Dish Network: Distant Networks
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 644
- Views 92K
mike123abc said:
Actually they have 167 dmas completed out of 210 . So that is 43 dmas left to have 100% dmas completed.
Full Story
EchoStar Loses Court Ruling On Some TV Transmissions
Hundreds of thousands of Dish Network subscribers could lose access to shows on traditional television networks as early as today after a Supreme Court justice's decision yesterday that brings an end to lawsuits that have been tied up in court for more than eight years.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas yesterday let stand a May ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit that ordered EchoStar Communications Corp., the parent company of Dish Network, to stop transmitting network programming to 800,000 subscribers -- those who live in mostly rural areas too far to receive local stations with regular antennas.
The decision stemmed from lawsuits filed by News Corp.'s Fox Network and stations affiliated with the four major networks, all claiming that EchoStar has been illegally offering distant-network signals to customers who are capable of receiving television signals from nearby cities.
Rural customers who live within the reach of a local television broadcast are not eligible to receive network programming from a satellite TV company, which usually offers transmissions from stations in large cities, such as New York or Los Angeles.
For more than eight years, Englewood, Colo.-based EchoStar has been battling broadcast networks that say the satellite provider is illegally encroaching on their markets and taking a chunk out of their audiences. EchoStar has frequently settled with local stations to maintain its presence in rural markets.
This time, analysts said, the satellite company may be required to halt service to all subscribers who receive the network transmissions, even if the subscriptions are legal.
"It looks like the company is running out of legal options and it's going to have to take some drastic steps to appease customers who are losing access to these signals, whether it be lowering rates or helping them find access to other channels," said Thomas W. Eagan, an analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. in New York.
"The subscription television marketplace has become very saturated and people are looking to be compensated," he said. "This could send customers straight to DirecTV or cable."
The Supreme Court's decision was "not unexpected," according to a statement released by EchoStar.
"We have settled with hundreds of stations and station groups over the eight and a half years this case has been winding its way through the court system, and we continue to negotiate with the broadcasters who have not yet settled," the company said.
EchoStar Loses Court Ruling On Some TV Transmissions
Hundreds of thousands of Dish Network subscribers could lose access to shows on traditional television networks as early as today after a Supreme Court justice's decision yesterday that brings an end to lawsuits that have been tied up in court for more than eight years.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas yesterday let stand a May ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit that ordered EchoStar Communications Corp., the parent company of Dish Network, to stop transmitting network programming to 800,000 subscribers -- those who live in mostly rural areas too far to receive local stations with regular antennas.
The decision stemmed from lawsuits filed by News Corp.'s Fox Network and stations affiliated with the four major networks, all claiming that EchoStar has been illegally offering distant-network signals to customers who are capable of receiving television signals from nearby cities.
Rural customers who live within the reach of a local television broadcast are not eligible to receive network programming from a satellite TV company, which usually offers transmissions from stations in large cities, such as New York or Los Angeles.
For more than eight years, Englewood, Colo.-based EchoStar has been battling broadcast networks that say the satellite provider is illegally encroaching on their markets and taking a chunk out of their audiences. EchoStar has frequently settled with local stations to maintain its presence in rural markets.
This time, analysts said, the satellite company may be required to halt service to all subscribers who receive the network transmissions, even if the subscriptions are legal.
"It looks like the company is running out of legal options and it's going to have to take some drastic steps to appease customers who are losing access to these signals, whether it be lowering rates or helping them find access to other channels," said Thomas W. Eagan, an analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. in New York.
"The subscription television marketplace has become very saturated and people are looking to be compensated," he said. "This could send customers straight to DirecTV or cable."
The Supreme Court's decision was "not unexpected," according to a statement released by EchoStar.
"We have settled with hundreds of stations and station groups over the eight and a half years this case has been winding its way through the court system, and we continue to negotiate with the broadcasters who have not yet settled," the company said.
I read the article and it stated that as many as 800,000 subscribers may be affected by this shutoff. I hope Direct has a lot of new receivers in stock.
What really pisses me off, is that Ergen has had years to get the remaining LIL's up which if he had would of at least mitigated some of the damage that's about to befall his empire. I don't care how big of a company you are, losing 800,000 potential subs is a huge bite out of the bottom line.
