don't feel like shelling out my life's savings for one tv show. Go ahead and drop HBO, most people that I know can't afford that package after the 60 dollars upfront just to get basic cable.


 How about this..Time-warner (major Cable TV Competitor) is being Nasty to E*..They want to double the price of Courtv and have forced charlie to go to the FCC to prevent Time-Warner from pulling HBO from E*


----------



## Freckles (Jun 13, 2005)

mruk69 said:


> As this thread is about HBO here is something you may want to know.
> 
> I am in the Lodging Business (hotel) and everytime they do an industry survey on the guests favorite premium movie channel, HBO wins unanimously. Over 80% would stay at a hotel with HBO than a hotel with another premium channel. The other popular channel is the Fox News Channel.


We travel frequently and usually stay in the extended stay type hotel and have actually switched hotels just to get HBO. I like many of the HBO series and hate to miss the episodes while away from home. We have Showtime in our package, but hardly ever watch it (we did watch Dexter).

We watch Headline News, Fox News, Weather Channel, Spike, G4, and Scifi most when on the road (and HBO of course!) I would drop my Dish service if HBO were discontinued. Cinemax...I don't know if I'd even notice. We don't watch any sports channels at all and would never miss Lifetime or Oxygen.

Can't comment on the rights of wrongs of the disagreement since I don't know the facts of the matter, but I don't really care whose fault it is as long as I turn on the TV and see my channels. When we can't afford it anymore, we'll try something else.


----------



## Zero327 (Oct 10, 2006)

Charlie is the RoadRunner...........

*MEEP MEEP!!!!* ------------------------------------->


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

I geuss if charlie wants to continue HBO, I think maybe he better go with a ala carte deal. $2.50 for each HBO, but if he did that. The greedy Timewarner may say no. Don't worry. If you want HBO this summer, you can always switch to DirecTV.. You get court tv over DirecTV Too.. For Charlie, take a few aspirin and call your local cable doctor...:lol:


I betcha all found out HBO was going to be $21.95 per month, you would be calling DirecTV or lifeline cable tv, because a higher bill will be your headache and you will need to take A CHARLIE ERGEN PILL OR TWO get rid of this major HBO headache.


----------



## ClaudeR (Dec 7, 2003)

Zero327 said:


> Would you list a company that is suing to attempt at strongarming you? I wouldn't.


That's why I've been with Dish for two years. After 6 years with the other guys they put me through the ringers.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

Meanwhile, once HBO disappears, Dish will loose there old sour bugs and the new sour bugs, will find out the old sour bugs might give DirecTV a call. That how the old cookie crumples each day. If your will to pay $15.99, then ask them to throw in HBO Zone, Cinemax Thriller and two other on account of price increase, why pass one or two bucks unto Dish Subs. Call this the HBO Headache. If you have a Charlie Headache, It's time for a ChaRLIE headache pad.:lol:


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> Meanwhile, once HBO disappears, Dish will loose there old sour bugs and the new sour bugs, will find out the old sour bugs might give DirecTV a call. That how the old cookie crumples each day. If your will to pay $15.99, then ask them to throw in HBO Zone, Cinemax Thriller and two other on account of price increase, why pass one or two bucks unto Dish Subs. Call this the HBO Headache. If you have a Charlie Headache, It's time for a ChaRLIE headache pad.:lol:


umm, okay!?!


----------



## INHUMANITY (Aug 8, 2005)

Dishrat said:


> Dishnetwork is telling it's employees to push Showtime and Starz. If you go to Dishnetwork's website and select 'movies' on the programming tab, you won't even see Cinemax listed now.


Just noticed that myself.

I was looking into adding HBO to my HD package, but it's waste as I'd be only watching the HD channel.

Same goes for the other premium packs such as Showtime. I'd only be interested in the HD feed.

I guess it would be too much to ask to have only the HD premiums and pay only for those.

Hell if HBO was $10.99 or $11.99 I would consider it, but with the increased price, I won't even bother.


----------



## John W (Dec 20, 2005)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> Meanwhile, once HBO disappears, Dish will loose there old sour bugs and the new sour bugs, will find out the old sour bugs might give DirecTV a call. That how the old cookie crumples each day. If your will to pay $15.99, then ask them to throw in HBO Zone, Cinemax Thriller and two other on account of price increase, why pass one or two bucks unto Dish Subs. Call this the HBO Headache. If you have a Charlie Headache, It's time for a ChaRLIE headache pad.:lol:


Go back and tell Charlie you need more training before you come here to defend him.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

Freckles said:


> We travel frequently and usually stay in the extended stay type hotel and have actually switched hotels just to get HBO. ...


For every "you" there is a "me" that does not travel and could not care less about HBO. If Dish rolled over and paid whatever Time-Warner wanted, the Dish bashers would criticize Dish for not holding down costs and if Dish fought it they'd criticize Dish for not carrying their precious HBO.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

SaltiDawg said:


> If Dish rolled over and paid whatever Time-Warner wanted, the Dish bashers would criticize Dish for not holding down costs and if Dish fought it they'd criticize Dish for carrying their precious HBO.


You do realize that Dish Network gets to keep almost half of the money they receive from their sales of the HBO package, right? It's standard procedure for the movie channels.


----------



## jwilson (Sep 24, 2006)

Don't expect DirecTV not to drop channels that you're paying for without notice, they did this to us last year.

I forgot which channel it was, but it suddenly stopped working.

I called them to get it fixed, but was told that it was now in a different package and that I could get it back by paying them an extra $5.00 per month. 



DonLandis said:


> While I appreciate Charlie's looking out for my costs in my programming, I really think I'm getting a bit tired of his constantly taking his subscribers down this bumpy road. Personally, I can live without Court TV and that women's channel since I never watch them but HBO is too big a deal to lose. I rweally want him to fix his constant squabbles with these program providers and settle with HBO and bring us Cinemax HD as well. If I have to pay a buck or two more then let me make that decision. Eventually, if HBO prices themselves out of the market than they will lose all those subscribers.
> 
> Additionally, I had heard that E* pockets most of the money from these subscriptions. If anyone has actual numbers it may be interesting to see out of a $15 per month charge what goes to Dish and what gets passed on to HBO.
> 
> Philosophy- While I am down on DirecTV for it's poor HD quality, and questionable quality overall on hardware, I may find myself switching back to DirecTV as a primary provider if E* can't deliver it's promised programming that I contracted for. Maybe by 2008, D* will have the bandwidth and programming with quality that I can stomach watching them again. Maybe by 2008, their hardware will be broken in too.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

I wonder how this will affect the "2 for $20" deal

I'm tempted to take that $20 ($14 after $6 fee) savings from cancelling HD and picking up Starz and HBO for $20.

