Dish / Gannett Dispute Settled! No Channel Removals!
- Thread starter compubit1
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 362
- Views 76K
Gannett or not (and no one knows how they settled), it would be unrealistic to assume there would not be an increase after the 2 year freeze.
I don't know for sure , I just don't see Gannett backing off an substantial increase ,since they were the ones who threw up the threat to drop their stations. My POINT is that the auto hop tool that was created in order to keep locals from asking for such big increases, has not worked. It looks like business as usual for the local stations and now auto hop,the threat to drop their stations because of it, will be the way they do it . Either way there will be an increase on the cost of carrying their stations in many markets. The question is will we ALL see an increase in the cost of all basic packs to cover for this increase or will DISH absorb the cost of this increase or increase another fee ,or create another fee , to make up for it.
MikeD-C05 said:
Your point is meaningless (as you try to portray it) since you have no idea how negotiations went and what sort of increase there was. It's fine to have an opinion or a personal prediction about how things will play out, but please don't present them as fact.
As Kab pointed out, there is going to be an overall increase, and it appears Dish didn't even find this particular increase as bad as others have asked for if the 200% was agreed to earlier on. But the fact that Gannett and Dish came to terms before Gannett demanded them to be taken down suggests to me the same thing I have been saying. This was not about the Hoppa. If Gannett was that much against it, they would not agree even for more money. This was simply a way to try for more money, using the skip feature as a ruse. And I just don't see Dish, with no court ruling allowing the networks to demand the skip feature be disabled, paying more based on the feature being active. Now I am aware enough to know if Dish did pay more than they originally offered, they would not characterize it as being tied to the skip feature even if it was. But they can't afford to start doing that for one, knowing everyone else will want that too. So I do not think the settlement was based on the skip feature.
"The Bigger They Are, The Harder They Fall" probably applied here. With so many stations and markets, loss of ad revenue would tick upward rapidly, and impact their bottom line...and stock price. So, I can see where they were compelled to want to negotiate more fairly.
I didn't present them as fact. I simply stated what I had read else where about why auto hop was created. It was to be used as a tool to help force the locals to keep their rates low . But that didn't work and it looks like the locals are now using that same tool, to extort more money for their carriage. YOU really need to take a chill pill and not take this stuff so seriously. This whole forum is devoted to people's opinions ,conjecture, speculation,etc. So until you become the moderator and or the owner of this message board, I suggest if you don't like what people post , don't read it.
I don't think it was settled over the skip feature either. But I do think that Gannett used the auto hop feature as a threat to REMOVE the channels on DISH . This threat was enough to give Gannett the extra leverage they needed to gain more money off of DISH. After all DISH was saying in their rebuttal during the dispute, that Gannett was demanding a 300% increase in price to carry their locals. Now I don't think that they got 300% ,but I'm sure that they got more than they would of ,without the threat over the auto hop feature. After all DISH can't afford to let the locals being removed now, because it would make the hopper PTAT feature dead in a number of markets across the country. Now, I don't think that DISH will absorb this increase and will find a way to pass it on ,either in the annual (or every two years-in order to claim a price freeze) price hike, or they will create some new fee or hike an existing one to compensate for the increase. I mean the ususal DISH tactic in local channel negotiations, is for DISH to take the channels down for a week or more, then they come back once they finally agree to a deal. This is the fastest I can remember that DISH came to an agreement without jerking the channels down. So Im sure that Gannett won't be the only company to use the threat to remove their channels over the auto hop feature. Not to mention the ongoing lawsuit with the actual networks too. So I forecast even more increases coming DISH's way over this auto hop feature.
It didn't work probably because it wasn't created for that purpose...what you read elsewhere was probably just someone else's opinion, conjecture, speculation. That part about it being used as a faux up-in-arms by the networks/locals had been my conjecture all along, which appears to have started to come to fruition.
Agreed. Some people can and will "read in" anything they want to, then redistribute it as fact.
So let me get this straight, since Dish avoided the dispute completely some assumed they caved? If Dish had let the dispute escalate and the channels go dark for a time, people would have complained that once again they are always spoiling for a fight, having disputes, and harming their subs. So, either way, it's a no-win situation for Dish on this one.
Without access to the past agreement and the current agreement, we have no basis on which to judge who "caved" or if there was acceptable compromise on either side. We have no idea if the stations used autohop as leverage or if Dish used the threat of same day autohop as leverage. We don't know if Dish made a good deal, or if they should have let the stations go dark. By the same token, when Dish lets stations go dark, we have no way of knowing if they're doing right by the customers or being excessively greedy and using the customers as leverage to negotiate a deal greatly in their favor. There's simply no way to know any of this without being privy to non-public information.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
Without access to the past agreement and the current agreement, we have no basis on which to judge who "caved" or if there was acceptable compromise on either side. We have no idea if the stations used autohop as leverage or if Dish used the threat of same day autohop as leverage. We don't know if Dish made a good deal, or if they should have let the stations go dark. By the same token, when Dish lets stations go dark, we have no way of knowing if they're doing right by the customers or being excessively greedy and using the customers as leverage to negotiate a deal greatly in their favor. There's simply no way to know any of this without being privy to non-public information.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
I'm sure you are right it was speculation or conjecture that I read else where. I never presented it as fact, as some here want to believe. Just like most news sources today are all being led in one direction or another , by people who speculate and use conjecture to make their points. But I do not understand the need to defend DISH at any cost like it was some kind of football game and DISH is the team they support. I am only stating that if you were to believe that auto hop was created in order to give DISH leverage over the locals and networks in negotiations to keep their carriage price low, it now turns out that it is not the case. IF anything the locals and networks are using the threat of removing their channels over the continued use of auto hop, and if they can't get auto hop discontinued ,then they will take a huge increase in their carriage fees to make up for it. SO the game has changed and the locals and networks have the leverage now ,instead of DISH ,over auto hop. Why else would DISH work a deal so quickly? Because DISH has more to lose if those channels are jerked down in many markets across the country,making the hopper ptat feature useless. And my belief that DISH will pass on the new cost to the rest of us? I think it is justified due to their history. I'm already hearing that they MAY hike equipment and or additional receiver costs come next February. So even though we don't formally know who won in the settlement between Gannett and DISH, I think we can safely know who will pay for it; US.
