DISH Comcast Dispute?

[Tony S]

Yes, I am jumping on Comcast for this. They clearly violated the terms of their contract with Dish by running notices that Dish was removing the channels. This is exactly what Comcast supposedly said that they were NOT going to do in order to get their NBC merger approved! (Also when they wanted to buy/merge with Time Warner as well). Now that the NBC merger has taken place, the first chance they get, they do it anyway.

Comcast are major sleazeballs. Clearly in the wrong in my opinion.

 

[ChadT41]

I have not said anything about price. My issue with Comcast is the violation of the contract, and using a scare tactic, not only claiming Dish was going to remove the channels when Comcast is the only one that could, but also the fact that Comcast doesn't have the authority, as stated by the FCC to remove those channels. Why would they do that, if they weren't in the complete and utter wrong. At this point, I don't care what the price was... I care that Comcast has PROVEN that they are negotiating in bad faith.

 

[The Fat Man]

The CSN Philly situation is a good example. But, that has a counter with the CSN New England situation, which Dish openly dumped. Greed does work on both sides.

This doesn't mean that I'm bipolar, jumping position within days . Just means that I am looking at the situation from all angles before forming my opinion.

 

[Yespage]

The CSN Philly situation is a good example. But, that has a counter with the CSN New England situation, which Dish openly dumped.

Is it a counter? Comcast won't put CSN Philly out there because they want to eliminate competition. Harder to go Dish or Directv in the Philly area if you want your local sports. And lets not forget Netflix on Comcast internet. Comcast rather not to have to keep up with competition and not offer the local area any choices.

Dish, whether they make a deal for CSN NE or not, isn't about restricting access to content for the competition. Dish made a judgment call on CSN NE regarding the number of viewers for the channel, the product provided, and the price wanted.

This doesn't mean that I'm bipolar, jumping position within days . Just means that I am looking at the situation from all angles before forming my opinion.

Best to compare apples to apples.

 

[bluegras]

so is comcast and dish in the cooling off periiod right now

 

[KAB]

so is comcast and dish in the cooling off periiod right now

They are waiting for arbitration and no one knows yet when that will occur.

 

[ChadT41]

so is comcast and dish in the cooling off periiod right now

10 days then 5 days.

 

[The Fat Man]

Is it a counter? Comcast won't put CSN Philly out there because they want to eliminate competition. Harder to go Dish or Directv in the Philly area if you want your local sports. And lets not forget Netflix on Comcast internet. Comcast rather not to have to keep up with competition and not offer the local area any choices.

Dish, whether they make a deal for CSN NE or not, isn't about restricting access to content for the competition. Dish made a judgment call on CSN NE regarding the number of viewers for the channel, the product provided, and the price wanted.
Best to compare apples to apples.

Comcast is using high cost to keep CSN Philly off Dish and Directv. Dish is claiming that CSN New England isn't worth what they were paying. At the end of the day, it's about the wallet. Comcast is feeling that they'll either get big bang for their buck either way (satellite providers paying, or through subs staying with cable) and Dish is claiming that their money would be better invested somewhere else, and subs won't miss CSN New England that much.

My big deal is that Comcast isn't screwing Dish as much, in Dish's perspective, Dish clearly has no issue deleting RSNs from their lineup.

 

[sam_gordon]

You made claims by proxy

ROTFL! In other words, you can't find a claim I made (other than accusing some of bias).

Is it outlandish to assume Comcast isn't "playing fair" because they haven't done so in the past? Of course not. But it is still an assumption (or opinion if you will) and should be treated as such.

 

[Bruce]

And lets not forget Netflix on Comcast internet.

If you mean when Comcast was throttling Netflix, all the broadband providers were doing it, none of them were innocent, that basically led to net neutrality

 

[KAB]

Boys, Boys, Boys....the sandbox must be getting empty by now. Suggest you go home, eat your dinner, and don't wake up so cranky tomorrow. IOW, put it to bed.

 

[dare2be]

ROTFL! In other words, you can't find a claim I made (other than accusing some of bias).

Is it outlandish to assume Comcast isn't "playing fair" because they haven't done so in the past? Of course not. But it is still an assumption (or opinion if you will) and should be treated as such.

No, I can't find a claim you made (other than baselessly accusing others of bias that you don't agree with).

And it isn't an assumption that Comcast isn't playing fair. They did it now and the proof was splashed on our TV screens.

 

[sam_gordon]

No, I can't find a claim you made (other than baselessly accusing others of bias that you don't agree with).

And it isn't an assumption that Comcast isn't playing fair. They did it now and the proof was splashed on our TV screens.

Fine. You win.

 

[MikeD-C05]

 

[Yespage]

If you mean when Comcast was throttling Netflix, all the broadband providers were doing it, none of them were innocent, that basically led to net neutrality

Comcast demanded money from Netflix to unthrottle, asking for money to let a stream through, even though it was already paid for.

 

[Bruce]

Comcast demanded money from Netflix to unthrottle, asking for money to let a stream through, even though it was already paid for.

Yep, so did everyone else, Verizon, Charter, Cox, Time Warner, etc.

I never said it was right but the way you are posting this info makes it sound like Comcast was the only one.

 

[Deadlocked]

ROTFL! In other words, you can't find a claim I made (other than accusing some of bias).

Is it outlandish to assume Comcast isn't "playing fair" because they haven't done so in the past? Of course not. But it is still an assumption (or opinion if you will) and should be treated as such.

There is no assumption, They broke contract and they broke one of their rules/promises they agreed to when they were merging. So they are not playing fair as they broke two contracts AND made claims that they knew they couldn't back up.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[kenny9966]

Do we have any updates on this?? Its been pretty quiet which usually is a good thing...Its Stanley Cup Playoffs and even if NBCSN isnt involved I'd die to see USA, or the channel i never watch CNBC disappear during this period...

 

[CK SatGuy]

No updates, but in this case, no news is good news.