Dish Network to Carry 80 Channel Racetrack Network

[dishcomm]

I bet they put these channels up on 121 or a 105 SuperDish.

naah....That would mean everyone save for those who had locals off those birds and are still using those antennas would require a two dish solution. E* appears to be trying to avoid that.
I expect these services to be available from the core satellites. Probably EA as well.

 

[HDRoberts]

naah....That would mean everyone save for those who had locals off those birds and are still using those antennas would require a two dish solution. E* appears to be trying to avoid that.
I expect these services to be available from the core satellites. Probably EA as well.

Do you really expect that that many will want 80 channels of horseracing for $50/month?

80 channels is minimum 4 MPEG4 transponders. probably 6 or more MPEG2 TPs. At least 28 HD channels. Dish would be nuts to blow core bandwidth on this.

 

[shodobe]

This a joke! So what small, demographic group is this supposed to appeal to? I hope this doesn't take away bandwith they could be using for channels that really matter.

 

[dishcomm]

Comments 42 and 43 lead me to believe there are those who are overly concerned about the appearance of HD niche channels that they have been waiting for.
Ok. Fine.
Question. How is it the niche channels you desire are more important than the niche channels someone else wants?

Worried about 4 tp's?.
IMO Dish sees this as a way to make money selling a service only to those who want it while adding HD chanels that may have 10,000 viewers per week(which they will eventually)does not.
I sometimes have to checukle at the anger expressed by some over the loss of VOOM.
How many people watched for example, the Kung Fu Channel, The Monster channel and that skateboarding channel. Yeah there is an interest there. But not a wide interest. Same applies to horse racing.
Why is one small interest group more important than the other?
I f this is a money issue then Dish is doing what any business would.
They obviously see a potential..
If Dish gets 20,000 buys at 50 bucks per that's a $1million they didn't have.
If Dish adds a few HD niche channels they get ZERO.
Oh well. I am not going to argue the point. So If any of you want to snap at me ,don't bother.
I have my logic and you have yours.
Personally I hope one day for all of us to be able to choose whatever channels we wish to buy. No packaging.

 

[Roxor]

Comments 42 and 43 lead me to believe there are those who are overly concerned about the appearance of HD niche channels that they have been waiting for.
Ok. Fine.
Question. How is it the niche channels you desire are more important than the niche channels someone else wants?

Worried about 4 tp's?.
IMO Dish sees this as a way to make money selling a service only to those who want it while adding HD chanels that may have 10,000 viewers per week(which they will eventually)does not.
I sometimes have to checukle at the anger expressed by some over the loss of VOOM.
How many people watched for example, the Kung Fu Channel, The Monster channel and that skateboarding channel. Yeah there is an interest there. But not a wide interest. Same applies to horse racing.
Why is one small interest group more important than the other?
I f this is a money issue then Dish is doing what any business would.
They obviously see a potential..
If Dish gets 20,000 buys at 50 bucks per that's a $1million they didn't have.
If Dish adds a few HD niche channels they get ZERO.
Oh well. I am not going to argue the point. So If any of you want to snap at me ,don't bother.
I have my logic and you have yours.
Personally I hope one day for all of us to be able to choose whatever channels we wish to buy. No packaging.

How's the weather in CO, Charlie?

 

[dishcomm]

How's the weather in CO, Charlie?

Huh?
Was that an attempt at humor?

 

[Slamminc11]

Huh?
Was that an attempt at humor?

quite a pathetic one if it was...

 

[Hemi 6.1]

Dish would be nuts to blow core bandwidth on this.

I agree.
Don't waste our Eastern Arc space with this garbage.
Put it on the 118 satellite and the 2 customers that pay $50 per month for Horse Racing can just upgrade to Dish PLUS setup.

 

[dishcomm]

I agree.
Don't waste our Eastern Arc space with this garbage.
Put it on the 118 satellite and the 2 customers that pay $50 per month for Horse Racing can just upgrade to Dish PLUS setup.

"our " easten arc space? Care to elaborate on that?

Ok..Is there anyone willing to answer the questions I put to the board.
One more time. Are the niche interests of one small group( people who want seldom watched niche channels in HD) any more important than the niche interests of another group? In this case those who want to see horse racing.
BTW what you consider "garbage" others like very much.
What would your reaction be if one refered to your interests as "garbage"?
It cuts both ways.