You will know whether Dish caved or not base on if Auto Hop was shut down in those markets on Gannett stations. Because I just can't see Dish shelling out an exorbitant amount for any reason.
See, there you go again...or keep going. Who are you hearing this from? Hell, even Swanni, analyst and more qualified experts "hear" things that never come to fruition. Again, of course we are going to have price increase next year. You conjectures will not prevent it. But stop embellishing as fact that which you do not know.
Last edited:
No, I did not say it was. I know you said local disputes don't seem to last too long. I posted in a hurry. My bad. I simply mean that some disputes do seem to last a while, mores the pity. I sure wish AMC and Dish would resolve theirs. I could have done without my local CBS station far more easily than I am doing without AMC. Of course, in two years, I will have to do without all of it due to budgetary concerns, so I guess it is irrelevant in the end.
Passing on the cost, to be expected. Dish is a business. A business is there to generate income,if they don't, they don't stay in business long.
Price increases, every service or product I purchase has increased. But I am glad Dish has not increased their subs prices like I had with cable service back in the late 90's.
A few questions to all those who complain about the disputes. Are you saying that Dish should just pay whatever is put in front of them in a new contract? Are you willing to pay for those increases not matter what those increases are? Or do you believe Dish should absorb all increases? If you believe Dish should absorb increases, how long do think Dish will stay in business.
All businesses make their income from "US". Even the U.S. government gets its money to give away from "US".
I never said it was FACT. I said I HEARD from somewhere else that equipment fees might be going up. Since when did this website become James LONG's DBSTALK website? The reason I no longer go there ,is because he will not allow ANY speculation of ANY kind against or about DISH. God help us all if this site is to be run by all you wanebe moderators.
I guess you haven't been with DISH very long. I've been with them for going on 16 years come January 18th. We have had yearly price increases just about every year except these last two since 2000. The only reason we didn't have a increase last year , was because DISH hiked the prices up to cover two years worth and then claimed a price "freeze". It was an advertising gimmick, kind of like blockbuster has turned out to be. As for price increases, yes you can expect a large one in the $5.00 - $8.00 range and possibly an equipment fee or possibly a dvr fee increase . It has been almost three years since the equipment FEE shakeup that rattled the DISH world. Any one remember the price for additional receivers before the hopper? Used to be $6.00 for a sd and $7.00 for an hd additional receiver and then it went to a scale of $7.00 single tuner /$10.00 for the 612/ $17.00 for dual tuner dvrs / $21.00 for an extra 922 dvr.
NO, I don't think that DISH should absorb all costs, but I am saying that for DISH to settle so quickly with Gannett ,there is a reason . DISH never settles anything quickly without some drama and channels being taken down for a while. NO, I don't have any inside information, but I do have a almost 16 year history with this company as a sub and I've seen the lawsuits that go on for ever: Distant network lawsuits, Tivo, Voom,and now AMC, the auto-hop lawsuit with the networks. DISH has a long history of holding out on lawsuits and extending them to make the other side lose money . Then they settle for a lot less. The very thing that is going on with Voom /Amc right now. Even the judge figured this out and called DISH out for it in trial yesterday. For DISH to settle so quickly without the usual drama, there has to be something bigger at stake. There entire marketing campaign is dependent on the hopper and auto hop. Without the locals staying in contract with DISH ,the entire campaign is meaning less. So DISH is now in the position to have to pay more to KEEP locals on their service. This is a reversal from DISH's negotiation tactics in the past, where they would jerk a station down, or not even carry it ,if the company didn't agree to DISH's idea of what fair value for the carriage of their channel is worth. For example in Lake Charles, Louisiana they have never carried the Fox station, because they can't agree over money. So look for this new agreement to cost more money for DISH ,which means we subs will pay more in some way ,shape or form. The question is where will it be reflected: basic programming packs, new fees or increase in old fees ?
OH and for all the wanebe moderators out there : THIS is my OPINION and not FACT.
As was stated...ALL providers and services go up in price practically every year. You're acting like this is just a Dish thing, or that they are the outliers here. I can't imagine how you'd be screaming (don't take that literally) if you had been a cable subscriber for the last 16 years.
My Dish bill in 2002 : $45 for DishDVR plan with AT100, 2 receivers
My Dish bill in 2012 : $76 for AT250, dual-DVR receiver
Over the last 10 years, not a bad increase for the increased channel selection and improved technology
My Dish bill in 2002 : $45 for DishDVR plan with AT100, 2 receivers
My Dish bill in 2012 : $76 for AT250, dual-DVR receiver
Over the last 10 years, not a bad increase for the increased channel selection and improved technology