-JB


----------



## CABill (Mar 20, 2005)

jrb531 said:


> I wonder how this will affect the "2 for $20" deal
> 
> I'm tempted to take that $20 ($14 after $6 fee) savings from cancelling HD and picking up Starz and HBO for $20.
> 
> -JB


"2 for $20" is toast on 1-Feb. On the Ad slicks I saw for 1-Feb, the Premium movie choices say Pick 2, and then only list Showtime and Starz.

http://ekb.dbstalk.com/rateincrease2007.htm says:

Basic Package + Any 2 Premium Packages - Package Discontinued. $20.00

Any 2 Premium Packages
Or 1 premium package & Playboy $22.99 $22.00 $0.99 Decrease


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

Greg Bimson said:


> You do realize that Dish Network gets to keep almost half of the money they receive from their sales of the HBO package, right? It's standard procedure for the movie channels.


So what? That has nothing to do with it.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

CABill said:


> "2 for $20" is toast on 1-Feb. On the Ad slicks I saw for 1-Feb, the Premium movie choices say Pick 2, and then only list Showtime and Starz.
> 
> http://ekb.dbstalk.com/rateincrease2007.htm says:
> 
> ...





> Any 2 Premium Packages
> Or 1 premium package & Playboy $22.99 $22.00 $0.99 Decrease


This is what I see. So I can pick HBO and Starz for $22 right?

-JB


----------



## mruk69 (Jul 26, 2003)

HBO should of forced Charlie to sign up for Credit Card Auto Pay.


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

Jhon69 said:


> I wouldn't worry about it their just sparring in the ring.


I'm not worried about it, I want it to happen so I can laugh.:lol: I hate E*, they are a very unprofessional company.:nono2: I have D*.


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> I geuss if charlie wants to continue HBO, I think maybe he better go with a ala carte deal. $2.50 for each HBO, but if he did that. The greedy Timewarner may say no. Don't worry. If you want HBO this summer, you can always switch to DirecTV.. You get court tv over DirecTV Too.. For Charlie, take a few aspirin and call your local cable doctor...:lol:
> 
> I betcha all found out HBO was going to be $21.95 per month, you would be calling DirecTV or lifeline cable tv, because a higher bill will be your headache and you will need to take A CHARLIE ERGEN PILL OR TWO get rid of this major HBO headache.


HEHE:lol: I love D*


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SDizzle said:


> HEHE:lol: I love D*


So, why don'y you have an R-20?


----------



## CABill (Mar 20, 2005)

jrb531 said:


> This is what I see. So I can pick HBO and Starz for $22 right?


For 6 more days, it should be the 2-for-$20 deal. If the $22 is acceptable, I'd probably sign up for the 2-for-$20 before the 1st. What one CSR says means little, but I just called myself and asked. She says it will remain $20 and isn't going to increase in Feb. I think she is wrong, but it wouldn't be the first time a package got discontinued (no new subs), but existing subscribers were able to keep the package at the old price. You'd at least have a argument if they also note in your account that you were told it wouldn't be increasing.

The rateincrease2007.htm is somewhat incorrect for the 2-for-$20. You do have to be at least AT120 (200) to get 2-for-$20 and Showtime can't be one of the Premiums (Same CSR on the Showtime, so grain of salt). I'm AT60 and couldn't do 2-for-$20 if I wanted to. I do qualify for the $22.99 ($22) any two premiums though.


----------



## Larry Caldwell (Apr 4, 2005)

TechnoCat said:


> Have you actually _experienced_ a bumpy road? Or are you perhaps too tied up in the back-room politics that seldom have any practical impact?
> 
> Put another way, how many of these were you _personally_ really impacted by:
> 
> ...


Having run in circles where claims run to 7 and 8 digits, I can tell you that going to court is just a business decision. You do what you can to establish leverage for your position. Just like any negotiation, you always ask for much more in a lawsuit than you ever expect to get. That allows you to write the full amount of the claim off as an uncollectable debt, which has tax advantages.

Unless you get off on hanging out with CPAs and corporate attorneys, it's best to just change the channel and ignore this one.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

juan ellitinez said:


> How about this..Time-warner (major Cable TV Competitor) is being Nasty to E*..They want to double the price of Courtv and have forced charlie to go to the FCC to prevent Time-Warner from pulling HBO from E*


WHAT????? Time Warner can go to ..... Court tv is JUNK!!


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

Simply, this. Charlie Ergen will either take the deal which timewarner's HBO provides them or 10 million to 12 million people will not have HBO-Cinemax, and once that happens. Charlie Dish Network will loose millions of subs over HBO. HBO is a big channel. But for a increase in price, covers inflation at a all time high going up on account of Iraqi war, BLAME MOMS MASH POTATOES FOR THAT. 

Charlie will agree. HBO on cable is going up. HBO on D* is going up too, we may say goodbye, but it will comeback weeks after.. By charlie agree to keep HBO, only means, people turning HBO off. Dropping HBO from Dish, means DirecTV pick up those subs, dish loses. He will do it, before then.  

SO, IF YOU HAVE THE CHARLIE'S, THEN ERGIN PAD IS SUPER, FOR HEADACHES:lol:

THE TOUCH OF HDMOVIES-THE TOUCH OF CLASS.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

:lol: I am about to set my Dish up, so maybe the HBO- sueing DISH can be carried on People Court. I'd like to see why HBO didn't come to Charlie Ergin with asking, what about money, what about the money. And Charlie, saying what money.. I betcha D* customers would laugh on that fast. Maybe, Judge Judy could handle Timewarner-HBO and Dish Network problems. After all, it's a Charlie Headache.:uglyhamme


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

mruk69 said:


> HBO should of forced Charlie to sign up for Credit Card Auto Pay.


:lol: What type of credit card can we get out of Charlie Ergin billfold, to pay this bill. If charlie doesn't come thru Paul Secic hair is going get very grey and he will pull the dish plug and call the cable doctor.

 Timewarner said they except VISA, MASTERCARD, DISCOVER, AMERICA EXPRESS, AND CHARLIE ERGIN DINERSCLUB CARD. Maybe, thats for happy hour beer...


----------



## Zero327 (Oct 10, 2006)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> Simply, this. Charlie Ergen will either take the deal which timewarner's HBO provides them or 10 million to 12 million people will not have HBO-Cinemax, and once that happens. Charlie Dish Network will loose millions of subs over HBO. HBO is a big channel.


HBO is a big channel that's true. But you know what? Most of America is FULLY willing to sacrifice one major channel such as HBO, so long as their next bill doesn't jump $5-10. Charlie will continue to push consumer interest as his topic, and he'll win. Because the number of people that will jump for HBO, is actually in the hundreds, AT BEST.

DISH is 13 million strong. Not even 1/10th of that will jump for HBO alone. If ALL premiums were cut, possibly, but otherwise, no.

Why? Because your Kung Fu is not strong.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

Zero327 said:


> HBO is a big channel that's true. But you know what? Most of America is FULLY willing to sacrifice one major channel such as HBO, so long as their next bill doesn't jump $5-10. Charlie will continue to push consumer interest as his topic, and he'll win. Because the number of people that will jump for HBO, is actually in the hundreds, AT BEST.
> 
> DISH is 13 million strong. Not even 1/10th of that will jump for HBO alone. If ALL premiums were cut, possibly, but otherwise, no.
> 
> Why? Because your Kung Fu is not strong.