What really pisses me off, is that Ergen has had years to get the remaining LIL's up which if he had would of at least mitigated some of the damage that's about to befall his empire. I don't care how big of a company you are, losing 800,000 potential subs is a huge bite out of the bottom line.
[PIE]"It looks like the company is running out of legal options and it's going to have to take some drastic steps to appease customers who are losing access to these signals, whether it be lowering rates or helping them find access to other channels," said Thomas W. Eagan, an analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. in New York.[/PIE]Lowering rates? From what crack pipe has this analyst been smoking! I see a Special Edition Charlie Chat coming soon. Topic of Discussion: Broadcasters, the NAB, the FCC, and the Supreme Court are all out to get you.
Charlie will then lay the ground work for a DNS and locals "rate increase" next year (after shelling out big bucks to settle for his willful violation, not yours) or state that the Lifetime Network Movie channel is being offered to all subscriber free of charge due to the minor inconvenience.
Does this company ever play by the rules? Ethics must not be a mandatory training requirement for employees at E*.
Charlie will then lay the ground work for a DNS and locals "rate increase" next year (after shelling out big bucks to settle for his willful violation, not yours) or state that the Lifetime Network Movie channel is being offered to all subscriber free of charge due to the minor inconvenience.
Does this company ever play by the rules? Ethics must not be a mandatory training requirement for employees at E*.
Dish Network: Distant Networks
I don't see how anyone could describe the Washington Post (Pravda East) as a "credible" media outlet about any subject!
Certainly not politics or government.
Lucky said:Several credible media outlets including the Washington Post are reporting that the Distant Networks may be gone as soon as today.
I don't see how anyone could describe the Washington Post (Pravda East) as a "credible" media outlet about any subject!
Certainly not politics or government.
Well, one of the networks for getting distant networks off Dish is Fox, owned by the same dum-dum who owns Direct. What's funny the Canadian system is so much different where they offer east and west with no issues.
Anyway I noticed savemychannels.com is not viewable.
Anyway I noticed savemychannels.com is not viewable.
Scott Greczkowski said:
Last edited:
srbond said:
I can call you Shirley but that doesn't make it so. You really need to learn the definition of censorship. Hulk Hogan has the "technical" ability to kick your butt however doing so is not legal.
srbond said:
Rather elitist, aren't we? Since the vast majority of the network programming is identical the difference lies primarily in the local (news, weather, sports.....) Is getting NY traffic updates that thrilling? What's wrong with bush-league locals? After all, you live in the bush-league city.
srbond said:
I don't smoke. You should demand a refund from the trade school you went to. Property rights are key to this issue (ever hear of copyright?) And you are confused. Broadcasters are licensed to use certain frequencies but the content imparted thereon is private property (with a few exceptions).
srbond said:
Who is making you purchase anything?
srbond said:
If network programming is such a trivial matter why are you getting in such a snit? They local affiliates don't care what you think - they own you. If you want network programming you will have to go to the authorized outlet. Getting all pouty because you can't have whatever you want is childish.
srbond said:
There are good reasons but I don't care what you do and neither do the locals unless you try to get distant signals that you are not authorized to receive.
srbond said:
riffjim4069 said:
The NAB to which the Networks have not been a member for about the length of this lawsuit....again, hmmmm.
srbond said:
Interesting....by your statements, the local theater chain has the rights to Star Wars in your city and the theater who doesn't only needs to download StarWars off the net and show it without any legal consequence.
I suppose you have rented a building and decided to sell McDonalds hamburgers and fries in your town even though you are not the local franchisee as well?
NY and LA stations do not own the programming and only lease it for their particular DMA. Networks would be happy to give NY and LA stations the legal rights if they want to pay the exclusivity bill for it. Unfortunately, that isn't financially an option for the NY and LA Stations.srbond said:
Now we know why you used to be a broadcaster, as you clearly didn't understand it. Signal are not leased in any form or fashion. They are granted for the public's safety, convenience and neccesity.srbond said:
The signals cannot air copyrighted material to which they are not licensed any more than they can go to Blockbuster, rent a DVD that has not even made it to HBO or Showtime and air it.
Clearly you must have flunked your broadcast law class.
srbond said:
You shouldn't and that's why you don't have to sub to locals.
Maybe you missed it in your other classes but in 1776 with the Declaration of Independence the Country became independent and no one will force you to buy any locals you do not want.
