Dish has a channel in Roku for the International stations. Maybe that's why they chose it. Also hardware is cheaper...
Engadget
DISH Drops AMC Networks (AMC Back on DISH channel 131)
- Thread starter Sparkman
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 4K
- Views 601K
Dish has a channel in Roku for the International stations. Maybe that's why they chose it. Also hardware is cheaper...
Engadget
Rock salt, a whole bag. That's what they at some point feel they are worth. (now get 25 cents, 200% would be the 75 cents) But every indication is they are working towards that, and not asking it all now. Maybe 100%. total of 50 cents.... who knows.
Lets say 25 cent increase for illustration. That's one channel. What if 10 channels want that, now that's $2.50 more. Just showing for those that say 25 cents isn't much. No taken alone it is not. You can use a lower number, outcome is similar just not quite as much. If AMC feels it is worth X amount more, USA and TNT among others are going to say we are at the top of the heap, you gave them X amount we want X+ amount, and on and on .......... Just posing the other side of the coin to why not pay them and move on.....
Last edited:
Both sides are lying through their teeth. I wish one of them would actually show the actual paperwork demanding the increase. AMC says that E* dropped them without even talking to them about the rates, insinuating it was the lawsuit payback at fault for the dropping of channels. E* claims exorbitant rate increases (which they say for EVERY conversation re: the programmers - has there ever been a "well they wanted 3% and we wanted 2.5% so we felt we couldn't live with that and dropped them?)
This is Charlie's vindictive side coming out, and we get the pain. (And Charlie is still pulling the strings,... Joe is just the mouthpiece). Rainbow is no better. They tried to pull a fast one on E* by going cheap on the Voom programming at the end and Charlie found some wiggle room out out of the deal. I still think that the Voom deal was mainly to get their hands on the Voom Satellite at 61.5.....
This is Charlie's vindictive side coming out, and we get the pain. (And Charlie is still pulling the strings,... Joe is just the mouthpiece). Rainbow is no better. They tried to pull a fast one on E* by going cheap on the Voom programming at the end and Charlie found some wiggle room out out of the deal. I still think that the Voom deal was mainly to get their hands on the Voom Satellite at 61.5.....
The lawsuit at worst will be a one time payment. Probably many years from now if at all (look at how many years TiVo dragged on and Dish still came out ahead of what TiVo wanted up front). The AMC is month after month plus yearly increases forever. A much bigger sum in the long run.
Well I called today and they certainly wouldn't offer me anything to stay except a $30.00 credit ($5.00/month for 6 months) to use with my Amazon or Netflix account. What's that going to get me? Maybe 1 or 2 Hi-Def episodes, and certainly no ability to record and save. They also wanted to offered additional channels but had nothing to offer since I am an AEP subscriber. They really offered nothing, not even basic equipment upgrades from my 622's & 311's.
I'm gone as of the 14th! I tried but they wouldn't relent on the disconnect fee. So fine, I'll pay it and be glad I'm done with them. I'll be an experienced voice for anyone who is thinking about Dish in the future. I'll consider it my very own promotional offer, like getting $50.00 for any referral away from Dish. I tried to explain the difference between losing me as a customer now and losing me as a customer forever. They kept falling back on their legalese by saying that offering HD Net in place of AMC means they kept their part of the bargain by offering the same number of channels as before dropping AMC. Never mind that HD Net doesn't have any of the shows I watch on AMC. So they have now lost a customer for life and possible future customers that I will work to sway away from choosing Dish. All they had to do was be a little gracious in losing a customer because of their boneheaded decisions. Then they wanted to whine about how AMC was wanting two to three times as much for programming. I explained that, when a ballplayer is in the walk year of his contract and has a big year, the new contract is for more money. If you don't want to pass that on to your customers, then you settle for less profit or make cuts in other areas. (How many Emmy Awards did AMC get for The Killing, Breaking Bad & Mad Men?) So, I guess I'll wait for the attorneys for Girard Gibbs to file another Class Action lawsuit against Dish. I'll sign up for that and get some of my money back. In the mean time, I'll be putting my OTA module for the 922 up for sale. If you're interested, PM me.
