# DirecTV Launches 21 New HD Channels



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

Here's the link from HDTV Magazine:

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/2007/09/directv_launche.php

Here are the new HD networks listed: * indicates ones already carried by Dish (I think I got them right)

* A&E HD
* Animal Planet HD
* Big Ten Network HD
CNN HD
* Discovery HD
* History HD
* NFL Network HD
Showtime Too HD
Showtime West HD
Smithsonian HD
Starz Comedy HD
Starz Edge HD
* Starz HD
Starz Kids & Family
TBS HD
The Movie Channel HD
* Science HD
The Weather Channel HD
* TLC HD
* Versus HD
* Golf Channel HD

There's a link on the HDTV site to D* which gives additional channels coming in October and by the end of the year.


----------



## He Save Dave (Jun 6, 2006)

I'm outta here. To DTV I go.


----------



## Todd H (Aug 18, 2006)

He Save Dave said:


> I'm outta here. To DTV I go.


I may as well. Word is they look amazing thanks to all of the extra bandwidth.


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

jgurley said:


> Here are the new HD networks listed: * indicates ones already carried by Dish (I think I got them right)
> 
> * A&E HD
> * Animal Planet HD
> ...


Has E* suggested when it will offer the now "missing" HD channels (e.g., TWC, CNN, the myriad movie channels, etc.)?


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

mhowie said:


> Has E* suggested when it will offer the now "missing" HD channels (e.g., TWC, CNN, the myriad movie channels, etc.)?


Good question. I'm very interested to hear E* response too.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Dish carries Starz HD. I added the necessary * next to it in the original post.


----------



## mspace (Mar 19, 2007)

So the current national HD count, not including PPV, RSN, or the west coast feeds of movies:

D* 28

E* 39 

I can't wait until the next round of HD releases...competition is good for everyone


----------



## rtk (Apr 15, 2007)

I still find the HD channel counts somewhat amusing. I have no contract and I'm free to choose whichever TV provider I want but I'll await to see what Dish adds over the few months. Paying for a bunch of Voom filler channels isn't my preference right now.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

mspace said:


> So the current national HD count, not including PPV, RSN, or the west coast feeds of movies:
> 
> D* 28
> 
> ...


Why wouldn't you count the west coast feeds of movie channels - they have different movies on them - dont they?


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> Why wouldn't you count the west coast feeds of movie channels - they have different movies on them - dont they?


No, same movie, three hours later. They do offer increased flexibility in viewing and recording, of course, and the times are more convenient for west-coasters.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

I love how people right away say,"I"m leavin for D*" as soon as someone gets different channels than E*. Geez people, if you really ment that, then by next Spring over on the other board you'll be reading How E* has more than anyone else, then you'll be back,hahahahaha! At least leave for a good reason, like I am, cuz I'm gettin screwed to upgrade and add a receiver, its cheaper to go elsewhere than to upgrade


----------



## He Save Dave (Jun 6, 2006)

I'm leaving because I need my locals in HD which Dish doesn't offer. Direct does. I was just waiting for Direct to catch up to Dish as far as national HD channels. Plus, Sunday Ticket and Trackpass look sweet.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

Dave, I feel ya on the locals, Dish could never explain to me why my neighbor is 200 yards from me, has Direct and LOcalhd's and I can't get them, their excuse is always,"they are not yet available in your area." DUH!


----------



## booger (Nov 1, 2005)

Todd H said:


> I may as well. Word is they look amazing thanks to all of the extra bandwidth.


That was going to be my next question. How do the channels look on D*?
I would like to see a comparison between E* and D*. (bandwidth resolutions, etc)


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

The only real way to compare HD offerings is to list the channels that each provider has (in total) that the other doesn't. The fact that Dish has the Voom channels, Rave in particular, is enough for me to not even THINK about any other provider. Who wants to volunteer to put together the list?


----------



## rtk (Apr 15, 2007)

I too would like to see a comparison on what the new Directv mpeg4 channels look like compared to the same channel on Dish and what resolution/bit rate they are transmitting. More than likely its not much different than what we are seeing on Dish. My guess is someone will eventually do a detailed technical comparison


----------



## rtk (Apr 15, 2007)

Richard King said:


> The only real way to compare HD offerings is to list the channels that each provider has (in total) that the other doesn't. The fact that Dish has the Voom channels, Rave in particular, is enough for me to not even THINK about any other provider. Who wants to volunteer to put together the list?