 HBO and HBO-hd as alone. A Dish viewer can not go without HBO-HBOHD for a good reason, I hope it's not because of hd cost, but maybe video royalty fee's and copy right fee, of sort. R.I.A.A. is sueing xm radio on issue, like HBO is sueing Dish. I have had HBO for 8 years on DISH NETWORK..


----------



## Link (Feb 2, 2004)

Why is it E* that is always having the disputes?? 

The first was with CBS/Viacom I think which resulted in CBS owned stations being dropped as well as Nick, TV Land, VH1, CMT, and MTV for a short time. Then it was the big Lifetime feud last year which resulted in LMN moving to the Top 180. Now there is a battle with Court TV and HBO....

It seems that D* has managed to reach agreements with the same companies and their rates are the same as E*. Directv added Lifetime Real Women a year or so ago and you never heard anything of it like adding it was such a big deal.

I know more people have switched back to cable since cable now has DVR, Video on Demand, Internet, and phone service. With Dish's package prices and additional receiver fees it is as high or higher than cable.


----------



## JimFunk (Oct 12, 2005)

Can Charlie please pay their suppliers? Fox sues them, and so they don't have HD RSN. Now HBO? Geez, E* needs to get their priority straight. You need good programming, that's the #1 rule. In my book, HBO is most sought after TV station after ESPN. Showtime doesn't even come close. What is good of a cheaper bill when there is nothing to watch. And can the customer legally cancel their sub if HBO is dropped?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The first wasn't Viacom ... E* has been fighting for "fair" treatment for years.

If you are going to ASSUME that the party that files a complaint is instantly correct and the plaintiff is instantly guilty please decline to serve jury duty. Thanks. (If you are going to assume, at least assume that E* is instantly correct in the complaints they file --- such as the program access complaints against Cinemax and InHD. Sheesh, it seems like some people hang out here just to bash Dish at every opportunity.)

BTW: D* doesn't have as many issues because they cave and raise prices and can rely on the corporate protection of their owner to bail them out of any financial problems. Perhaps with the Liberty buyout of D* that protection will disappear. E* lives and dies based on the satellite business, not as part of a larger corporate entity.


----------



## djpadz (Aug 4, 2004)

Awhile back, E* starting moving away from its model of allowing subs purchase their receivers, to forcing them to lease them, which generally comes with a service commitment. Therefore, as long as E* can force us to keep upgrading our equipment (anybody else on their third generation of HD receivers?), they don't have to worry about people leaving because they're going to dump HBO. A ~$200 penalty is enough to make anybody think twice.

Having said that, the loss of HBO will cause E* to lose new subscribers. Whether you personally like HBO or not is immaterial; all other things being equal, people are going to want to have the _option_ to subscribe to HBO. Also, dropping a big channel like HBO sends a message to E* subs: no channel is safe, and E* will drop channels without regard for the impact to the subscriber base. It's not the absence of the channel; it's what the channel's absence symbolizes.

To that end, I doubt that HBO is going anywhere. An agreement will be reached, and we may end up paying a couple bucks a month more. And, we will. We'll complain about it, and E* will ignore us, and, who knows, some of us may even pay the penalty to leave, if only to prove a point. We won't be missed.

--Dj


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Remember too, as someone else said, Dish turns a profit... DirecTV doesn't usually. Also, after the Lifetime squabble where Dish got better rates... DirecTV turned around and threatened to sue Lifetime if they didn't give them the same better deal that Dish had negotiated. DirecTV could have fought too... in fact if both Dish and DirecTV fought these things, I wager that both companies could have lower satellite bills.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

IF both sat companies would work together as a team to negotiate the rates for movie channels , etc, we could get the combined strength of over 28 million customers. This could be a financial strategic partnership in terms of bargaining that would benefit all subs to keep prices low.


----------



## SMosher (Jan 16, 2006)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> IF both sat companies would work together as a team to negotiate the rates for movie channels , etc, we could get the combined strength of over 28 million customers. This could be a financial strategic partnership in terms of bargaining that would benefit all subs to keep prices low.


Yah, like that will happen.


----------



## John W (Dec 20, 2005)

James Long said:


> The first wasn't Viacom ... E* has been fighting for "fair" treatment for years.
> 
> If you are going to ASSUME that the party that files a complaint is instantly correct and the plaintiff is instantly guilty please decline to serve jury duty. Thanks. (If you are going to assume, at least assume that E* is instantly correct in the complaints they file --- such as the program access complaints against Cinemax and InHD. Sheesh, it seems like some people hang out here just to bash Dish at every opportunity.)
> 
> BTW: D* doesn't have as many issues because they cave and raise prices and can rely on the corporate protection of their owner to bail them out of any financial problems. Perhaps with the Liberty buyout of D* that protection will disappear. E* lives and dies based on the satellite business, not as part of a larger corporate entity.


James-If D* caves and raises prices, how has all this worked out for us?Are we paying significantly less as a result of Charlie's efforts?


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

If Charlie looses HBO, Maybe he can replace the channel with the Belly Button Channel and Playboy. Maybe a little porn will be good for time. Atleast mom roast won't smell like unions..:sure:


----------



## SMosher (Jan 16, 2006)

John W said:


> James-If D* caves and raises prices, how has all this worked out for us?Are we paying significantly less as a result of Charlie's efforts?


My 2 cents, yes indeed we are paying less. As I said in another post no matter which way one turns to find TV its all turning into a luxory to have.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> ...


And he even edited his post.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

Link said:


> ... With Dish's package prices and additional receiver fees it is as high or higher than cable.


Based on costs in my area his is nonsense.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

JimFunk said:


> ... Geez, E* needs to get their priority straight. ... In my book, HBO is most sought after TV station after ESPN. ...


Apparently for most of us E* *does* have their priorities straight - bringing quality programming to we viewers without accepting proposed outrageous cost increases from program providers. The majority of E* subsacribers do not care about HBO and many of us don't care about ESPN. To suggest that we should supplement *your* monthly bill any more is outrageous!


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

James Long said:


> ... Sheesh, it seems like some people hang out here just to bash Dish at every opportunity.) ...


James,

Seems like this is exactly correct!


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

djpadz said:


> ... Whether you personally like HBO or not is immaterial; all other things being equal, people are going to want to have the _option_ to subscribe to HBO. ...


Nonsense! *A small minority* of "people" are going to want to subscribe to HBO - this is borne out by the exisiting HBO viewer base as compared to the 13 million + total.

Assuming E* continues carrying HBO at a cost lower then proposed by Time-Warner I trust you'll conme back here and thank E* for negotiating a better price on behalf of we viewers. (I won't hold my breath waiting. lol)


----------



## John W (Dec 20, 2005)

SMosher said:


> My 2 cents, yes indeed we are paying less. As I said in another post no matter which way one turns to find TV its all turning into a luxory to have.


I've considered it just another required utility bill for some time.Of course, it resembles telephone/internet more than the others because if and when I get tired of Charlie Quixote I can switch.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

Greg Bimson said:


> You do realize that Dish Network gets to keep almost half of the money they receive from their sales of the HBO package, right? It's standard procedure for the movie channels.