 

[Fitzie]

This is a business deal. Dish is being paid to carry those channels, which will be used to promote on-line wagering on the horse races.

According to newspaper reports, about $15 billion is wagered on horse races each year, but for the last few years that number has remained stagnant. The only area where there has been growth has been the on-line wagering segment, and this is an effort by the race tracks to improve their bottom line. If the effort isn't successful, the channels will soon be abandoned.

I hope some of the channels, maybe the "select" pack, will be in high definition. Horse racing in high definition was tested at one of the west coast tracks a couple of years ago, and it's pretty spectacular--if you like horse racing. Ellis Park in Henderson, KY a few years ago tried a 3 channel telecast which I really liked: one channel on the odds board, one channel on the horses, and the third channel for a broadcasting team offering detailed handicapping analysis on each race. That idea pretty well blew up because the simulcasting sites wouldn't devote 3 channels just to one track, as I understand it. But that was a valiant effort.

Regards,
Fitzie

 

[Hemi 6.1]

"our " easten arc space? Care to elaborate on that?

Ok..Is there anyone willing to answer the questions I put to the board.
One more time. Are the niche interests of one small group( people who want seldom watched niche channels in HD) any more important than the niche interests of another group? In this case those who want to see horse racing.
BTW what you consider "garbage" others like very much.
What would your reaction be if one refered to your interests as "garbage"?
It cuts both ways.

80 channels of horse racing? Gimmie a break! Go to the track or gamble Online.
It will do you good to get out of the house.

 

[dishcomm]

80 channels of horse racing? Gimmie a break! Go to the track or gamble Online.
It will do you good to get out of the house.

You didn't answer the question.
BTW, the point is to encourage more wagering. This is a trend that has been surfacing and is now in full swing.
Betttors are no different from anyone else. They want convenience. Most want to be able to wager on the best tracks. The problem is many of them are far away from those venues. Using the internet is the next best thing.
The people at HRTV and Dish see that and went ahead with this deal.
Everyone needs ot just relax and see how this shakes out.
One important item. If Dish wants to remain competetive in the small dish industry they will do what they must to grow their HD capacity. I do not think that Dish will jeopardize their plans to add more HD services.
I understand there is much impatience among HD conniseurs.
However the question still remains, why is one niche group more important than another?
Set aside your anger and answer the question.

 

[dishcomm]

This is a business deal. Dish is being paid to carry those channels, which will be used to promote on-line wagering on the horse races.

According to newspaper reports, about $15 billion is wagered on horse races each year, but for the last few years that number has remained stagnant. The only area where there has been growth has been the on-line wagering segment, and this is an effort by the race tracks to improve their bottom line. If the effort isn't successful, the channels will soon be abandoned.

I hope some of the channels, maybe the "select" pack, will be in high definition. Horse racing in high definition was tested at one of the west coast tracks a couple of years ago, and it's pretty spectacular--if you like horse racing. Ellis Park in Henderson, KY a few years ago tried a 3 channel telecast which I really liked: one channel on the odds board, one channel on the horses, and the third channel for a broadcasting team offering detailed handicapping analysis on each race. That idea pretty well blew up because the simulcasting sites wouldn't devote 3 channels just to one track, as I understand it. But that was a valiant effort.

Regards,
Fitzie

The geniuses up in DC(US House) are about to send a bill out of committee that will reverse the ban on internet wagering. If this passes and Obama signs it(very likely as the feds and states are looking for more sources of tax revenue) that will blow the lid off the industry.
There will always be people willing to find a way to put down a bet.
What better way to to raise revenue other than rasing taxes on everyone. Simple, the federal government can regulate internet wagering and then have the means to tax it.
The puritanical outlook we here in the US have on gambling is outdated and stupid. The Brits can bet on anything in their country. There are betting shops in every city and town.
Federal and State governments unwilling to piss off the far right church going people (votes)allow illegal wagering to go on under their noses while refusing to recognize the possible truck loads of tax revenue passing them by.
They'd rather be sticks in the mud and refuse to acknowledge the reality that people love or to gamble.
And here's the best part. The ta on internet wagering) is progressive. In other words, one pays the tax only if their choose to participate.