I guess you shouldn't slept through that class either.
why* D* is now a card carrying member of the NAB they wont sell these poor souls distants eitherminnow said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by srbond
I don't want the local channels period. I enjoy watching my LA and NY distants. Why should I want the bush-league locals?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasRz
Rather elitist, aren't we? Since the vast majority of the network programming is identical the difference lies primarily in the local (news, weather, sports.....) Is getting NY traffic updates that thrilling? What's wrong with bush-league locals? After all, you live in the bush-league city.
Many locals have simply not invested in the technology to deliver good PQ or sound or to deliver an optical feed to E*. Those of us who were grandfathered and have had the opportunity to receive locals and distants have seen the difference. The difference is so apparent ,we have paid $11.98 per month more to receive the distants and another $5.99 per month to see the superstations. Now that HD is gaining popularity the differences are even more pronounced.
It is interesting that the court did not take away the superstations. I guess the smaller networks cw(once upn and wb) and I are not equal in the law.
I hope by the time I get my locals in HD via E*( OTA is impossible in the canyon I live in) They are delivered in a state of the art technology.
Originally Posted by srbond
I don't want the local channels period. I enjoy watching my LA and NY distants. Why should I want the bush-league locals?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasRz
Rather elitist, aren't we? Since the vast majority of the network programming is identical the difference lies primarily in the local (news, weather, sports.....) Is getting NY traffic updates that thrilling? What's wrong with bush-league locals? After all, you live in the bush-league city.
Many locals have simply not invested in the technology to deliver good PQ or sound or to deliver an optical feed to E*. Those of us who were grandfathered and have had the opportunity to receive locals and distants have seen the difference. The difference is so apparent ,we have paid $11.98 per month more to receive the distants and another $5.99 per month to see the superstations. Now that HD is gaining popularity the differences are even more pronounced.
It is interesting that the court did not take away the superstations. I guess the smaller networks cw(once upn and wb) and I are not equal in the law.
I hope by the time I get my locals in HD via E*( OTA is impossible in the canyon I live in) They are delivered in a state of the art technology.
Last edited:
Completely separate problems.odbrv said:
The distant network license is much different than the superstation license. The smaller networks have no say in this decision.
Couldn't it be that Dish Network has not invested in the technology to deliver a quality feed to their customers? All a station is required to do is deliver a good feed to the headend (called the POP or LRF). If the customers want fibre feeds from the networks, then Dish Network is the entity responsible for paying for those feeds.odbrv said:
I believe "D" is looked more favorably upon by the NAB and FCC because they've historically never pushed the envelope like "E" has. If anything, they go the other way regarding distant qualification and lean toward the affiliate instead of the customer.Greg Bimson said:
When DirecTV was sued by the networks, you'd believe the opposite...waltinvt said:
DirecTV and PrimeTime24 were sued. Then, during the last week of February, 1999, DirecTV dropped PrimeTime24 and supplied their own feeds, to try and wiggle out of the injunction. The courts and the NAB laughed at them.
DirecTV was belligerent to a point, until they had no choice. Left with many subscribers that no longer had distant networks, four months later, DirecTV comes to an agreement with the NAB that is now the basis for the SHVIA, while Dish Network was just starting their fight with the NAB and the networks.
I mean, a couple of days ago, SkyReport claimed that Echostar was ready to settle with the rest of the network affiliate boards and FOX for $100 million. This assumes that Dish Network would keep the right to use the distant network license. The network affiliate boards and FOX will settle for around $375 million.
That is an awful lot of money to pay to right the wrongs, for less that 10 percent of their subscriber base.
It was interesting to note the value placed per sub was $375. Now that we have a tangible number, It'd be interesting if they could just throw that number out as a licensing fee for those who want distant programming for reasons other than being "unserved". A $375 lifetime license may be worth it to some, while, if they wanted $375 per year, that would be a different story.
Oh, I think it is more along the lines of levying a fine against Dish Network, and then also placing unbearable restrictions on distant networks from this point forward.
Trust me, if there was some market-based subscription for distant networks, it would cost a heck of a lot more than $2.25 per network.
Trust me, if there was some market-based subscription for distant networks, it would cost a heck of a lot more than $2.25 per network.
