DISH Network Sues the FCC

[Greg Bimson]

What it looks like to me is they are just trying to get the date of implementation delayed from end of 2011 to end of 2012. In directly this may also be the date that they will try to get all converted over to MPEG4 (this is just a conjecture on my part).

I don't remember how many markets are in HD on Dish Network, but STELA mandates that 50 percent of those markets receive their non-commerical stations in HD. Technically, that could be a handful of channels if Dish Network decides to use the statewide PBS for delivery into multiple markets. Such as...

GPTV for all of Georgia
SCETV for all of South Carolina
UNC for all of North Carolina

I'd think Dish Network could cherry-pick their own markets and figure out a way to make the mandate.

 

[rwjga]

I can understand why Charlie does not want to tie up so much capacity for so many stations that have small viewership. Of course the local stations want to have local viewership in order to solicit funds. However it seems that a way could be found for Charlie to carry the national signal on one channel and funds solicited on this channel be divided based on some formula based on market size. This would save E* & D* satellite space, give PBS HD viewing to those who want it, and save E* & D* money that hopefully would provide all of us more HD programming or help hold down our monthly bills.

 

[RandallA]

Statement from Dish on the passage of STELA :

DISH NETWORK STATEMENT ON PASSAGE OF SATELLITE TELEVISION EXTENSION AND LOCALISM ACT OF 2010

ENGLEWOOD, Colo., May 12, 2010 – DISH Network L.L.C. issued the following statement today about the passage of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010:

"DISH Network congratulates Congress on passing the landmark Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 (STELA), clearing the way for DISH Network to become the first pay-TV provider to make local broadcast stations available in every television market in the United States."

and now they're suing.

 

[whatchel1]

Local programming

I can understand why Charlie does not want to tie up so much capacity for so many stations that have small viewership. Of course the local stations want to have local viewership in order to solicit funds. However it seems that a way could be found for Charlie to carry the national signal on one channel and funds solicited on this channel be divided based on some formula based on market size. This would save E* & D* satellite space, give PBS HD viewing to those who want it, and save E* & D* money that hopefully would provide all of us more HD programming or help hold down our monthly bills.

Each individual PBS buys what they think is best for their market. During the times that they run their fund raising events they don't usually run the national feeds. So if they are running special programs that were bought or maybe produced locally then those will not be viewed by a large part their audience. Another thing is if it goes into the national PBS coffers CPB doesn't have a way to individually distribute the funds to the different stations. This is why using either national of state feeds is a problem over all.

 

[SatboyZ]

Read through all of the posts and...

still have a question. As per the press release, is the PBS situation linked to the request/demand for DISH to again offer distant locals?

Steve

 

[David_Levin]

Let the customer choose with his Green....

They didn't seem to get upset about it when the law was being pushed through. Yet now that it is passed they have decided that they can't stick to their end of the deal. To me there is something wrong with that.

I understand your point, but I think on the whole we'd be better off if the customers $$$ dictated what HD channels are picked up (not the FCC). It sounds like the SD channel will be there.

The competition between Direct, Cable, & Dish seems to be doing fine pushing the additions of HD channels.

 

[Greg Bimson]

still have a question. As per the press release, is the PBS situation linked to the request/demand for DISH to again offer distant locals?

Steve

No, they are separate. Dish Network is simply trying to get the mandate for non-commerical stations in HD overturned, which would not have an effect on the attempt to get the license for distants back again...

Which reminds me, distant qualification will be harder than ever once Dish Network receives access to the distant network license. The first qualfication is, "does the customer have access to all networks on their local channels"? If the answer is yes, then distants are not available, even with a waiver.

 

[Fiveft20in]

The FCC should not even exist to begin with.

Are you serious, Clark?

 

[nelson61]

What it looks like to me is they are just trying to get the date of implementation delayed from end of 2011 to end of 2012. QUOTE]

you got it right. In the end, Dish does not "own" the spectrum, the nation does and part of the cost of leasing the spectrum is the public service requirements. They will effectively delay the implimentation dates to meet their satellite launch schedules with this lawsuit.