SaltiDawg said:


> So what? That has nothing to do with it.


Let's say of any $40 programming bill that $20 is for programming. This is not a stretch; it is about what any provider makes off of a package. So at this time Dish Network makes $20 a month per subscriber.

So the programmers raise rates an average of seven percent the next year. That $20 that Dish Network pays their suppliers this year turns into $21.40 next year.

Dish Network then raises their rates 7 percent, blaming higher programming costs. The $40 they take in this year turns into $42.80 next year, and then Dish Network is now making $21.40 a month in profit, also a 7 percent increase.
There are numerous complaints about the channels trying to make a buck, but no one wants to complain that their provider will make MORE off of the increases than they pay out.


James Long said:


> The first wasn't Viacom ... E* has been fighting for "fair" treatment for years.
> 
> If you are going to ASSUME that the party that files a complaint is instantly correct and the plaintiff is instantly guilty please decline to serve jury duty. Thanks. (If you are going to assume, at least assume that E* is instantly correct in the complaints they file --- such as the program access complaints against Cinemax and InHD. Sheesh, it seems like some people hang out here just to bash Dish at every opportunity.)


But then you have just assumed that the programmers aren't treating Dish Network fairly. Look at your first sentence again.


James Long said:


> BTW: D* doesn't have as many issues because they cave and raise prices and can rely on the corporate protection of their owner to bail them out of any financial problems.


Assumptions abound, even amongst the best of us.

It has been noted that one of the reasons Dish Network wanted to merge with DirecTV was to gain the ability to see DirecTV's books. It infuriated Dish Network management to learn that DirecTV was paying less per subscriber than Dish Network. Then again, these carriage contracts set price based upon the amount of subscribers to a system, and Dish Network has been in the neighborhood of 2 to 3 million subscribers less than DirecTV for years.


SaltiDawg said:


> Apparently for most of us E* does have their priorities straight - bringing quality programming to we viewers without accepting proposed outrageous cost increases from program providers.


Assumptions abound.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

SaltiDawg said:


> Nonsense! *A small minority* of "people" are going to want to subscribe to HBO - this is borne out by the exisiting HBO viewer base as compared to the 13 million + total.
> 
> Assuming E* continues carrying HBO at a cost lower then proposed by Time-Warner I trust you'll conme back here and than E* for negotiating a better price on behalf of we viewers. (I won't hold my breath waiting. lol)


We will thank E* for negotiating a cheaper price.Then can we ask" UH Why is HBO
cheaper on D*"???.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

SMosher said:


> Yah, like that will happen.


 This isn't congress we are talking about here. This is about $$$$$$$$. Both sat companies should work together to bargain for the best price for their programming and to battle the competition as well. AFter all Cable and other new video providers are the competition.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Greg Bimson said:


> Let's say of any $40 programming bill that $20 is for programming. This is not a stretch; it is about what any provider makes off of a package. So at this time Dish Network makes $20 a month per subscriber.
> 
> So the programmers raise rates an average of seven percent the next year. That $20 that Dish Network pays their suppliers this year turns into $21.40 next year.
> 
> ...


"And the Truth shall set you Free"!!.


----------



## archer75 (Oct 13, 2006)

SMosher said:


> My 2 cents, yes indeed we are paying less. As I said in another post no matter which way one turns to find TV its all turning into a luxory to have.


You aren't paying less at all. Dish is significantly more expensive than Direct. Hell it's even more expensive than comcast. I priced it all out with what was more important to me and dish would cost me $20 more per month than direct tv. Though dish is only a few bucks more than comcast.


----------



## mruk69 (Jul 26, 2003)

Lets say E* looses HBO. If you signed up for 18 month or 2 year commmitment and you subbed to HBO. They would have to let you out of the contract. Because if the refuse then Charlie will be opening up another can of worms.
I for one have to have HBO. I don't give a crap about any other premium channel, as long as I get my HBO boxing, Extra's and the Sopranos.
We should all stop paying Charlie as well.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

Greg Bimson said:


> Let's say of any $40 programming bill that $20 is for programming. This is not a stretch; it is about what any provider makes off of a package. So at this time Dish Network makes $20 a month per subscriber.
> 
> So the programmers raise rates an average of seven percent the next year. That $20 that Dish Network pays their suppliers this year turns into $21.40 next year.
> 
> ...


They sure do! Your assumption that supply and demand either doesn't exist or is not worth mentioning when discussing effects on profit when price is raised. Heck, in your simplistic model E* should hope for even larger increases in their programming costs so that they can increase their profitability in the future.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

SaltiDawg said:


> They sure do! Your assumption that supply and demand either doesn't exist or is not worth mentioning when discussing effects on profit when price is raised.


Right. But that is no different than assuming the reason for yearly price increases is only because of the programmers. ASSUMING that your package rises 7 percent in a year, everyone is receiving a cut of it. You are complaining that the programmer doesn't deserve any part of the increase, but don't question that Dish Network does deserve it.

It starts with a bad premise. My rates rise year over year because the programmers...


SaltiDawg said:


> Heck, in your simplistic model E* should hope for even larger increases in their programming costs so that they can increase their profitability in the future.


And as I recall, Dish Network has stopped carrying Court TV. So...

We'll say that Dish Network pays a dime per subscriber per month for Court TV (yes, another assumption). Dish Network doesn't have to pay Court TV this month, so they've saved $1.3 million. Was the savings passed on to you? I'm fairly certain Dish Network didn't have to pay nearly that much to add Biography in its place, if Dish Network had to pay anything for it.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

Greg Bimson said:


> ... You are complaining that the programmer doesn't deserve any part of the increase, but don't question that Dish Network does deserve it. ...


Huh? I made no representation that I have any knowledge of the reasons for cost increases by E*.

I do suggest that providing TV entertainment for fee is an industry that follows some sort of supply-demand curve and rising costs say 7% does not simply mean that E* will receive 7% more money from the same number of subscribers.

I also will suggest that if in order to carry HBO, E* must also pay for and carry additional channels in its non-premium packages and that results in a higher package cost that this will also reflect suppy-demand curve effects that may or may not result in more total revenue for E*.

If a given carrier drops some niche programming and also some non-premium package programming and there is an overall reduction in price while it may well lose some subscribers that find another provider more appealing, it may also be said that some new customers may be drawn to the lower prices that come to be. You seem to think that *everyone* somehow views HBO or ESPN as something that they want to pay for.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

SaltiDawg said:


> Huh? I made no representation that I have any knowledge of the reasons for cost increases by E*.





SaltiDawg said:


> Apparently for most of us E* does have their priorities straight - bringing quality programming to we viewers without accepting proposed outrageous cost increases from program providers.


It is quite inferred. Because Dish Network publicly fights programmers, it is "assumed" Dish Network is trying to hold rates down. The easy reality is that Dish Network is trying to hold down their own expenses. Dish Network then also tries to maximize their own revenues, and that is done through customer acquisition, package uplifts and rate increases.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

Greg Bimson said:


> ... The easy reality is that Dish Network is trying to hold down their own expenses. Dish Network then also tries to maximize their own revenues, and that is done through customer acquisition, package uplifts and rate increases.


