BBC WORLD NEWS
- Thread starter nrholland
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 33
- Views 6K
I don't have the exact numbers but I know I personally have received about 10 in the last several weeks.
I want Enlace 
Actually is a free channel, so I don't think it is a big deal.
And why Telemundo isn't on the English Packages? I like the English programming more, but Telemundo broadcast Mexican Soccer that is mainly why I have Dish at first
Actually is a free channel, so I don't think it is a big deal.
And why Telemundo isn't on the English Packages? I like the English programming more, but Telemundo broadcast Mexican Soccer that is mainly why I have Dish at first
I have sent a request for the Enlace channel for you. As far as Telmundo it can be added to any English package for $15.00 in the DISHlatino Bonus pack.
First I am not certain Dish will take BBC America; I am almost certain any channel provider will do all it can to "force" or entice Dish to take ANY of its channels that Dish does not offer, including BBC World News, but that doesn't mean that Dish will take it at the next renegotiation. It is just the best chance of us ever getting it.
BBC World News, BBC's commercial world news service, had not been cleared for the USA until a few years ago, so no chance until recently for Dish or DirecTV to get it, although it was offered in Canada a few years before. In fact, when BBC World News service was created it was never intended for North America: it was designed for and aired ONLY in Africa and Asia. Then BBC America started airing a few BBC World News newscasts when BBC America first went on the air, and that created interest in expanding BBC World News and offering it in North America in Canada first. But times have changed.
The channel operators ALWAYS try to foist more if its inventory of channels on the MVPD's. This is why there are an overwhelming number of channels on cable and sat. It has been confirmed on countless occasions on this forum that several "crap channels" were part of the renegotiation for new contracts. None of the MVPD's like them, but if they aren't too expensive, they have to take them to keep the highly popular ones on their system. This is how business is done by ALL OF THEM. It is also no coincidence when the Viacom or Fox (who owns NatGeo) or Disney or any them get a new contract, a new channel by said channel provider is magically put on the system at the same time. They don't create and distribute these channels to sit on a shelf; they aggressive try to get them on as many MVPD's as possible contract negotiation time is when they really try ram it in, and it is there only real chance of getting a channel picked-up, and it often works, provided they have extremely popular channels to bargain with. Often, it is not the price of any one particular channel, but the requirement to take additional channelS (plural) for an effective big programming increase that MVPD's lump together for the cost of the one sought after channel, which is why the MVPD and channel often publically disagree or accuse the other of dishonesty about the rate "hike" for a "channel". This is what often leads to a channel being dropped.
Another tactic and new wrinkle to negotiations is at what package of level of service a channel is to be offered. All the channel providers want to be on the lowest, least expensive package so that potential ratings are greatest, but the MVPD wants the channels at the highest possible level to get subscribers to trade-up. Sometimes this can be used positively in a negotiation. Discovery would do all it can to get BBC World News at the lowest level, but neither Dish nor Discovery want to go too far, so often the compromise is yes, pay more for the big popular channels, but willing to let Dish put BBC World News at a higher package level, perhaps the highest.
I don't think you get how the MVPD business works in regards to how channels get onto systems or why we have so many of them and Dish doesn't even want them because most subscribers don't watch them, but Dish and we pay for them, OR ELSE! It's been the one cost that none of the MVPD's can get a handle on because of requirements to take new channels. Charlie has been talking about this for many years, back in 1999, at least. But now here comes Michael White at DirecTV saying that programming costs is their #1 problem and he plans on addressing it. I don't know what he meant as his quote didn't have details, but he has been willing to drop even sports channels in the past like VS. It's a sausage making process.
Last edited:
Of course that's how less popular channels get added, (not necessarily saying BBC is less popular) I have followed Dish and their reluctance to always go along with that. But asking or negotiating for it to be carried, and insisting to the point of the provider not carrying your channels over it are two very very different things. I just don't think it will become a condition of carriage of the other channels.
Last edited:
