We have a video also, on WEMT Channel 39 FOX and the same video on WCYB Channel 5 NBC.
Bonten Media Group......DISPUTE OVER
- Thread starter stardust3
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 111
- Views 16K
We have a video also, on WEMT Channel 39 FOX and the same video on WCYB Channel 5 NBC.
I'm curious. Are the video's generic or specific to the station/group?
And broadcast *IS* still free OTA. The fact you're in an area that doesn't receive OTA means (to you) that locals and ESPN, History, et al are the same. You need to pay someone to receive them. There has never been any rule or law that says broadcasters must reach 100% of the viewers in their market.
I simply have a problem with people throwing out the argument that locals should be paying Dish (Direct, Comcast, whoever) because the cable/satcos get them into more homes. You can use the same argument with ESPN, History, etc, who must rely on cable/satcos to get ANY viewers.
Yep, and I've been saying all along that the cable channels should be low-bidding for the privilege to be in a lower tier, to get their channels into more homes and maximize ad revenue. I've been consistent with this all along, but so have the extortion cartel owners been in demanding more and more. There is no free market in the industry.
It is a woman giving a run down on the current situation & history lesson on broadcast stations. The best thing about it is her, she is easy on the eyes.
They are generic, both exactly the same. Change from one channel to the other and it is the same video showing. A woman explaining how DISH has handled the local channels from day 1 and how the broadcasters are trying to rip them off.
Last edited:
I agree with part and disagree with part of what you say. I agree with the logic of trying to get more eyes on the product. I actually thought that had been a point of contention with channels in the past in that the channels wanted to be on a lower tier, but the cable/satcos wouldn't agree (at least as part of negotiations).
And unless Wiki is wrong, how is this NOT a "free market"? According to Wiki, a free market is one that isn't controlled by the government or other entity. Cable/satcos don't have to agree to broadcasters or networks demands for payments, just like you and I don't have to agree (assuming we're out of contract) to Dish's demands for rate hikes. Cable/satcos make business decisions to decide which channels to carry and how much to pay for them. You and I decide which entertainment provider offers what we want at a cost we can afford. Isn't that exactly how free markets should work?
Dish could if they want, not pay the money for ESPN, Fox Sports, CBS Sports, etc, etc, etc, pass the savings along to consumers and market themselves as the "lowest cost option". They must feel though that they would lose more subscribers than they would gain.
And now the print ads have started in the local newspaper. Buckle in folks, this may be another long dispute.
But, they are not the same. The local channels were designed from the beginning to be free OTA paid for by advertising. ESPN, History, etc. were not.
Dish is going all out on their campaign. They have the videos playing on the channels which explain their point of view quite clearly, they are putting full page ads in the papers everyday, and they have billboards up now. They are probably spending more money on lawyers and advertising than the fee changes would cost them.
Dish is going all out on their campaign. They have the videos playing on the channels which explain their point of view quite clearly, they are putting full page ads in the papers everyday, and they have billboards up now. They are probably spending more money on lawyers and advertising than the fee changes would cost them.
But as far as you (and others like you who can't receive OTA), they ARE the same. They never reached 100% of the population. If it was up to me, I would compromise for those subscribers who are outside of the Grade B (if not the Grade A contour). However, it's not up to me. I still maintain the MAJORITY of subscribers (nationwide) CAN receive OTA free, but elect not to for convenience. I have an OTA antenna feeding my Dish receivers and record the OTA broadcast. Part of that is because I am on WA and my HD locals are EA only. The other part is because I don't want to suffer any more compression that would be inherent by watching HD locals via satellite.
I tried a little experiment awhile back and maybe it's just my eyes but I could not notice the difference between my OTA locals vs through Dish for quality of HD. Granted it was not a full scientific measurement experiment.
We just do not agree. The local stations supposed to serve the local population. I used to get them fine when they were analog - but, nada when they went digital. Like I said in my original post - Dish should provide all the uplink equipment and pay for electricity and rack space. Other than that, I really do not see the reasoning behind the fees. If I was a local business advertising on those channels, I would want a prorated rebate because my ads are no longer reaching all of the Dish network customers.
I do wonder if Dish hadn't originally charged for locals separately if broadcasters would have gone after the retrans fees.
One other minor point... the transition to digital was forced on the broadcasters by the government. Broadcasters didn't invest the money in the upgraded equipment "for the good of the viewers".
Coming up on the end of week 2, no updates from either side, just more of nothing.
Talking shop with a Mastec/Directv installer today. He said he just wishes they would settle, he was tired of working 70+ hrs a week switching dish customers that hasn't stopped since the start of the MG dispute. Poor fellow.......lol, at least he's making some good paychecks.
Talking shop with a Mastec/Directv installer today. He said he just wishes they would settle, he was tired of working 70+ hrs a week switching dish customers that hasn't stopped since the start of the MG dispute. Poor fellow.......lol, at least he's making some good paychecks.
Oh wow, just seen a commercial on wcyb claiming Bonten Media is only seeking 3 cents a day per customer.
*added link
http://www.wcyb.com/important-infor...ers/-/14590664/23164866/-/wu1n4f/-/index.html
*added link
http://www.wcyb.com/important-infor...ers/-/14590664/23164866/-/wu1n4f/-/index.html
Last edited:
Careful of the spin. 3 cents a day = 90 cents for the month. That's close a dollar/subscriber. That's too high IMO. Although I wonder how NBC's ratings are vs. ESPN.
I have to agree with Sam here stardust.If there are 100,000 subscribers in the Tri Cities area,that is .90c more per month per subscriber,that adds up pretty quick.
On the other hand lol,we still got socked with a $5 increase.There has to be a middle ground that they can reach,it would behoove Dish to get this settled asap though.
On the other hand lol,we still got socked with a $5 increase.There has to be a middle ground that they can reach,it would behoove Dish to get this settled asap though.
Sorry, I didn't realize the 90 cents/month included three channels. Even not counting the CW, that would be 45 cents/month for NBC and 45 cents/month for FOX. Looking at it that way, IMO, makes it more reasonable. In my market the "Big 4" are four different channels, not sub channels. Are (were) NBC & FOX offered in HD?