Doh. Ya think?


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Jhon69 said:


> We will thank E* for negotiating a cheaper price.Then can we ask" UH Why is HBO
> cheaper on D*"???.


Around this area Comcast charges $16.90 for less channels than E. I considered switching until I would have paid $124.78 for less channels. Comcast is a ripoff! I pay $67.79 for E. I'm getting AT100 + HBO +STARZ. Probably I'll pay about the same.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> If Charlie looses HBO, Maybe he can replace the channel with the Belly Button Channel and Playboy. Maybe a little porn will be good for time. Atleast mom roast won't smell like unions..:sure:


dude, please don't quit your day job, cause you comedy routine really sucks!


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

archer75 said:


> You aren't paying less at all. Dish is significantly more expensive than Direct. Hell it's even more expensive than comcast. I priced it all out with what was more important to me and dish would cost me $20 more per month than direct tv. Though dish is only a few bucks more than comcast.


What is more important to you doesn't mean important to me. So, yes, I am paying less. Nice try though!


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

mruk69 said:


> Lets say E* looses HBO. If you signed up for 18 month or 2 year commmitment and you subbed to HBO. They would have to let you out of the contract. Because if the refuse then Charlie will be opening up another can of worms.
> I for one have to have HBO. I don't give a crap about any other premium channel, as long as I get my HBO boxing, Extra's and the Sopranos.
> We should all stop paying Charlie as well.


You might want to take another look at that contract you signed. You are locked in no matter what. When you put your signature on the bottom line, you agreed that Dish was able to change the programming without notice and without you getting out of your contract. Can of worms? Nope, just smart business.
Go ahead and stop paying. I dare you! You will see not only HBO shut off, but you will also see any other packages you subscibe to shut off and if you wait long enough they will give your credit card a nice little hit, oh yeah, as well as your credit rating. Like I said, go ahead, I dare ya!


----------



## Freckles (Jun 13, 2005)

SaltiDawg said:


> For every "you" there is a "me" that does not travel and could not care less about HBO. If Dish rolled over and paid whatever Time-Warner wanted, the Dish bashers would criticize Dish for not holding down costs and if Dish fought it they'd criticize Dish for not carrying their precious HBO.


You're right. I would hate Dish to charge me more to keep or acquire a sports package because I don't care for them. I also don't care if they drop Lifetime or Oxygen since I don't watch them. And as you say, another may not care anything about HBO. We all want what WE want. I want HBO and if Dish doesn't want to carry it or if it becomes too expensive to stay with Dish, I guess I can change providers if necessary. Overall, I've been pretty happy with Dish. I love my HDTV, DVR, and the opportunity to lease the receivers. I could never have afforded to purchase the receivers outright.

Are all the satellite and cable providers experiencing the same issues with HBO or is it just Dish? I don't see how Dish can hold out against Time Warner if the other providers all "roll over." Unless they have been singled out for a price increase.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I have never been able to see that I would save money with E* as compared with D*, on any channel package I wanted to subscribe to.

Which tells me something, because with the way Mr. Ergen fights for low rates, SOMEONE must be benefitting.


----------



## Freckles (Jun 13, 2005)

paulman182 said:


> I have never been able to see that I would save money with E* as compared with D*, on any channel package I wanted to subscribe to.
> 
> Which tells me something, because with the way Mr. Ergen fights for low rates, SOMEONE must be benefitting.


I switched from D* to E* because it would have cost me a small fortune up front to acquire HD receivers as well as enough receivers to have 4 tuners. Then it would have been wasted because D* had next to nothing in HD programming. That was about a year and a half ago.

I have been very happy and surprised at how seldom we have rain fade problems compared with D*. I don't know that my package is any cheaper with E*, but it is great to have programming in 4 rooms with HD in 2 rooms on all leased equipment. I know the research and development as well as manufacture of this equipment must be quite expensive since D* was charging a fortune to sell theirs. Maybe they have better deals now.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

Slamminc11 said:


> dude, please don't quit your day job, cause you comedy routine really sucks!


 You have to ask yourself, Can Charlie keep the same low price for HBO at $10.99? No.. The price will end up going up. Echostar is being sued, enless HBO can negiote. Dish is running out of time to CourtTV. If Court TV comes back, then were lucky. Were not lucky, if we loose HBO. E* is better off negiotating and pay off, for the sake of loosing his viewers. You don't want to loose over 5 million dish subs, because judge told E* to turn off HBO. All, I know is it is grazy, E* is being sued by HBO, because Dish failed to pay up on the cost and a lawsuit, spell trouble and a double whammy. Yes, I did fallow what's been happening. Reports our true or not? Sky Report is true or not?


----------



## mplsjeffm (May 28, 2005)

HBO is a pay channel. You can choose to pay for it or not.
All of the ESPn's and FOX sport channels I don't have a choice. Those channels are in a bundel.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> You have to ask yourself, Can Charlie keep the same low price for HBO at $10.99? No.. The price will end up going up. Echostar is being sued, enless HBO can negiote. Dish is running out of time to CourtTV. If Court TV comes back, then were lucky. Were not lucky, if we loose HBO. E* is better off negiotating and pay off, for the sake of loosing his viewers. You don't want to loose over 5 million dish subs, because judge told E* to turn off HBO. All, I know is it is grazy, E* is being sued by HBO, because Dish failed to pay up on the cost and a lawsuit, spell trouble and a double whammy. Yes, I did fallow what's been happening. Reports our true or not? Sky Report is true or not?


umm, what?


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

Freckles said:


> I switched from D* to E* because it would have cost me a small fortune up front to acquire HD receivers as well as enough receivers to have 4 tuners. Then it would have been wasted because D* had next to nothing in HD programming. That was about a year and a half ago.


Late summer/early fall 2006 I got the HD DVR and three SD DVRs for $39. Then I got another HD receiver for the standard price of $99. I am hoping to get a good deal for another HD DVR when my "one-special-deal-every-six-months" waiting period is up.

Sorry about the OT!


----------



## nybo30 (Jan 27, 2007)

These are all very interesting points to consider. E business practices, What subscribers want, paying by the month, etc..... and here are my thoughts.

None of us subscriber work within the higher level of E; so how can we guess what the motives may or may not be. The arguement is mute.

Court wants more money for service. How legitimate is this? Well i refer back to the 80's when cable first came around and we were promised "pay broadcasting with no commercials." We paid so we would not have commercials, now all we get is 60% program and 40% commercial. I say don't simply agree to pay the higher prices just because a contract is up. Fight a little. See how it goes and if I have to sacrifice my channel, so be it. The precident I fear would be all of them asking for higher prices at the end of a contract which of course would pass the cost to us.

