DISH Comcast Dispute?
- Thread starter bobvick
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 358
- Views 46K
- Nov 29, 2003
- 16,079
- 20,694
Your right, not a loss at all, it is only $1.2 Billion dollars both lawsuits added together.
As far as I know, the only people in America who aren't greedy are NBA basketball players and Hollywood left-wing Actors and Actresses. Everyone else is greedy, including the big oil companies and Comcast and Dish.
They got all access to TiVo tech out of that lawsuit for less. The other saved them $200M over if they still carried Voom to contract end so yes, they came out on top.
c'mon. it's all relative. I won't be baited by the strawman.
or the asinine rhetoric of other posters.
edit: what Tampa said below.
It doesn't have to be how much is allowed, more of what will be tolerated. Your point is correct people have different levels of what is "greedy." So to stay in business the buying public will decide when it is too much as I feel it is supposed to be. Thus you have somewhat of an exodus from traditional pay TV. It doesn't need to be "allowed" meaning needing regulating what they can charge the consumer will make that happen unless it is an unfair marketplace.
I believe as the FCC and the Congress have allowed the mergers saying they won't have a detrimental effect to the consumer, by making a different rule for Comcast/NBC about pulling their channels they are indeed acknowledging it was not in the best interest for us. But that isn't quite regulating what they can charge more of how they can negotiate and not have an unfair advantage.
It was (sort of) a rhetorical question. Obviously everyone has their own "line" on how much is too much, but I guarantee that line will be above what they're making. IMO, on something optional (and televised entertainment qualifies IMO), the consumer gets to decide how much is too much. Unfortunately, we (MVPD subscribers) don't get to choose how much the MVPD pays for the content. That's no different than buying something from a grocery store. If a store pays too much for milk, when they pass that cost on to the consumer (and increasing it for profit), the consumer can decide whether to pay that price or not. If consumers don't buy the milk from the grocery store, the store won't buy from the vendor. Isn't that "free market"?
What Tivo tech Chad?
Agree, Dish is just as greedy as the next guy.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
Again, this is a tangent at best, and a bad analogy. All I'm saying is I would choose sides based on which company appears to be the greedier one based on historical financials. If the numbers were reversed I would surely side on the NBCU/Comcast side.
To your "analogy", no one company owns all the milk, or forces stores to bundle their eggs and bread with the purchase of said milk. Free market my arse.
But it has to be an even playing field. If Comcast did not have it's own cable company then yes, no different than Viacom DISH can negotiate then decide they don't want to pay the price. No one would be forcing either side to do business with each other.
But when that programming is owned by a Cable competitor who gains by making it harder for their competition to carry that programming, in this case DISH that hurts the consumer as much as it does DISH.
But when that programming is owned by a Cable competitor who gains by making it harder for their competition to carry that programming, in this case DISH that hurts the consumer as much as it does DISH.
I don't disagree. But that's an issue to bring up with our government for allowing the merger.
And it was brought up by most MVPD provider (sans comcast) to the FCC and FTC before the merger was allowed.
