I'm not understanding this. I get WCBS as a distant network for $1.50. That will not be interrupted? WCBS-DT WILL be interrupted? I only get the distant to get the HD feed. Guess I wait till midnight and see what stays on.
Charlie Chat Summary
- Thread starter Neutron
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 57
- Views 8K
I really expected more positive news about new HD. Seems Charlie doesn't think there are enough people who are interested in HD to make economic sense for him to make it a priority.Neutron said:
I wish there was another viable option for me right now. Please don't say voom. It's not ready for prime time yet. At least not for me. Looks like I'll have to wait till summer and see what pans out with D* and HD Tivo or maybe voom will get their wrinkles ironed out and introduce the HD PVR. At this point I don't expect much from E*, the HD laggard.
Hell I am considering it right now. I see they have $10 off for the first 6 months. Just have to front the $100 for the Tivo. I can swing that. My wife is not happy losing these channels. Serious WAF affects here.... (Wife acceptance factor)
I would if the CBS O&O's stay off for any length of time (like by next mondayNeutron said:
if they're not back, I'm calling D*).
mjrusso45 said:
Man, I hear ya. Wife wasn't home to watch the CC but since I am at work I recorded it because I would like to watch for myself what happens. She is watching it now and is NOT happy.... I have a WAF to deal with as well. If she ain't happy I either have two choices. Not go home, switch to make her happy.
I'm not happy on the compensation Charlie is offering. I mean, come on, $1 off for losing 10-15 (not sure the exact number) channels?? That hardly justifies the difference.
mjrusso45 said:
Check http://www.valueelectronics.com/Hughes_tivo.htm
The way I read it, $39.99 installed for a HSN SD-DVR40 DirecTivo unit. Although I'd pay to get the dish upgraded to a Phase III. I've ordered my D* system from these guys and they're OK.
I think it ends up as 13 channels after you include Nick East/West. Not including the CBS for the poor schmucks in those areas. If I lost CBS too, I would be seriously hot.
I don't think that Viacom should be mentioning name of channels such as SpikeTV, and CMT as they are not part of this package. I also don't think the crawl should be on the channels which are not part of these negoations.
Although I don't think the crawl should be on the screen at all.
Although I don't think the crawl should be on the screen at all.
As others have said, it's BET, Comedy Central, MTV, MTV2, Nick Games & Sports (in TOP180), Nickelodeon/Nick at Night (East and West), NOGGIN, VH1, and VH1 Classic (in TOP180). If you have the TOP60, you are losing six channels; if you have the TOP120, you are losing eight channels.Neutron said:
A $1.00 to $1.50 refund is about right. They are basically refunding customers the cost of these channels. Keep in mind that programming only makes up about $12 of that $25 you pay for the TOP60. The rest goes to pay off satellites, support, marketing, and overhead.
Scott Greczkowski said:
Same thing at cbs2chicago.com. I sent them an email telling themthat maybe they shouldn't leave out the fact that it's not only the money. They mysteriously leave out the fact that they are insisting that DISH carry Nicktoons.
Ken F said:
It matters not what the programming costs are. If you loose a certain percentage of what you pay for you should get that percentage off. If Walmart sells you an item that is supposed to have 100 pieces and you only get 90, you take it back and they say we will give you only a 7% refund not 10% because that is the % of the actual product cost for the pieces you are missing, the rest is for marketing ,advertising labor cost ect. what would you say?
AndyMon said:
CBS is not part of the HD pack, never was. You get 4 channels in the HD Pack, Discovery HD, HDNet, HdNet Movies and ESPN-HD. this has nothing to do with the HD Pack
In the case of Walmart, they'd swap you a box with 100 pieces, then send the 90 piece box back to the vendor for a refund.
All channels are not equal in their cost or viewership, so taking percentages as you suggest wouldn't be appropriate anyway, imo. If you lost ESPN, would you be asking for just 1/60th (or 42 cents)? If they dropped ESPN--the most expensive channel--I'd want its full $2.40 cost back.
This article lists some average channel prices. ESPN has a lower effective cost because they provide a 20% (IIRC) of their advertising time to the carrier to resell. Nickelodeon, MTV, and Comedy Central are among the more expensive channels.
That chart also tends to understate current prices, because it takes the average of what all MSOs are paying with their contracts, which may vary widely depending on when the contract was renewed, or by the number of subscribers the distributer had or was projected to have at the time the contract was signed.
The largest content distributers, like Comcast with its 21-22 million subscribers, tend to pay less than Echostar and smaller cable companies. Similarly, a company that reached a five year agreement to carry a channel in 2001 is probably paying less this year (and next year) than would a provider whose contract was up for renewal this year. For example, when FOX News first launched a few years ago, it was available in a contract at 10 cents per subscriber per month for ten years, while the current asking price for FOX News (for new providers) is closer to 30 cents a month per subscriber.
The Echostar / Viacom deal is a multi-year deal, probably four to seven years in length, which is why the issue of price increases is such a big deal. Echostar obviously feels that it should not have to pay more than other content distributers of similar size and similar growth.
That chart also tends to understate current prices, because it takes the average of what all MSOs are paying with their contracts, which may vary widely depending on when the contract was renewed, or by the number of subscribers the distributer had or was projected to have at the time the contract was signed.
The largest content distributers, like Comcast with its 21-22 million subscribers, tend to pay less than Echostar and smaller cable companies. Similarly, a company that reached a five year agreement to carry a channel in 2001 is probably paying less this year (and next year) than would a provider whose contract was up for renewal this year. For example, when FOX News first launched a few years ago, it was available in a contract at 10 cents per subscriber per month for ten years, while the current asking price for FOX News (for new providers) is closer to 30 cents a month per subscriber.
The Echostar / Viacom deal is a multi-year deal, probably four to seven years in length, which is why the issue of price increases is such a big deal. Echostar obviously feels that it should not have to pay more than other content distributers of similar size and similar growth.
They are still running the Crawls at least on MTV (and its past 3:02 aM) I am watching MTV-E via the local cable provider, I cant beleive they have the balls to do such a thing over money. It could easly backfire into bad publicty for Viacom, Yet people complain that charlie is the "evil one"