I completly agree with your comments, any total number should include all channels. The point of my post was to show the actual total number of HD channels is meaningless if the channels the subscriber prefers are not available. I would gladly trade all of the Voom channels for a few the new Directv HD channels but that's my preference and its not possible. As I've said elsewhere, I have no immediate plans to switch but I don't think Dish (or any business) should take its subscribers for granted. Choosing a TV provider shouldn't be an emotional decision any more than choosing a long distance company.

Until both DBS companies offer the same HD channels or unless someone can show there is some significant difference in HD picture quality, choose a TV provider based on the actual channel lineup, not some raw number.


----------



## Todd H (Aug 18, 2006)

projectorguru said:


> I love how people right away say,"I"m leavin for D*" as soon as someone gets different channels than E*. Geez people, if you really ment that, then by next Spring over on the other board you'll be reading How E* has more than anyone else, then you'll be back,hahahahaha! At least leave for a good reason, like I am, cuz I'm gettin screwed to upgrade and add a receiver, its cheaper to go elsewhere than to upgrade


For me, it's not the number of channels but the quality. I personally hate HD-lite. If D* has somehow managed to start showing its HD channels in full HD resolution, then yes I would consider switching. Without any new birds going up (as far as I know), I worry that the only way E* will keep pace is by cramming more and more channels onto the same satellites and reducing resolution and bitrate.

Personally, I have no favorite dish company. I go where the best picture is. When I signed up for E*, they had the best HD picture. If D* now has the best HD picture, then they will get my business. I'm no fanboy for either company.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

Richard King said:


> The only real way to compare HD offerings is to list the channels that each provider has (in total) that the other doesn't. The fact that Dish has the Voom channels, Rave in particular, is enough for me to not even THINK about any other provider. Who wants to volunteer to put together the list?


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=419472


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Nice list. Thanks for the post. Satellite sure does make cable look sick.


----------



## archer75 (Oct 13, 2006)

I don't even subscribe to starz, showtime or HBO so having those in HD is meaningless to me.
The weather channel in HD seems like a giant waste of bandwidth. I would like to have TBS though.


----------



## DBS Commando (Apr 7, 2006)

archer75 said:


> I don't even subscribe to starz, showtime or HBO so having those in HD is meaningless to me.
> The weather channel in HD seems like a giant waste of bandwidth. I would like to have TBS though.


Word


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

The chart also brought to mind another frustration I have with E*. Why don't they announce their plans for future HD offerings, including locals. Surely they must have some idea as to what's on the horizon.

I just spent a few minutes on E* web site just to see if some new information was there, and it's not. In fact, the listing of E* present HD offerings isn't even current. I guess if they won't even bother to take the time to update their HD programming on their web site I shouldn't expect them to tell us any future plans.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

Wow! I just got an email from E* inviting me to play "Blackjack" on DishGAMES! I guess I was wrong, they do keep us informed with very useful reminders :nono2:


----------



## GeorgeLV (Jan 1, 2006)

jgurley said:


> The chart also brought to mind another frustration I have with E*. Why don't they announce their plans for future HD offerings, including locals. Surely they must have some idea as to what's on the horizon.
> 
> I just spent a few minutes on E* web site just to see if some new information was there, and it's not. In fact, the listing of E* present HD offerings isn't even current. I guess if they won't even bother to take the time to update their HD programming on their web site I shouldn't expect them to tell us any future plans.


The problem is DirecTV already played the new satellite launches for a future of 150 HD channels card. Dish could make a big deal about how they're also launching new satellites to do the same thing, but at this point it's a day late and a dollar short.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

GeorgeLV said:


> The problem is DirecTV already played the new satellite launches for a future of 150 HD channels card. Dish could make a big deal about how they're also launching new satellites to do the same thing, but at this point it's a day late and a dollar short.


Certainly that's one way to look at it. And I'm not suggesting that E* advertise any future programming which is designed to mislead the public. I would just like to know what their real plans are.

They *must* have a plan. Some idea of what they can offer in the future and some target dates. That's all I'm asking.


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

archer75 said:


> The weather channel in HD seems like a giant waste of bandwidth.


Assuming you are not a gay male or a hetero female... have you not seen Stephanie Abrams? :heart:


----------



## zlensman (Jan 15, 2006)

jgurley said:


> The chart also brought to mind another frustration I have with E*. Why don't they announce their plans for future HD offerings, including locals. Surely they must have some idea as to what's on the horizon.


It's true that Dish keeps their future plans very close to the vest, but are you sure that you would prefer the alternative? Take a look in the DirecTV forums to see what it's like.