Dish USED to have HDNet movies, Style and HDNet but dropped them for some other crap. So what's old is new again? Utter crap. Utter, utter crap. AMC's historical draws are pointless. Their movies as of the last few years have been nothing; their original programming everything. Yippee.
You're wrong modwild. They had these channels for quite some time now. Which you can argue makes it worse, because there wasn't any replacements. There was just three new duplicates. Style on 115 & 128, Axis on 362 & 131, and HDNet Movies on 383 & 130.
Shine on your crazy diamond. It is a shame that the operator wasn't gracious for losing your business forever. *insert ominous music*
Your baseball sports analogy was a very good point. If a ball player has a few good weeks in the final season of a contract, the club should put up all the money they can scrounge. It doesn't matter if the rest of the season he sucks and isn't worth fielding, but if they have a few good weeks... they should just throw their money at him... and to three of his friends that can't play ball at all.
You will be sorely missed by Dish. But they appreciate the ETF as a parting gift.
When they come for you...
I've never seen a big contract given to a ballplayer who wasn't already pretty darn good and then had a very good year, an entire year, not a few months. In my analogy, AMC has been pulling down the Emmy Awards at almost the rate of HBO and Dish has been benefiting from it's "play" for a year or two without a rate increase, so when it comes time to pay up, what do they do? They say, "No way, we'll pay some minor leaguer and charge fans the same amount. We'll just have more money in our pockets."
It happened with AMC this time. What happens when it's channels that YOU want to watch. If you think it won't happen again, and maybe to you, then you are the "crazy diamond."
As far as graciousness goes, what I was referring to was the fact that Dish added up the cost and benefit of dropping AMC and made a business decision based on that. Had they been "gracious" they would have admitted that it substantially changed the conditions of the contract I signed, stated they understood that I was interested in the AMC programming and released me from the ETF. It would have been a good public relations move that would have cost them all of $190.00. Instead they get the equivalent of $17.50 per month for the next 12 months and nothing more ever from me or anyone who makes a decision other than Dish after hearing my take on their business practices. That's a stellar business model. Good luck defending them in the future, if they are around to defend.
I've never seen a big contract given to a ballplayer who wasn't already pretty darn good and then had a very good year, an entire year, not a few months. In my analogy, AMC has been pulling down the Emmy Awards at almost the rate of HBO and Dish has been benefiting from it's "play" for a year or two without a rate increase, so when it comes time to pay up, what do they do? They say, "No way, we'll pay some minor leaguer and charge fans the same amount. We'll just have more money in our pockets."
It happened with AMC this time. What happens when it's channels that YOU want to watch. If you think it won't happen again, and maybe to you, then you are the "crazy diamond."
As far as graciousness goes, what I was referring to was the fact that Dish added up the cost and benefit of dropping AMC and made a business decision based on that. Had they been "gracious" they would have admitted that it substantially changed the conditions of the contract I signed, stated they understood that I was interested in the AMC programming and released me from the ETF. It would have been a good public relations move that would have cost them all of $190.00. Instead they get the equivalent of $17.50 per month for the next 12 months and nothing more ever from me or anyone who makes a decision other than Dish after hearing my take on their business practices. That's a stellar business model. Good luck defending them in the future, if they are around to defend.
John Lacky
85 million
"When he became a free agent in 2009, Lackey signed with the Boston Red Sox. In 2011, he had one of the worst seasons by a starting pitcher in Red Sox history and the team missed the playoffs by one game after leading in the Wild Card race by 9.5 games in September."
Carl Crawford
142 Million
Played part of one year, hurt ever since. Batting avg was his worst ever.
I could go on, but it hurts.
See my other post about the business model of $17.50 per month as opposed to the $85.00 they were getting. Oh, you were being funny? Sorry, I didn't get it. But, like the other guy, you're welcome to go on defending them until the bitter end...
You're a Red Sox fan. Sorry, that's not the real world. I grew up with the Cardinals. I'm used to fairly rational management and ball players. Oh, and 11 World Championships.
