# Sling TV To Add EPIX As Part Of Dish Network’s Carriage Renewal Deal



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

*Sling TV To Add EPIX As Part Of Dish Network's Carriage Renewal Deal*

(deadline.com) - The fact that it made a deal seemingly without a stink with Dish Network could affect the thinking of investors who wonder whether the No. 2 satellite distributor is preparing for a battle royale with Viacom when their carriage deal expires. Sure, the negotiation for a suite of channels including MTV, Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, and BET will be more demanding. But at least we've seen that both sides can talk and work together.

As for today's announcement: Dish's new $20 a month Sling TV streaming service will offer EPIX on an undisclosed date for an undisclosed additional price. The offering will include some 2,000 Video-On-Demand titles, as well as linear channels EPIX, EPIX2, EPIX3 and EPIX Drive-In....

Full Story Here


----------



## Jeffro (Dec 24, 2006)

Since DirecTV has a programming package for $19.99 to compete with Sling TV, then DirecTV needs to add the EPIX movie channels to thier premium lineup too.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2008)

That has been my argument, that $20 for ad supported TV is not a good deal, especially when you can't watch what you want when you want it.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Jeffro said:


> Since DirecTV has a programming package for $19.99 to compete with Sling TV, then DirecTV needs to add the EPIX movie channels to thier premium lineup too.


I agree.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

We have Epix on FiOS...you are not missing anything. They should rename Epix 1 as the "World War Z" channel.

But this is an interesting development for two reasons:

1) It is the start of a la carte pricing.
2) It shows that streaming is unlikely to be cheaper than a cable subscription at the higher tier levels.

So, for people who can live with a basic set of channels, or whose viewing preferences are narrow enough to be satisfied with only a few "add-on" packages, this could be a good deal. For the rest of us, the solution to big monthly cable or satellite bills goes on.


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

Diana C said:


> 1) It is the start of a la carte pricing.
> 2) It shows that streaming is unlikely to be cheaper than a cable subscription at the higher tier levels.


Bah. People still think a la carte is buying channels. Channels are BUNDLES. Unless you watch a channel 24x7, and only that channel, each channel is a bundle of programs - you have to pay for ones you don't want to get the few that you do.

SlingTV isn't a la carte pricing. It's the same old cable bundles of channels, repackaged and rebranded.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

sregener said:


> Bah. People still think a la carte is buying channels. Channels are BUNDLES. Unless you watch a channel 24x7, and only that channel, each channel is a bundle of programs - you have to pay for ones you don't want to get the few that you do.
> 
> SlingTV isn't a la carte pricing. It's the same old cable bundles of channels, repackaged and rebranded.


If you're arguing "true" a la carte as a per-program basis... then you only have to look to PPV or iTunes for how much an individual movie or TV show will cost you via a la carte... and that is FAR more expensive even than the other examples.


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

I have had Epix streaming for some time. It is real time streaming for 1, 2, and 3, as well as on demand, on the Roku. The only thing is that the customer has to sub to Dish or Cable like several others. But it is nice to have on demand.

Patrick


----------



## sregener (Apr 17, 2012)

Stewart Vernon said:


> If you're arguing "true" a la carte as a per-program basis... then you only have to look to PPV or iTunes for how much an individual movie or TV show will cost you via a la carte... and that is FAR more expensive even than the other examples.


Of course true a la carte is per-program. The argument has always been "Why do I have to pay for these [channels/programs] I never watch?" And the answer has always been, "Bundling makes the entire package cheaper, and offers a greater variety of programming than if you could pay for only the [channels/programs] you watch."

I never said a la carte would be cheaper. The problem is that SlingTV is a package of channels, and some people are trying to call it "a la carte" because the package is smaller. It isn't. It's still a bundle.

Buying individual programs is almost always going to be the most expensive way to purchase your programming.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I don't think anyone has said SlingTV is "a la carte"... I was only responding to the part where you said "people think a la carte is buying channels" and I thought that's where most people did want a la carte... on a per-channel, rather than a per-content basis. I'm fine with the bundles myself.


----------