Today, there is great joy in Mudville (D* land), but notice some of the comments saying "after years of waiting" and "the great ride over the last 6 months". Anticipation can be a kind of insanity.

Our DirecTV satellite brethren have been taken for a ride, alright. For a while there, they were posting every day, even every hour on the previous "announce" dates. They were like kids on a car trip to Wally World saying, "AreWeThereYet? AreWeThereYet? AreWeThereYet?" Today they are like hostages just released from internment, seeing how bright is the sun and how beautiful the sky. Even I feel relief for them. Congrats, guys!

Sure, Dish Network only announced the new HD channels for 8/15 and 9/01 a few weeks in advance. But, on the day in question, or the very next day, there they were as promised. I know which method I prefer.


----------



## djzack67 (Sep 18, 2007)

paulman182 said:


> No, same movie, three hours later. They do offer increased flexibility in viewing and recording, of course, and the times are more convenient for west-coasters.


i love it. that way i have less conflicts when setting up recoreing times.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

zlensman said:


> It's true that Dish keeps their future plans very close to the vest, but are you sure that you would prefer the alternative? Take a look in the DirecTV forums to see what it's like.


You are right about the way DirecTV has promoted their future HD programming, and I would not want Dish to do the same. I guess I'm suggesting some sort of middle ground, not keeping their plans "close to the vest" but not misleading us either with over zealous predictions like D* has done.

With DirecTV's additional 21 channels and another 27 by years end, I think it would be wise for Dish to loosen up a bit regarding their plans. I'm not going anywhere as I know Dish will be adding more HD, but my guess is there are those who'll be jumping ship. The competition looks even more attractive if Dish isn't saying anything about their plans.


----------



## He Save Dave (Jun 6, 2006)

jgurley said:


> Wow! I just got an email from E* inviting me to play "Blackjack" on DishGAMES! I guess I was wrong, they do keep us informed with very useful reminders :nono2:


:lol: Nice.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

zlensman said:


> Sure, Dish Network only announced the new HD channels for 8/15 and 9/01 a few weeks in advance. But, on the day in question, or the very next day, there they were as promised. I know which method I prefer.


DirecTV announced that expansion would begin by the end of the 3rd quarter, in September. Today they launched 21 new HD channels. In the 3rd quarter. As promised, they were there, no differently than E*'s "promise."

DirecTV didn't promise any other date, contrary to what some D* lovers had believed.


----------



## Legends (Jun 22, 2007)

Exactly. D* said some new HD channels in September, more in October and more by the end of the year. So far, they are right on. Since D10 went up in July at least we've had something to look forward to. And, at least so far, the MPEG-4 channels are fantastic.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

jgurley said:


> Here's the link from HDTV Magazine:
> 
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/2007/09/directv_launche.php
> 
> ...


Actually that list is a bit off. D* does not have separate HD channels for Versus and Golf. Its a combined Versus/Golf HD channel.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> DirecTV announced that expansion would begin by the end of the 3rd quarter, in September. Today they launched 21 new HD channels. In the 3rd quarter. As promised, they were there, no differently than E*'s "promise."
> 
> DirecTV didn't promise any other date, contrary to what some D* lovers had believed.





Legends said:


> Exactly. D* said some new HD channels in September, more in October and more by the end of the year. So far, they are right on. Since D10 went up in July at least we've had something to look forward to. And, at least so far, the MPEG-4 channels are fantastic.


I don't know about "promised" - but they did announce plans to offer 70 new channels by end of Q3, 100 by EOY in their fin. conf call.

And their CSRs told callers about 19th.

No big deal in my mind - but not _exactly_ correct that D* is keeping its "promises".


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

rtk said:


> I completly agree with your comments, any total number should include all channels.


Even if ten of those channels require a "premium" subscription? So much for D* changing their stripes with respect to the short shrift they've been giving Cinemax.


> I would gladly trade all of the Voom channels for a few the new Directv HD channels but that's my preference and its not possible.


Which of the 12 (eight premium and four non-premium) channels in question would you trade 15 full-time wide screen HD channels for?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The HDTV Magazine listing apparently combined Starz East and Starz West.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

nataraj said:


> I don't know about "promised" - but they did announce plans to offer 70 new channels by end of Q3, 100 by EOY in their fin. conf call.
> 
> And their CSRs told callers about 19th.
> 
> No big deal in my mind - but not _exactly_ correct that D* is keeping its "promises".