Switching service. Well now there are certainly cons on all three sides of this. Cable, Direct, and Dish are all guilty of overpromising and underdelivering. Cable offered the most reliable service but the bills were a rollercoster. Cable was way more per channel on costs. Direct is not far from cost per channel but maybe it is worth it since they dont have all these legal issues and our programming is more assured. Dish is certainly more volatile but they offer the lowest cost per channel by at least 20+%

Bottom line: what are we willing to sacrifice for cost?


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

nybo30 said:


> Well i refer back to the 80's when cable first came around and we were promised "pay broadcasting with no commercials."


I beg your pardon? They never promised us a rose garden. 

Cable TV NEVER promised commercial free channels with the exception of the movie channels like HBO. They promised us consistant good reception of local channels plus specialty channels. I cna go back to the 70's when the biggest objection to getting cable was that you were paying for channels with commercials on them.

See ya
Tony


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

TNGTony said:


> I beg your pardon? They never promised us a rose garden.
> Cable TV NEVER promised commercial free channels with the exception of the movie channels like HBO. They promised us consistant good reception of local channels plus specialty channels. I cna go back to the 70's when the biggest objection to getting cable was that you were paying for channels with commercials on them.


Right you are, Tony. It was many years after my Mom & Dad got cable before there even were any channels with no commercials, except for educational channels (now PBS channels.)

And in this area, cable still does not offer "consistant good reception" of anything.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CATV - Community Antenna TV ... You don't hear that much any more now that cable has become a pay satellite driven service (with HITS and other platforms specifically for the cable industry).

My family's first "cable" subscription was in 1974 or 1975 and all we got were the "local" channels. The benefit was that we didn't have to put up a tower to receive those channels. And neither did all of our neighbors. Even into the 80's our "cable" service was primarily OTA TV retransmitted. Then the CATV company added a big dish and we started getting "extra" channels (in my town it was Showtime and The Weather Channel as our first two satellite "cable" channels).

They had a hard enough time keeping the channels static free back in the day. Commercial free? Nahhh. That is only for "premium" channels and is a guarantee made more by the content provider than the CATV/cable/satellite system.

The last 25 years of growth in satellite driven "cable" has brought channels that were more or less just broadcasted in a different way. Early cable channels included superstations ... regular commercial TV stations that put their signal on satellite. Even now the dedicated "cable" stations are more or less run like an OTA network - competing with OTAs for the best programming as well as doing the usual rerun TV.

Cable has come a long way from the CATV days ... but it was and remains just another way of getting commercial TV into your home. The "commercial free" channels are an exception, not the rule.


----------



## minnow (Apr 26, 2002)

And cable wouldn't be offering anywhere's near the number and variety of offerings if it weren't for Dish and Direct. Competition for subscribers is what drove cable to upgrade. Without satellite and now FIOS, cable would very quickly revert back to the "good old days" of no competition = poor service at very high prices. Consumers need all the players to survive to keep them all honest.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

mplsjeffm said:


> HBO is a pay channel. You can choose to pay for it or not.
> All of the ESPn's and FOX sport channels I don't have a choice. Those channels are in a bundel.


Ah, havn't you heard about the "Family Pack"? No ESPN, some channels out of every other pack (including some from the top-180) and the lowest price in the business.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Don't think there will be a problem unless you wake up and find HBO&Cinemax gone.Then you might have a problem.:eek2:


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Paul Secic said:


> Around this area Comcast charges $16.90 for less channels than E. I considered switching until I would have paid $124.78 for less channels. Comcast is a ripoff! I pay $67.79 for E. I'm getting AT100 + HBO +STARZ. Probably I'll pay about the same.


Might want to think about changing your package declaration on the bottom?.


----------



## Zero327 (Oct 10, 2006)

All of this is really moot since the entire topic, much to Rupert's delight centers around the simple fact that if DISH caves, subs will pay more, and complain about it the entire time. If DISH doesn't cave, subs that want HBO will complain about losing service for the stance Charlie is taking. Either way subs are going to complain. The only thing Charlie needs to know, is which side, the subs with HBO or the subs without is the largest money maker, and then to err on that side. 

Apparently, Charlie has done his homework and checked his books, HBO isn't as important as it was a decade ago with the large drive to BD and HDVD. People are more interested in owning than buying a new movie channel. The end result, is Charlie will reach an agreement with HBO sooner or later, but it will be more on less on his terms, and there isn't a thing HBO can do about it. The court case, was their absolute best shot. Consumer pressure on DISH, well, we've seen how far that goes.


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

paulman182 said:


> Late summer/early fall 2006 I got the HD DVR and three SD DVRs for $39. Then I got another HD receiver for the standard price of $99. I am hoping to get a good deal for another HD DVR when my "one-special-deal-every-six-months" waiting period is up.
> 
> Sorry about the OT!


The difference is the mirror fee's.With 4 recievers from d* you pay the primary plu 15 bucks amonth for the additional receivers. With E* you pay for the primary and only 1 5 dollar mirror fee (assuming all is plugged into a phoneline)


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

James Long said:


> So, why don'y you have an R-20?


If you are referring to the HR20, the D* made HD DVR, I do, look in my signature 
And you say that as though it may be a bad thing I think it is a fine receiver, has it had issues? Yes. But at least D* cares to try to resolve them as soon as possible. All that DISH gives is headache to their subscribers by always wanting to "blackout channels", and offer horrible customer service. Every company has exceptions to the rule, but, ask 10 D* subs how their customer service is, and I will stand behind the fact that it is........say 80% approval......you can't please everyone.


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

James Long said:


> The first wasn't Viacom ... E* has been fighting for "fair" treatment for years.
> 
> If you are going to ASSUME that the party that files a complaint is instantly correct and the plaintiff is instantly guilty please decline to serve jury duty. Thanks. (If you are going to assume, at least assume that E* is instantly correct in the complaints they file --- such as the program access complaints against Cinemax and InHD. Sheesh, it seems like some people hang out here just to bash Dish at every opportunity.)
> 
> BTW: D* doesn't have as many issues because they cave and raise prices and can rely on the corporate protection of their owner to bail them out of any financial problems. Perhaps with the Liberty buyout of D* that protection will disappear. E* lives and dies based on the satellite business, not as part of a larger corporate entity.


Been a D* sub for 3 years, had cable for a long time. I have not seen an increase on my bill? They did raise Total Choice Premier, but, mine stayed the same as the old price, and the HD package went down:hurah: There is a rumor of an upcoming increase, okay, maybe But, they may indeed keep existing customers the same, as they have done prior. You asked that E* not be "assumed" as guilty, but you then turn around and make a bogus statement about D*? What'supwiththat???


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

John W said:


> James-If D* caves and raises prices, how has all this worked out for us?Are we paying significantly less as a result of Charlie's efforts?


Check it out for yourself, go to www.directv.com, and compare. Number of channels, quality of channels, and price. Also, look at the 1 DVR fee PER HOUSE!! NOT PER DVR! My Buddy just switched from E* to D*, and paid the 200 large to do it, as a result of their lousy customer service. And he PAYS LESS for more. Oh, let me say this before someone inevitably digs it in, E* does currently have more HD channels...................not for long. And they are VOOM, who many say that they don't care less about. There, I outed that one myself.


