Deal with NPS to "save" distants on DISH!

[Greg Bimson]

I've always said everything was my opinion. And the only quote from me used in the case was the orchestra, "in active concert".

Of course, maybe I should sue , as my name has been tarished with a lie by calling me a "former Dish Network subscriber", in a court document no less.

Keep the mind open, and take the facts for what they now are. Dish Network has "outsourced" their distant network service. The only differences between November and December are:

NPS leases a transponder (from Dish Network)
NPS bills the end user
NPS uplinks the distant channels
NPS supposedly qualifies the distant network subscribers (but now says they used a customer list supplied by Dish Network)

Everything else is still the same. Dish Network must "authorize" the smart card, just like they do for Sky Angel. The signals are bounced off of a satellite and license they own. And, from what we have seen, only Dish Network customers are allowed to receive disant networks from NPS.

It is only an outsourcing agreement, designed to work around the injunction. And even if the injunction isn't crystal clear, it is not legal in a federal court to design a solution to allow what an injunction does not. I fully expect clarifications. I also fully expect that NPS will have some kind of warning against them, because the entire proposition now rests on the fact the only qualifications they've ever done were based off of a list of customers that Dish Network gave them.

I do give Dish Network credit. They are still trying. It was a rather brilliant, bold idea. But unfortunately, once again it is Dish Network's execution of the idea that will destroy the implementation (MY OPINION, of course).

 

[wayne231]

Greg is not going to get sued because his comments, how silly. His opinion is just that this "opinion" and besides postings from online discussion forums are inadmissable in court.

Also I know for a fact Greg is a real person, he has been doing this for as long as I have.

Problem is, Greg has not pre-faced his statements with "in my opinion" but has continued to post as fact. Precedent has been set in the past for posts on forums. Just my opinion.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

As we always say everthing on SatelliteGuys should be considered an opinion or rumor unless it is backed up by a valid press release.

 

[minnow]

I've always said everything was my opinion. And the only quote from me used in the case was the orchestra, "in active concert".

Of course, maybe I should sue , as my name has been tarished with a lie by calling me a "former Dish Network subscriber", in a court document no less.

Keep the mind open, and take the facts for what they now are. Dish Network has "outsourced" their distant network service. The only differences between November and December are:

NPS leases a transponder (from Dish Network)
NPS bills the end user
NPS uplinks the distant channels
NPS supposedly qualifies the distant network subscribers (but now says they used a customer list supplied by Dish Network)

Everything else is still the same. Dish Network must "authorize" the smart card, just like they do for Sky Angel. The signals are bounced off of a satellite and license they own. And, from what we have seen, only Dish Network customers are allowed to receive disant networks from NPS.

It is only an outsourcing agreement, designed to work around the injunction. And even if the injunction isn't crystal clear, it is not legal in a federal court to design a solution to allow what an injunction does not. I fully expect clarifications. I also fully expect that NPS will have some kind of warning against them, because the entire proposition now rests on the fact the only qualifications they've ever done were based off of a list of customers that Dish Network gave them.

I do give Dish Network credit. They are still trying. It was a rather brilliant, bold idea. But unfortunately, once again it is Dish Network's execution of the idea that will destroy the implementation (MY OPINION, of course).

Like I said, ad nauseam

 

[navychop]

"...that's why we have armed guards posted at the "Pit" entrance now..."

...which begs the question- keeping people out - or in?

 

[waltinvt]

I've always said everything was my opinion. And the only quote from me used in the case was the orchestra, "in active concert".

and we all know that these have just been your opinions. I think someone was just jealous over the clever analogy.

Of course, maybe I should sue , as my name has been tarished with a lie by calling me a "former Dish Network subscriber", in a court document no less.

You smile but you're right - it has tarnished you. In fact we're going to start calling you "rusty" Bimson now.

<snip>.... And, from what we have seen, only Dish Network customers are allowed to receive disant networks from NPS.

Exactly! I think they (NPS AND Dish) shot themselves in the foot with this. If they'd allowed non Dish customers too, it would look a lot less "concerty" .

I do give Dish Network credit. They are still trying. It was a rather brilliant, bold idea. But unfortunately, once again it is Dish Network's execution of the idea that will destroy the implementation (MY OPINION, of course).

This has been one of my frustrations with Dish for years - so much potential seems to get screwed up by dumb and short-sighted implementation.

 

[Tampa8]

Anyone who takes what Greg, or any of us say as anything other than opinion does not understand anything about forums. Greg does not need to preface every post with saying it is his opiion. That is a given. Now if someone says something as fact - that they have documents or some form of proof of what they are saying, that is a different issue completly. As the saying goes, if we all agreed on everything this would be a boring board, and no new ideas would ever get evolved. But it is especially odd that some get so upset with comments/opinions they don't agree with, when sometimes those comments are correct. Some have been big enough to admit they were wrong about CBS HD for instance. I admit I have not appreciated those that felt you should not have any distants unless you are completly unserved. My thought has been if the law allows it (Grandfathering for instance) then why would you say I should not get distants. But they have the right to say it, as I do to disagree with it.