Again, DirecTV never made a promise of a specific date on which the HD channels would launch. Claiming that some CSRs said the 19th is a corporate promise is ridiculous.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

And they do have 5 more days to get those other 49 channels going


----------



## tx.agg.96 (Sep 27, 2007)

mhowie said:


> Assuming you are not a gay male or a hetero female... have you not seen Stephanie Abrams? :heart:


I am a big fan of stephanie, just wish she was still on during the day.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

mhowie said:


> Assuming you are not a gay male or a hetero female... have you not seen Stephanie Abrams? :heart:


Well, that pitcure of her earlier in this thread with those two weather balloons she had sure was nice. :eek2:


----------



## apace (Feb 1, 2007)

mhowie said:


> Assuming you are not a gay male or a hetero female... have you not seen Stephanie Abrams? :heart:


Yes Sir, one man's waste of bandwidth is another man's enjoyment.


----------



## guillermopelotas (Oct 9, 2006)

rtk said:


> any total number should include all channels.


Well, any number other than PPV, RSN, etc. 

I've long been over the whole "500 channels" BS. PPV channels and the like are nice options, but there are not a lot of consumers who are swayed to a service for a grand number of channels they can pay additionally to use occasionally, but at a greater price than Blockbuster.

But of course those consumers DO exist. Probably the same people that supposedly DO want unsolicited e-mail and are thrilled when they get it.



rtk said:


> I would gladly trade all of the Voom channels for a few the new Directv HD channels but that's my preference and its not possible.


This is the statement I came into the forum to make, and there it was waiting for me, already said!

I got Voom because there wasn't much else out there. There are a couple of channels I watch occasionally, but Voom channels are mostly *so* narrowcasted that most channels get literally less than a minute per month of viewing.

In other words, Voom blows.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I wish nobody would count PPV or part-time channels... but as long as I know what they are counting, I can adjust to the level of importance to me.

I do find it continually interesting that people will bash Voom, yet in the same breath praise channels that are stretching/zooming or sending non-HD much of the time. At least all the stuff on Voom is HD. Also, most of the channels repeat too much for my liking... so I don't see Voom being an offender in that regard.

It is certainly fair if Voom is not to your liking... as we all have different favorites. But people who think Voom doesn't count are kidding themselves when they say it is because of repetition or a desire for "real" HD content. I hardly watch A&E, History, Science, etc in HD at all because they are so rarely actually HD that it is no different than watching the SD channel. But I assume it will eventually get better... just as I assume Voom will continue to build their library.

National Geographic actually bought some Voom Equator programming to show on their HD channel! And I've seen some movies recently on HDNet that were first shown on one of the Voom movie channels... so I see no way to single these channels out to bash in the way some folks like to do.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Lord Vader said:


> Again, DirecTV never made a promise of a specific date on which the HD channels would launch.


If you look at the promises/assurances/statements/plans that they did make public since February, many deadlines and channel counts have been missed. 2007 will go down as the year of "soon" and "up to".


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

What deadlines? What channel counts? Can you post *specifics * of DirecTV _actually stating this_? Please do so.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

Here's a link to an article from HDTV Magazine dated 6/1107 which recaps what D* announced and what they delivered (or will deliver)

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/article..._to_100_national_high_definition_channels.php

The author, Shane Sturgeon, points out the confusion which occurred by D* using the phrase "capacity for 150 channels" in the paragraph under The Promise.

I personally think it's a waste of time at this point to go back over what D* claimed or didn't claim. To me the only relevant issue is what D* offers today (and in the months to come) verses what E* is offering. Since Dish has chosen not to let us know of their plans for future HD content, we can only speculate whether or not they will catch up and if so how long before that happens.

To satisfy my own curiosity I went to DirecTV web site and "built my own system" which matched my current Dish plan as close as possible (Vip622, America's 200, HD package, locals). The monthly cost was within a dollar or two of being the same.

So the bottom line for me is this; would I rather have Dish's Voom programs (together with the best receiver on the market..622/722) and hope they add more main stream networks in the near future, or DirecTV's current HD lineup, with 27 more by years end?

For many people the answer seems obvious, but I'm sticking with Dish hoping the competition will force them to add more HD content soon(er). But damn I wish Dish would at least give us some idea of their plans. It would sure make me feel much better about my decision.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

In case some of you missed this (I DID), here's an article regarding Dish's plans for future HD.

http://www.tvpredictions.com/ergen050907.htm

I feel better already.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Once again you guys cannot back up your baseless accusations with any facts. I have asked that evidence of DirecTV promising a specific date and specific number of channels be posted. No one has done this. Your linked article above only perpetuates the baseless claims.

