DISH Drops B 10 network. My options?

[larlane]

My email says that negotiations fell through and they are officially dropping BTN. I need to know what my options are with over 2 mos left on my 2 yr agreement with Dish. I will definitely be going to DTV, but am trying to cut my losses on the agreement.

It seems to me that the agreement shouldn't be valid since Dish is not providing all the channels I signed up for. I can live without AMC and the like, but this is a deal breaker for me.

Thanks for any help.

 

[B_Kranski]

I think it sucks that dish and providers have issues. But your agreement also said content may change. So you will probably will be responsible for the etf if you decided to leave.

 

[TheKrell]

Welcome Pack is cheaper.

 

[mdavej]

DirecTV used to pay up to $200 of your ETF. Not sure if they still do, but you should ask. Someone is trying to start a class action over ETF's and excessive channel losses. May want to look into that as well. When Dish dropped AMC my ETF was only about $50, so I paid it and was glad to be rid of them. But the contract says they can drop whatever they want and you're still on the hook.

Good luck

 

[Deadlocked]

FOX/BTN and Dish should've just signed the deal they had last week and be done with it.

 

[Laddyboy]

FOX/BTN and Dish should've just signed the deal they had last week and be done with it.

The speculation on the net is that B10 wanted the network added to Dish's regular lineup for the majority of its subs and not just as an RSN for the Big Ten states. This would cost Dish quite a bit more money. I can't say I blame Dish for not going along with this, if true, as all the existing RSNs will want the same thing. In other words, everyone gets the Sports Pack as part of the subscription with the corresponding increase in fees.

 

[gpflepsen]

The standard contract clause to the effect that programming content is subject to change should be able to be challenged at some point. Is it valid to maintain the contract enforceable if one ore two channels go away? It seems most people accept that. But what if 10 channels disappear, or 15 or 20? At some point the contract is made null due to too many programming changes. After all, Dish can't just drop 75% of programming and expect us to just accept it.

I think the changes over the past 2-3 months crosses that line for many. BTN puts me at the edge.

 

[riffjim4069]

The speculation on the net is that B10 wanted the network added to Dish's regular lineup for the majority of its subs and not just as an RSN for the Big Ten states. This would cost Dish quite a bit more money. I can't say I blame Dish for not going along with this, if true, as all the existing RSNs will want the same thing. In other words, everyone gets the Sports Pack as part of the subscription with the corresponding increase in fees.

Even if this speculation were true, the flip-side of this argument is why shouldn't BTN want national coverage? They play many out of conference games and their alumni and fans are spread-out throughout the country. Moreover, the average viewer cost would go way down if the BTN channels were available to...oh, let's say AT200 viewers. Plus, why shouldn't everyone pay for this channels when everyone, including those customers who do not watch sports programming, are already paying BIG BUCKS for the ESPN channels? Of course I'm being facetious...customers who don't watch sports programming shouldn't pay for BTN and they shouldn't pay one cent for ESPN. Move ESPN into a sports package.

 

[Laddyboy]

Even if this speculation were true, the flip-side of this argument is why shouldn't BTN want national coverage? They play many out of conference games and their alumni and fans are spread-out throughout the country. Moreover, the average viewer cost would go way down if the BTN channels were available to...oh, let's say AT200 viewers. Plus, why shouldn't everyone pay for this channels when everyone, including those customers who do not watch sports programming, are already paying BIG BUCKS for the ESPN channels? Of course I'm being facetious...customers who don't watch sports programming shouldn't pay for BTN and they shouldn't pay one cent for ESPN. Move ESPN into a sports package.

I think Dish would like to have ESPN added to a sports package along with everything else. The problem is that it will end up like this B10 deal since ABC will be against it. Plus there will be other nonsports channels disappearing as well.

 

[jbrelish]

The standard contract clause to the effect that programming content is subject to change should be able to be challenged at some point. Is it valid to maintain the contract enforceable if one ore two channels go away? It seems most people accept that. But what if 10 channels disappear, or 15 or 20? At some point the contract is made null due to too many programming changes. After all, Dish can't just drop 75% of programming and expect us to just accept it.

I think the changes over the past 2-3 months crosses that line for many. BTN puts me at the edge.

Ok lets do some simple math. The AT 200 package has listed 235 channels(as per Dish web site). If Dish drops 20 channels that is an 8.5% loss of programming. But that is only true if Dish does nothing but drop the 20 channels. But in many cases that is not what Dish is doing. Dish has moved replacement channels in to fill the those slots, example the AMC network removal. We lost or are losing BTN but didn't they just add PAC 10.

Now you can be upset if a dropped channel is one you really watch all the time, that's understandable. But "Dish can't just drop 75% of programming and expect us to just accept it." is not a valid statement.

Personally I would like to see all packages non sport, then have sports available at different packages determined by the amount of sports channels within that package. And again, everyone has a choice, OTA, DirectTV, Dish, Cable, and internet based programming. If AMC, BTN, RSN's were my only channels I watch I would not be here now. But I watched nothing on AMC network and I watch very little sports programming, so the absence of them did not affect me at all. If it were not for Satelliteguys I would not have even noticed the loss of the channels.

And after reading a linked article on sports programming prices and seeing what ESPN charges and gets away with, you had better bet on losing more sports by the sports channels demanding more and more money. My suggestion would be to contact the providers and ask why are they asking for unrealistic price increases or carry demands.

 

[riffjim4069]

I think Dish would like to have ESPN added to a sports package along with everything else. The problem is that it will end up like this B10 deal since ABC will be against it. Plus there will be other nonsports channels disappearing as well.

There is no doubt the system is dysfunctional in its current form. Since we now have streaming options for some of our must see content (5-6 shows), we could completely drop our PayTV subscriptions...if it weren't for Sports programming.

 

[gpflepsen]

Now you can be upset if a dropped channel is one you really watch all the time, that's understandable. But "Dish can't just drop 75% of programming and expect us to just accept it." is not a valid statement.

OK, so the 8.5% loss would be a valid statement? At which point does the statement transition from valid to not valid? That's my point, at some threshold the contract is not enforceable.

 

[Mfinchv1]

Youd have to pay dish like $20.00 bucks to get out of a two month more contract. I have 12 months left myself..they quoted me $110 bucks right now. Its like $12.00 something a month...

 

[AKGolf]

If indeed the Big-10 wants their channel in the basic package then I applaud Dish for fighting that, I don't think the average subscriber cares about the new Pac-12 channel or the Big-10. I like sports, but don't think that a subscriber who doesn't should have to pay for these channels. Hopefully they can work out a deal.

 

[rdale]

They don't, and Dish CS confirmed that.

 

[osu1991]

They don't, and Dish CS confirmed that.

Dish CS doesn't know squat in these disputes, other than what is on their script.

 

[rdale]

Common sense agrees with rejecting the rumor as well.