 

[Hemi 6.1]

I understand there is much impatience among HD conniseurs.
However the question still remains, why is one niche group more important than another?
.

I have no problem adding this option. But put it on the 121,105,or 118.7 satellite.
If you want it that bad you'll upgrade your dish, So will everyone else.
Gambling isn't what I'd call tv programming.
HD TV is ,Movies and Sports are!
Horse racing is a Sport sure, but solely for betting only while causing a sick addiction in an already very poor economy.
And Quite frankly if I had to pay $50 per month for it, You might as well drive to the Nearest OFF Track betting and save your $50 for a Bet.
I can go to the Track Every Saturday, With a Full Bar, TV's Out the wad zoo with a live track,and slot Machines, and that won't cost me $50 per month for that option ,Plus it won't effect upcoming channels from my satellite provider.

 

[mike123abc]

"our " easten arc space? Care to elaborate on that?

Ok..Is there anyone willing to answer the questions I put to the board.
One more time. Are the niche interests of one small group( people who want seldom watched niche channels in HD) any more important than the niche interests of another group? In this case those who want to see horse racing.
BTW what you consider "garbage" others like very much.
What would your reaction be if one refered to your interests as "garbage"?
It cuts both ways.

80 SD channels is about 7 TPs of SD on a DBS satellite. I suspect they will be on 105/121 or similiar off satellite (they do not have 7 TPs available on a main DBS satellite if they wanted). You ask about a niche channel importance if you use the same 7TPs for HD you would end up with about 49 HD channels. Yes to answer your question I think they could put 49 HD channels up and sell it to a lot more people than 80 horse racing channels. So the 49 niche HD channel watchers are more important than the horse racing people.

Dish/DIRECTV answered your question a long time ago. If these channels were such hot sellers they would have been bidding them up trying to attract new subs. Instead they have focused on bringing as much HD as possible. And yes providers force thier less popular channels into the packages with the popular ones.

 

[Hemi 6.1]

Federal and State governments unwilling to piss off the far right church going people (votes)allow illegal wagering to go on under their noses while refusing to recognize the possible truck loads of tax revenue passing them by.
They'd rather be sticks in the mud and refuse to acknowledge the reality that people love or to gamble.
.

Truck Load of Revenue??? That goes Streight into the State and Governments pockets, The local Tax payers don't see SH&* from this. Thats Fact. PA is living proof of that.
Anyone who pays taxes in PA reading this
Tell me Since the Slots came to PA ,How Much taxes have you all saved in the past 3 years.
ZERO FOR ME. Up 15% in fact.
Don't Even go that route "Dishcomm".
Drive on a PA road sometime too, and put a Gallon or 2 of gas in while your here.

 

[Hemi 6.1]

For the Record I have no Issues with Gambling at all.
Just do it in the supplyed location. AC,Vegas and all the Other betting tracks around the country. Just keep it off my TV service.

 

[dishcomm]

I have no problem adding this option.Gambling isn't what I'd call tv programming.
HD TV is ,Movies and Sports are!
Horse racing is a Sport sure but solely for betting only..
And Quite frankly if I had to pay $50 per month for it, You might as well drive to the Nearest OFF Track betting and save your $50 for a Bet.
I can go to the Track Every Saturday, With a Full Bar, TV's Out the wad zoo with a live track,and slot Machines, and that won't cost me $50 per month for that option ,Plus it won't effect upcoming channels from my satellite provider.

How do you know this servcie "will effect upcoming channles from your satellite provider"?
And once again, you've not answered the question.
You can rationalize your postion all you like.
" But put it on the 121,105,or 118.7 satellite.
If you want it that bad you'll upgrade you dish, So will everyone else."