DirecTV has all along said it would have "X" number of channels within "Y" time frame. They never said 50 channels by September 19th, or 20 channels by September 1st, or 70 channels by October 15th, etc. That would have been foolish. Instead, they carefully but properly updated people with estimates based on the new satellite's testing.


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

Lord Vader said:


> DirecTV has all along said it would have "X" number of channels within "Y" time frame. They never said 50 channels by September 19th, or 20 channels by September 1st, or 70 channels by October 15th, etc. That would have been foolish. Instead, they carefully but properly updated people with estimates based on the new satellite's testing.





> *Washington, D.C. (May 9, 2007)[b/]
> EchoStar's Dish Network now carries 32 national high-def channels, more than any other TV provider. However, the nation's second largest satcaster is under pressure from rival DIRECTV to expand HD capacity in the coming months. DIRECTV has said it will offer 100 national HD channels by year's end.
> *


*

Which is a back pedal from 150 stated earlier in the year which is another backpedal from the 1500 stated the year before.

If D* has 100 HD Nationals by Dec 31st I'll kiss Murdocks back side in the middle of Times Square live on Fox news. :lol:  :lol:  :lol:*


----------



## rtk (Apr 15, 2007)

jgurley said:


> In case some of you missed this (I DID), here's an article regarding Dish's plans for future HD.
> 
> http://www.tvpredictions.com/ergen050907.htm
> 
> I feel better already.


IIRC, the was a delay for the launch of the new satellites until mid 2008. If that is the case, the soonest it would seem possible for new capacity (over what is already available) would be at least a year from now and thats assuming there are no more delays. Does it make sense to switch TV providers? Thats a question everyone will have to answer for the themselves. Even though I prefer the new DirecTV HD lineup over what I get with Dish and most reports of the picture quality from new mpeg4 channels are positive, I'm not making any decision until the end of the year. I have no emotional attachment to either provider although I do like my Dish622 which is largely the reason for me not switching at this time.


----------



## He Save Dave (Jun 6, 2006)

jgurley said:


> In case some of you missed this (I DID), here's an article regarding Dish's plans for future HD.
> 
> http://www.tvpredictions.com/ergen050907.htm
> 
> I feel better already.


Thanks, I missed that too.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

rtk said:


> the was a delay for the launch of the new satellites until mid 2008. If that is the case, the soonest it would seem possible for new capacity (over what is already available) would be at least a year from now and thats assuming there are no more delays.


Say it ain't so. You just ruined my day 



rtk said:


> I do like my Dish622 which is largely the reason for me not switching at this time.


I couldn't agree with you more.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> nataraj said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know about "promised" - but they did announce plans to offer 70 new channels by end of Q3, 100 by EOY in their fin. conf call.
> ...


I've been in this for long enough to spot a strawman argument when I see one.

Who exactly made the claim that you claim I made ? Where did I make that claim ? Where is the word corporate in my post ? Infact I clearly state "I don't know about promised". What part of it don't you understand. Did I say "DirecTV made a promise of a specific date" - if so where did I make that statement ? If I didn't why are you writing as if I did ?

BTW, this is what they said in their Q2 conf call.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/44085-directv-group-q2-2007-earnings-call-transcript



> Today we have agreements in place with about 90 channels, and continuing to work on more so we are adding to that. We will launch with an HD package with over 70 channels around the end of the third quarter. Again, the difference there is some of the channels need a couple more months to get their HD stream online, and we do expect over the coming months, between the end of the third quarter and the end of the year, we'll get to the 100 channels that we talked about. So we will launch with really a fabulous HD package, the 70-plus channels and then over a couple of months build to the 100 channels that really we think will define us in a unique way competitively in the marketplace.


*Don't blame us if they can't control the message their CSRs are giving customers.*


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Having a bunch of confused CSRs is not an indicator of a broken company promise that you claim DirecTV claimed even though they never claimed this, your claim notwithstanding.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> Having a bunch of confused CSRs is not an indicator of a broken company promise that you claim DirecTV claimed even though they never claimed this, your claim notwithstanding.


I asked a few questions. First answer those.


----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

There once was a man from D.C.
Who from birth he couldn't see
He prayed everyday
For a cheerful thought to say
"At least I don't worry 'bout TV"
jg :icon_peac


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

nataraj said:


> I asked a few questions. First answer those.


I answered them just like you answered--er, dodged--my original request. Please present specific evidence of DirecTV's promises of an exact date. I cannot answer yours until you answer mine.


