Channel disputes - Networks vs (all) providers

[ChadT41]

Turner...

 

[ChadT41]

I'm sorry, I don't understand your point. What you've posted doesn't discount there's value in the product. If there was no value, Dish would pay exactly that... nothing. MVPDs feel they need certain channels in order to be competitive. Does that mean they're willing to pay $25/channel/subscriber? Of course not. Does that mean they're willing to pay $5/subscriber for a local? No. But they are willing to pay whatever they're paying now.

Actually, Dish doesn't have a choice on locals. Take one, Take all. Both sides must negotiate on good faith, but one side cannot simply say "we don't want you at all". So it does leave the MVPD in a little bit rougher area when it comes to negotiation. With the regular cable channels, Dish and all MVPDs have the option to just say "naw, we are not interested" as shown with channels like MAVTV

 

[lparsons21]

Chad, are you sure about that 'take one, take all'? I thought that only applied to 'must carry' rules.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[sam_gordon]

Chad, are you sure about that 'take one, take all'? I thought that only applied to 'must carry' rules.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have the same question. I thought if a local opted for retrans (instead of must carry), then an MVPD could elect to not carry them. However, IMO, if an MVPD elected to not carry a big four (I'm not talking about when a dispute happens, but actually deciding they don't want the channel), their subscriber numbers will suffer.