 

[Robert NTSC Archivist]

I agree we should not have to post in my opinion as it is very repeditive. We are all entitled to our own opinions and we will never all agree with each other.

Now perhaps NPS should sign a contract with DirecTV to allow them to sell DNS to thier customers as well. Ill bet they wont like that idea. . . .

Then again if they added the superstations to their line up it might lure more Dish Network customers over to the House of Dark Shadows. . . .

In fact Suddenlink Cable Company formely charter has run a big add in the Beckley Newspaper telling us about all the local channels they offer and are reaching out to Dish Network customers. Now they did not target DirecTV customers in the add just Dish Network customers

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Some movement in the court today, the judge has granted the out of state NPS Lawyers to participate in this case, they paid the correct fees this time.

And he denied the motion to allow a Cynthia Ricketts to appear as a "Pro Hac Vice" which means the court would allow this witness speak for this one particular occasion

 

[Greg Bimson]

Problem is, Greg has not pre-faced his statements with "in my opinion" but has continued to post as fact. Precedent has been set in the past for posts on forums. Just my opinion.

Like I said, ad nauseam

Oh, you mean Like here?

CBS HD is staying put.

Or like here?

CBS HD is not going anywhere.

I asked this tonight. Again it is not classified as a Distant Network.

Or even like here?

The CBS HD is not a distant network. Its classified as a Special Feed from CBS to CBS viewers in CBS O&O Areas.

Or this one?

CBS HD is considered a PRIVATE FEED, and not a Distant Network.

Or how about here?

All the info you need is here...

http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/p...hd/index.shtml

This CBS feed will not go away no matter what happens to the distants.

Or how about this one?

Scott, Can you please confirm with Echostar contacts that CBS-HD is not at risk due to court ruling?

This is correct it is at no risk, thats not considered a distant network.

Or is it just time to be critical of me?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Actually CBS HD did not go down because of this distants thing. It just seemed like perfect timing to get rid of it.

Again 12 out of 16 CBS O&O areas were now on Dish in HD. The cost of keeping it running and the very low subscribership is what I am told that did it in.

 

[wayne231]

Scott: Typically Pro Hac Vice refers to a lawyer and not a witness. But I may be wrong

 

[KingofKaty]

I found one of the footnotes interesting, also elaborated in the second pdf....


I guess this essentially stops NPS from adding new subs unless they qualify via a documented method (RV or Truck Waiver)....

If NPS can't qualify new subs, doesn't this prevent them from doing their other business? I can see a countersuit coming from NPS against the broadcasters for restraint of trade.

The broadcaster's attorneys may have overplayed their hand if they are threatening other businesses. They should stick to pursuing the injunctions.

Cut Greg some slack!

 

[carl033]

Can you get distants on DirecTv without subscribing to any other programming package?

No.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Another interesting headline, from the 8 December issue of SatBizNews.com:

STEVENS DROPS DISTANT STATION LEGISLATION

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Scott: Typically Pro Hac Vice refers to a lawyer and not a witness. But I may be wrong

Im not a lawyer, I just looked up Pro Hac Vice in google and posted the first thing it came up with.

 

[ThomasRz]

Actually CBS HD did not go down because of this distants thing. It just seemed like perfect timing to get rid of it.

Again 12 out of 16 CBS O&O areas were now on Dish in HD. The cost of keeping it running and the very low subscribership is what I am told that did it in.

Do you mean "were" or "are now" or something else? If the 119 license were not the issue why turn off HD? Dish is providing it in home markets, what is the incremental cost to provide it as a distant? Not much. I agree with the Bimster. This was fallout from the injunction. Has anybody asked CBS?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Do you mean "were" or "are now" or something else? If the 119 license were not the issue why turn off HD? Dish is providing it in home markets, what is the incremental cost to provide it as a distant? Not much. I agree with the Bimster. This was fallout from the injunction. Has anybody asked CBS?

Sorry I meant "are now".

I believe even Charlie mentioned this on a past chat how it was not a distant network.

 

[Greg Bimson]

A round-table at Echostar:

"Let's take down the CBS HD feeds on 1 December."

"Why, we have the injunction to deal with? Why upset another 100,000 customers on top of the 900,000 we just had to cut-off?"

"Because we don't need to give customers the CBS HD feed anymore. We have it in 12 of 16 markets. Let's just voluntarily cut-off the CBS HD feeds during what will be the busiest customer service issue we've ever had."

Yep. Makes complete sense that the cut-off was voluntarily.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Now your pulling stuff out of your ass Greg.

Show me where Dish had 100,000 CBS HD subscribers.