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

paulman182 said:


> Late summer/early fall 2006 I got the HD DVR and three SD DVRs for $39. Then I got another HD receiver for the standard price of $99. I am hoping to get a good deal for another HD DVR when my "one-special-deal-every-six-months" waiting period is up.
> 
> Sorry about the OT!


HR-20 - 1, R-15 - 4. Paid Nothing for ANY of them. I also have an HR10-250. And no DVR fee, it is in my package, but, others not in that package still only pay $5.99 I believe.

E* subs..........................you would pay $35.94 in this situation, that is if the fee from them is $5.99 per receiver.


----------



## JimFunk (Oct 12, 2005)

If Dish loses HBO, the subs will get Netflix until their contract is up. Then make the switch.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The only way E* will lose HBO is if HBO turns off (de-authorizes) E*'s receivers for the alleged non-payment or a court orders termination.

Neither side of this issue, E* or HBO, wants the channels off of the system. It is too big of a loss for either. With a normal channel loss (such as CourtTV) E* can continue to charge the same amount and perhaps send out a PPV coupon to those who complain. Dropping HBO would lead to a real loss of income. Not enough to kill E*, but still more than the cost of a PPV coupon.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

James Long said:


> Neither side of this issue, E* or HBO, wants the channels off of the system.


I read somewhere that about 30 percent of the public buys HBO. As I recall, that is about $12 a month average, dependent upon system. For Dish Network with a total around 12.5 million subscribers, that puts the subscriber take for HBO at about 3.75 million subscribers. At $12 a pop (yes, average) that is $45 million a month revenue generated for the HBO package, which is divided out between both Dish Network and HBO. This fight over $90 million is a drop in the bucket, as either side makes that in around 4 months time.

It is obvious that each side feel wronged by the other side. Between Dish Network filing access complaints with the FCC and HBO filing papers for damages in a court of law, both sides feel extremely wronged for it to get to this point.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

Greg Bimson said:


> I read somewhere that about 30 percent of the public buys HBO. As I recall, that is about $12 a month average, dependent upon system. For Dish Network with a total around 12.5 million subscribers, that puts the subscriber take for HBO at about 3.75 million subscribers. At $12 a pop (yes, average) that is $45 million a month revenue generated for the HBO package, which is divided out between both Dish Network and HBO. This fight over $90 million is a drop in the bucket, as either side makes that in around 4 months time.
> 
> It is obvious that each side feel wronged by the other side. Between Dish Network filing access complaints with the FCC and HBO filing papers for damages in a court of law, both sides feel extremely wronged for it to get to this point.


 HBO is Big Bucks for dish network. If you Charlie tries to get a good deal, depends on rather or not he keeps HBO. HBO I am sure will stay. There is no reason to tell 13 million HBO viewers, they will loose HBO. It's better for Dish to carry HBO, and if a high number want to turn off, fine.. Price will go up.. Everybody, including James Long wouldn't mind receiving The Playboy Channel, for P-O-R-N GOODS...:lol:


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> HBO is Big Bucks for dish network. If you Charlie tries to get a good deal, depends on rather or not he keeps HBO. HBO I am sure will stay. There is no reason to tell 13 million HBO viewers, they will loose HBO. It's better for Dish to carry HBO, and if a high number want to turn off, fine.. Price will go up.. Everybody, including James Long wouldn't mind receiving The Playboy Channel, for P-O-R-N GOODS...:lol:


umm, Dish has 13 million customers, do you honestly think every one of them subscribes to HBO, I think not!


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

News Corp. Rupert Murdoch placed his bid for Tribune media, last week. If Murdoch gets Tribune, what affects it will have WGN-CHICAGO, WPIX-NEW YORK, KTLA-LOS ANGELES, AND KWGN-DENVER? Lesser choice superstation be owned by News Corp. 

Meanwhile, If HBO get's Pulled, we might as well, be pleading our case. HBO is aware of the 13 million viewers, who might not get HBO and tell 13 million to go to DIRECTV. I believe, Dish keep HBO.. No reason to turn it off...


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

Slamminc11 said:


> umm, Dish has 13 million customers, do you honestly think every one of them subscribes to HBO, I think not!


 No, but HBO may think that there could be 13 million HBO viewers. Yea, it is true, that viewership is a unknown number, it wouldn't look good for Charlie Ergin, if people who want HBO, want it, NOT HAVE TO GET DIRECTV. Deal goes thru, because Charlie must compete, but in good faith, maintain a low HBO price on Dish, or raise price. People have a choice, not Dish. Pay more for HBO, or drop HBO, themselves. HBO will continue to be available, because the percentage or the numbers..


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

SDizzle said:


> HR-20 - 1, R-15 - 4. Paid Nothing for ANY of them. I also have an HR10-250. And no DVR fee, it is in my package, but, others not in that package still only pay $5.99 I believe.
> 
> E* subs..........................you would pay $35.94 in this situation, that is if the fee from them is $5.99 per receiver.


 From You dozen entry's over HBO. There is no reason for HBO to force Dish to pull plug. Having to turn off 6 million to 12 million subs on HBO, does mean one thing. HBO wouldn't want to stiff subs, over a subs 12,24 month commitment on Dish.. And no HBO.. With millions, HBO will go up, but ofcourse Dish does have a better selection of HBO-Cinemax pack.. There's way too many HBO subs..


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> ...There is no reason to tell 13 million HBO viewers, they will loose HBO. ..


Do you think? In this case, do you think there are 13 million HBO subscribers on Dish.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

SaltiDawg said:


> Do you think? In this case, do you think there are 13 million HBO subscribers on Dish.


 Yes, I can't say how many people have HBO, but does HBO people know that. 13 million Dish subs, no number. It was HBO sub number. IN all cases, Dish has a better HBO-Cinemax selection for on satellite service, but if HBO gets dropped, then many will switch to life-line cable tv. I do not believe, Dish will not drop HBO.. Millions and MIllions of viewers. Except being sued for failure to pay up.


----------



## Guitar Hero (Dec 13, 2005)

Good news! Dish Network is the next Enron in my opinion. All who work for this failing company who choose to defend it deserve to get fired without notice and have all their pension money stolen. Idiots. This company is doing a lot of evil s*** to cover up their failure to properly maintain the company. I know from personal experience since they charged numerous fraudulent charges to my credit card when I wasn't' even a customer of theirs. 

This company will soon dry up and wither away into nothingness and it will be well deserved, too.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

:lol:


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> From You dozen entry's over HBO. There is no reason for HBO to force Dish to pull plug. Having to turn off 6 million to 12 million subs on HBO, does mean one thing. HBO wouldn't want to stiff subs, over a subs 12,24 month commitment on Dish.. And no HBO.. With millions, HBO will go up, but ofcourse Dish does have a better selection of HBO-Cinemax pack.. There's way too many HBO subs..


I think you're right, it would be too huge of a move by either DISH or HBO. It would be a bad business move. I'm just stirring things up due to my personal hatred for DISH You understand.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Umm... why is my name (and a bunch of others) at the bottom of Guitar Hero's post?