We just received the following new Dish Network conversion memo from DIRECTV, which was sent to all Nationwide authorized dealers as well as indpendent dealers in the effected areas.
The “Switch from Dish” $150 Cash Back Offer will be available to new DIRECTV customers in the 10 markets listed below (all channels of distribution). To be eligible, customers must submit their last Dish bill AND their first DIRECTV bill along with the completed redemption form. Eligible customers will receive $10 credits on their account each month for 15 months.
GROUP 1 – Markets where DIRECTV has all locals & Dish customers will lose all
Mankato = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Rochester MN = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Springfield-Holyoke = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Wilmington NC = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Zanesville = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
GROUP 2 – Markets where DIRECTV has locals & Dish customers will lose *one*
Monterey-Salinas = (ABC is on DNS)
Juneau = (FOX is on DNS)
GROUP 3 – Markets where DIRECTV has locals & Dish customers are missing one (already) and there is NO DNS option today
Corpus Christi = (No ABC)
Myrtle Beach-Florence = (No NBC)
Lafayette LA = (No NBC)
Offer
· Current DISH customers hear of the “Switch from Dish” $150 Cash Back Offer via radio, newspaper, or DIRECTV (inquiry or escalation). New, low risk customers may submit order through ANY sales channel.
· Offer Dates:
· Purchase by Date: 8/21/06 – 10/02/06
· Activate by Date: 11/02/07
· Postmark by Date: 12/02/07
· These customers will be required to meet all the following eligibility rules in order to be eligible for the 15 monthly $10 Credits.
· Last Dish bill and first DIRECTV bill must be submitted along with redemption form
· New DIRECTV customers only (validated by welcome message on copy of bill)
· Low risk credit score (validated by presence/absence of fee on copy of bill)
· Must activate within the offer dates
· Must reside in eligible market area (validated against the zip code file)
· Must provide copy of first bill
· Activate TOTAL CHOICE ($44.99 or above) or Seleccion Extra ($29.99 or above) or World Direct ($29.99 or above) as validated by TAOS
Miscellaneous Information
DIRECTV will post the “Switch from Dish” $150 Cash Back Mail-in Redemption Form PDF file so that eligible customers can download and print the forms themselves.
-Robert
The “Switch from Dish” $150 Cash Back Offer will be available to new DIRECTV customers in the 10 markets listed below (all channels of distribution). To be eligible, customers must submit their last Dish bill AND their first DIRECTV bill along with the completed redemption form. Eligible customers will receive $10 credits on their account each month for 15 months.
GROUP 1 – Markets where DIRECTV has all locals & Dish customers will lose all
Mankato = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Rochester MN = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Springfield-Holyoke = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Wilmington NC = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
Zanesville = (ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on DNS)
GROUP 2 – Markets where DIRECTV has locals & Dish customers will lose *one*
Monterey-Salinas = (ABC is on DNS)
Juneau = (FOX is on DNS)
GROUP 3 – Markets where DIRECTV has locals & Dish customers are missing one (already) and there is NO DNS option today
Corpus Christi = (No ABC)
Myrtle Beach-Florence = (No NBC)
Lafayette LA = (No NBC)
Offer
· Current DISH customers hear of the “Switch from Dish” $150 Cash Back Offer via radio, newspaper, or DIRECTV (inquiry or escalation). New, low risk customers may submit order through ANY sales channel.
· Offer Dates:
· Purchase by Date: 8/21/06 – 10/02/06
· Activate by Date: 11/02/07
· Postmark by Date: 12/02/07
· These customers will be required to meet all the following eligibility rules in order to be eligible for the 15 monthly $10 Credits.
· Last Dish bill and first DIRECTV bill must be submitted along with redemption form
· New DIRECTV customers only (validated by welcome message on copy of bill)
· Low risk credit score (validated by presence/absence of fee on copy of bill)
· Must activate within the offer dates
· Must reside in eligible market area (validated against the zip code file)
· Must provide copy of first bill
· Activate TOTAL CHOICE ($44.99 or above) or Seleccion Extra ($29.99 or above) or World Direct ($29.99 or above) as validated by TAOS
Miscellaneous Information
DIRECTV will post the “Switch from Dish” $150 Cash Back Mail-in Redemption Form PDF file so that eligible customers can download and print the forms themselves.
-Robert
Similar threads