----------



## zlensman (Jan 15, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> DirecTV announced that expansion would begin by the end of the 3rd quarter, in September. Today they launched 21 new HD channels. In the 3rd quarter. As promised, they were there, no differently than E*'s "promise."
> 
> DirecTV didn't promise any other date, contrary to what some D* lovers had believed.


I looked through the press releases from DirecTV, and I don't see any evidence that they made promises that were not kept. Glad I don't have to argue with a Dark Lord of the Sith!

The point I was making in my previous post, #28, is not that DirecTV corporate lied, only that the DirecTV forum posters experienced a great deal of angst for a long period of time over upcoming HD channels. So, it wasn't D* corporate that caused this, but someone caused a great deal of false hope, let downs, and general gnashing of teeth for those posters. My point was that these folks were made to suffer needlessly, that my heart goes out to them, and I'm glad that their ordeal is over.

I'm a Dish subscriber and see additional HD channels on DirecTV as a positive force in a free market economy (i.e., it's competition).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Lord Vader said:


> What deadlines?


Not so much dates as time periods by the end of which something would have happened. Those who have extended the original September 2004 announcement to the end of 2007 are sorely mistaken.


> What channel counts?


There was a 2007 claim by a DIRECTV VP that promised a quantity of channels (60-100?) by the end of April 2007. I haven't been able to find an account of it.


> Can you post *specifics * of DirecTV _actually stating this_? Please do so.


Take a look at the Eric Shanks interview on TVPredictions from September 14th, 2006. In that interview he prophesied the following:


Eric Shanks said:


> We are currently serving 39 markets with local HD and will be in 68 by the end of the year.


The year being 2006.


ES said:


> We will add the most popular HD channels first, when they are available.


and the big one


ES said:


> The next national HD channel won't be just one; it will be a major launch of as many quality channels as are available. That will happen in the second quarter next year, when we'll have the capacity to launch more than 150 national channels.


There are numerous modifications that have come as the various time periods passed without event.

It isn't so much about specific dates and deadlines as it is about generating expectations with claims of availability that haven't come to pass. This has happened with HD LIL, national HD content and receiver features.

Yes, the statements of a Vice President do represent the voice of the company regardless of how poorly they turn out.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

zlensman said:


> I looked through the press releases from DirecTV, and I don't see any evidence that they made promises that were not kept. Glad I don't have to argue with a Dark Lord of the Sith!
> 
> The point I was making in my previous post, #28, is not that DirecTV corporate lied, only that the DirecTV forum posters experienced a great deal of angst for a long period of time over upcoming HD channels. So, it wasn't D* corporate that caused this, but someone caused a great deal of false hope, let downs, and general gnashing of teeth for those posters. My point was that these folks were made to suffer needlessly, that my heart goes out to them, and I'm glad that their ordeal is over.
> 
> I'm a Dish subscriber and see additional HD channels on DirecTV as a positive force in a free market economy (i.e., it's competition).


I don't disagree with your statement that many people, forum members especially, seemed to lead to further confusion. Add the various clueless CSRs to the mix, and it's understandable how some people could misconstrue this as unkept company promises.

Unfortunately, competition often leads to a lot of BS or misleading situations. Look at DISH's actions, for example, where they claim they have "70 HD channels." Uh, no. Industry experts will tell you that you don't count a few HD PPV channels and a few RSNs as HD channels.

I swear, these companies--all of them--must have former politicians running them.


----------



## saltrek (Oct 22, 2005)

All of the press releases I have read from E* that mentions the 70 (now 74) HD channels has a breakdown of the split between national, RSN & PPV in the very same paragraph.


----------



## grooves12 (Oct 27, 2005)

Lord Vader said:


> Unfortunately, competition often leads to a lot of BS or misleading situations. Look at DISH's actions, for example, where they claim they have "70 HD channels." Uh, no. Industry experts will tell you that you don't count a few HD PPV channels and a few RSNs as HD channels.


Well, the only reason Dish is doing this is because DirecTV started it. The same thing with their normal packages. DirecTV changed their channel count to include music channels to try to get a leg up on Dish, so Dish was forced to do the same.

DirecTV will not have anywhere NEAR 100 true national... non-premium channels. The only way they will get there is by including RSNs, PPVs, Premiums, and Sports subscriptions. Plus, DirecTV has even admitted that some of their "HD" channels will be SD upconverts because the content providers are not ready to broadcast in HD yet.

So, why is Dish the one getting slammed over this?? I don't get it.


----------