 

[whatchel1]

1 word

No, they are separate. Dish Network is simply trying to get the mandate for non-commerical stations in HD overturned

They want it to be delayed by 1 year until they get the new sat up in the last quarter of 2012. IMO

 

[tomcrown1]

What it looks like to me is they are just trying to get the date of implementation delayed from end of 2011 to end of 2012. In directly this may also be the date that they will try to get all converted over to MPEG4 (this is just a conjecture on my part).

Bingo that is what is going on.

 

[jayn_j]

They didn't seem to get upset about it when the law was being pushed through. Yet now that it is passed they have decided that they can't stick to their end of the deal. To me there is something wrong with that.

Actually, they released a statement a month before the law was passed that was almost a clone of this latest statement:

Dish: We Can't Deliver Noncom HD Channels By 2011 - 2009-10-15 19:00:27 | Multichannel News

Note the date.

 

[goaliebob99]

Bingo that is what is going on.

Dish should have planned more effectively.. like I said in the past, they in reallity should have started MPEG4 Transition on WA like 2 months ago!

 

[truckracer]

dish

Well it is interesting. They might have to do some extra compression to squeeze in HD PBS if they do not have the satellite capacity.

LOL...we gotta make them locals look like you tube quality videos ha ha

 

[whatchel1]

That's great

Dish should have planned more effectively.. like I said in the past, they in reallity should have started MPEG4 Transition on WA like 2 months ago!

It's really easy to plan thing when a rocket goes boom and makes sat useless. You remember that don't you Bob. That put them back 1 sat before they can get all set for what they need.

 

[TalonDancer]

They didn't seem to get upset about it when the law was being pushed through. Yet now that it is passed they have decided that they can't stick to their end of the deal. To me there is something wrong with that.

Exactly! Dish didn't get upset about the bill because they got what they wanted -- the ability to provide distants and hence brag about providing 100% of 'locals' -- and NEVER had any intention of living up to their side of the bargain -- providing PBS HD anytime soon.

FWIW the ONLY reason we are still Dish subs, is because of the HD Absolute package. If/when Dish drops the HD Absolute package, we'll drop Dish.

Talon Dancer

 

[goaliebob99]

It's really easy to plan thing when a rocket goes boom and makes sat useless. You remember that don't you Bob. That put them back 1 sat before they can get all set for what they need.

I do, and that was on Eastern Arch at the 61.5 location (where the bird was going to) wich has nothing to do with Mpeg4 conversion on Western Arch, (110,119,129) They still could of effectivly transitioned to mpeg4 on western arch giving them bandwidth on that side of the sky that's limited to now.

Over on eastern arch (61.5,72,77) is allready an all mpeg 4 solution. So my comment still stands, like I said in the past, Dish should have transitioned WA (western arch to all mpeg 4 like two months ago.)

The bird that failed was AMC14, wich was going to replace E* 3 at 61.5

 

[RandallA]

Dish should have planned more effectively.. like I said in the past, they in reallity should have started MPEG4 Transition on WA like 2 months ago!

Wow Bob, I actually agree with you. If they would have planned better, they would have been prepared for the FCC requirements. Sorry but this company has always shown very poor planning.

 

[goaliebob99]

Wow Bob, I actually agree with you. If they would have planned better, they would have been prepared for the FCC requirements. Sorry but this company has always shown very poor planning.

See there is a method to my madness!

 

[SamCdbs]

It is not the FCC that should not exist.

It is PBS. PBS used to have a slogan, "if PBS won't do it, who will?"

That quesiton has been answered. Each type of programming PBS does is, in the modern 200 channel universe, simply a duplicate of a money-making private sector channels. PBS is just another government program that has outlived its usefulness.

Now, for reasons I find difficult to understand, PBS's managers want to soak up bandwidth with 1000s of duplicates of the same programming, over and over the entire country.

Rather than simply let the Market decide. Maybe DirecTV will offer PBS in HD in some makret and DISH not. Why does not PBS support that? Because it will just be evidence #32445 of what we all know. No one is watching.