I see no point in it, and he isn't talking directly to any of us or quoting anything... and I noticed when I tried to quote his post that line did not appear... so it looks like it is part of his tagline?


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> Yes, I can't say how many people have HBO, but does HBO people know that. 13 million Dish subs, no number. It was HBO sub number. IN all cases, Dish has a better HBO-Cinemax selection for on satellite service, but if HBO gets dropped, then many will switch to life-line cable tv. I do not believe, Dish will not drop HBO.. Millions and MIllions of viewers. Except being sued for failure to pay up.


Huh?


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Umm... why is my name (and a bunch of others) at the bottom of Guitar Hero's post?
> 
> I see no point in it, and he isn't talking directly to any of us or quoting anything... and I noticed when I tried to quote his post that line did not appear... so it looks like it is part of his tagline?


good question, cause mine is there too! Which after his mindless ramble I'm none to happy to have my name associated with his.
Guitar hero, you have no clue as to what you speak, as I happen to know people who work for Dish network and they have no problem with the company, and as a stock holder and as someone who has had Dish for over 5 years with very few problems, have no problems with it either!


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman (Jan 5, 2007)

If Dish doesn't pay up. Advantage DIRECTV and lifeline cable. HBO did say, they will pull Dish Networks plug. Cost of Living is going up, THANKS TO THE IRAQI AND AFGHANISTAN WAR... Commitment is the killer. Charlie Ergin will just end up pissing off sub number of HBO viewers. IF THOSE WISH TO PAY MORE FINE, BUT GIVE IN GOTO COURT AND PAY SUIT, BEFORE A JUDGE ORDERS SHUT-OFF, JUST LIKE THE DISTANT NETWORKS. REMEMBER GUYS.. December 1st, 2006. The injunction was applied.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

HDMe said:


> Umm... why is my name (and a bunch of others) at the bottom of Guitar Hero's post?
> 
> I see no point in it, and he isn't talking directly to any of us or quoting anything... and I noticed when I tried to quote his post that line did not appear... so it looks like it is part of his tagline?


Clearly, we must be _his_ heroes!


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> If Dish doesn't pay up. Advantage DIRECTV and lifeline cable. HBO did say, they will pull Dish Networks plug. Cost of Living is going up, THANKS TO THE IRAQI AND AFGHANISTAN WAR... Commitment is the killer. Charlie Ergin will just end up pissing off sub number of HBO viewers. IF THOSE WISH TO PAY MORE FINE, BUT GIVE IN GOTO COURT AND PAY SUIT, BEFORE A JUDGE ORDERS SHUT-OFF, JUST LIKE THE DISTANT NETWORKS. REMEMBER GUYS.. December 1st, 2006. The injunction was applied.


Um, the two subjects aren't even remotely related.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

FTA Michael said:


> Clearly, we must be _his_ heroes!


I hadn't thought of it like that... Ok, as long as it is a worship situation, I'm fine with it


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> ...


Unitelligible nonsense removed.


----------



## CABill (Mar 20, 2005)

CABill said:


> "2 for $20" is toast on 1-Feb. On the Ad slicks I saw for 1-Feb, the Premium movie choices say Pick 2, and then only list Showtime and Starz.
> 
> http://ekb.dbstalk.com/rateincrease2007.htm says:
> 
> ...


I'm wrong. 2 for $20 is gone from regular packages ($22 now), but it lives on with DishDVR Advantage packages.

http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/whats_on_dish/programming_packages/dvr_advantage/packages.aspx Says add DishHD or any two premium packages for $20. It shows logos for HBO, Showtime, Starz, and Playboy. They are still mad at Cinemax I guess. If you click on the "Click Here" for complete guide, you go to http://www.dishnetwork.com/pop_ups/...ng_packages/dvr_advantage/dvr_advantage.shtml to find that the DishDVR Advantage of 2 for $20 doesn't include HBO (that's $22). A bunch of combos like "AT 250 Bonus Pack". Note that you can get the $49.99 AT200, add $20 DishHD, and then HBO is only $10. So 2 for $20 allows any premiums when coupled with DishDVR Advantage AND DishHD.

Plus a new sub could get $10/month off the AT200 and I assume another $10/month off the DishHD.

I'm still unable to Login to My Account on the website.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

What is the 250 Bonus Pack? I've yet to get an answer about that one from the csrs.


----------



## CABill (Mar 20, 2005)

The only reference I've found for 250 Bonus Pak is in DishBuilder, on the screen when you can check HBO, ... 250 Bonus (NOTE that Cinemax is NOT one you can check in the DishDVR Advantage pick a premium screen). It says (can't cut-paste Flash, so forgive typos):

America's Top 250 Bonus Pack gives you all the programming from DISH Network's America's Top 200, as well as such fine channels as History Channel International, Discovery Kids, Fox Movie Channel, and more!

If you don't say Yes, I'm interested in DishDVR (or you picked something on the 1st screen that makes them decide to never offer it to you), the 250 Bonus Pack isn't a choice when you get to HBO, Showtime, Starz, and Playboy.

Edit: An interesting feature of the Pick a Premium screen in DishDVR Advantage (if you did DishHD) is Additonal fees starts at $5 for locals. If you pick Showtime or Starz premiums, Addl Fees drops to $4 because you add $10 Starz and get an $11 credit for 1 Premium free for 3 months. If you pick HBO, Playboy, or 250 Bonus, Addl Fees goes to $15 (adds $10 for any one of them but no $11 3 months free). It means it is cheaper to take just Showtime/Starz than to decline it. The $11 premium credit also appears on their sample bill at http://www.dishnetwork.com/downloads/pdf/sample_bill.pdf


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

That is really confusing as hell. I don't know why a dvr advantage package that is supposed to have no hidden fees or extra costs has all of those extra credits . I couldn't make out what was going on.


----------



## CABill (Mar 20, 2005)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> What is the 250 Bonus Pack? I've yet to get an answer about that one from the csrs.


I've got a THEORY that could explain it. I was expecting two flavors of DishDVR Advantage for AT200 and AT250 subs, but now think the package is the single AT200 variety for "billing" purposes. The AT250 Bonus Pack seems to only be available with DishDVR Advantage (someone start an acronym please) and must be everything needed to make an AT200 sub into an AT250 sub.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=78427
Website shows DVR Advantage pack at 49.99 but this is the old Top 120 channels and i had to pay $10.00 more for next package up to get History Int., National Geographic, DIY and others.​
That would make it a billing / accounting / verbiage tool so that there isn't more than one DishDVR Advantage?? AEP references intentionally omitted.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

That makes sense . I hope if I can ever get on the website I can check for myself and look at all this. I heard from one csr that I could do the top 250 + Hdpack for 20.00 and that would be all I needed for the premium channel commitment with D.DVR advantage. It wouldn't save me much but it would cut out the price increase of $3.00.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

As also reported in thread

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=78836

And suspected by most of us HBO and Echostar have reached a long term agreement and droped there complaints and law suits. Neither side really want to remove HBO from Dish, but were looking for the best deal they could agree to.

Time to lock this thread.


----------