One thing I find puzzling is you appear to be speaking for Dish based on your own personal prefernces and expectations.
One thing is clear, as Dish customers we've never been promised any particular channel or service.
That brings up a choice. One can choose their provider.
I have been tempted to change over due to Dish's unwillngness or inability to add services. But my CHOICE is stay with this provider.
If the additon of this Horse racing service raises suspicion that you'll have to wait longer for the few HD services that your crave, then seek out other options.
It's that simple.
If enough people leave the Dish service based on this, perhaps the fire will be under Dish management to act.
In conclusion ,I have no idea which orbital slot Dish will use for this service.
I used a bit of logic in considering market conditions and other factors to come up with a theory that Dish will want to sell this service as seamlessly as possible. That to attract as many users as possible.
Think of it. This horse racing service will serve a niche market. If Dish were to require a major upgrade or the additon of a second antenna, that in turn will chase away potential users who'd be unwilling to pay for said upgrade or have aesthetic concerns that would preclude them form acquiring a second antenna.
I could be dead wrong here.
But again, logic tells me that Dish will try to get this done as smoothly and painlessly as possible in order to attract as many paying subscribers as possible.

 

[dishcomm]

80 SD channels is about 7 TPs of SD on a DBS satellite. I suspect they will be on 105/121 or similiar off satellite (they do not have 7 TPs available on a main DBS satellite if they wanted). You ask about a niche channel importance if you use the same 7TPs for HD you would end up with about 49 HD channels. Yes to answer your question I think they could put 49 HD channels up and sell it to a lot more people than 80 horse racing channels. So the 49 niche HD channel watchers are more important than the horse racing people.

Dish/DIRECTV answered your question a long time ago. If these channels were such hot sellers they would have been bidding them up trying to attract new subs. Instead they have focused on bringing as much HD as possible. And yes providers force thier less popular channels into the packages with the popular ones.

Thge operative is "Sell".. Look we all know that HD enthusiasts expect HD options to be provided free or at a very small cost.
That's a fact.
Let's take your number (49, which I believe to be high by quite a bit. Based on one HD ch taking the same bandwidth as 5 or 6 SD Channels, research to follow), do you think Dish would simply "give away" 49 channels of HD service without extracting more coin from those who want them? I think not.
However, Dish IS going to charge 50 bucks a month for the service in question. That's guaranteed revenue for Dish.
Now let's say dish charges 50 cents per new HD channel adding 25 bucks per month to each HD sub that wants those channels. In my experience the uproar from HD enthusiasts would be something Dish would not want to hear. Especially in light of the fact that the additional channels are of the niche variety.
Using that logic (one niche group vs another) which service would you add as a business owner, one that generates instant revenue or one that generates none at all?
I think at the end of the day Dish will NOT jeopardize their future expansion of HD offerings. So I am not understanding the alarm from HD enthusiasts.
It is as though the HD people have assumed that their HD programing desires will be dealyed to accomodate the Horse Racing service.
I don;t think so.
Now Wiht that said, how do you justify one niche group to be more than Improtant than another. Answer that question objectively. In other words forget your desire to see more HD.
One last thing.
I think this whole hullaballoo over HD for free is nonsense. If you want more stuff you should be willing to pay for it.

PS......In checking the figures on how much space HD vs SD ,it appears that some sources convey one HD channel takes up an equivalent space of 4 SD channels.
So while 7 Tp's (as you say) would be required to x-mit 80 channels that equals just 20 or so HD chs. That's based on mpeg 4 compression figures.. It is my understanding that up to 12 SD channels can be transmitted by one TP so your 7 TP estimate is pretty close. While 4 HD chs in mpeg 4 can be on one TP. That's with quite a bit of degredation to the HD quality. A major bone of contention among those who rightfully(IMO) demand their HD quality be untouched by compression(HD lite).
Anyway who knows the plans Dish has to offer.

 

[dishcomm]

Truck Load of Revenue??? That goes Streight into the State and Governments pockets, The local Tax payers don't see SH&* from this. Thats Fact. PA is living proof of that.
Anyone who pays taxes in PA reading this
Tell me Since the Slots came to PA ,How Much taxes have you all saved in the past 3 years.
ZERO FOR ME. Up 15% in fact.
Don't Even go that route "Dishcomm".
Drive on a PA road sometime too, and put a Gallon or 2 of gas in while your here.

Question is ,which taxes have been increased in PA?
If you refer to school or property taxes, those are decided on a local level.
NC is a high tax state as wel. I am with you on that. We ahve a lottery that is supposed to fund education.
But if one takes a look at the low tax rates in for example Mississippi and Nevada, gambling revenues offer taxapyers in those states much relief.

I used the gambling/tax revuenue issue for purposes of discussion. It is true that governemtn NEVER "saves" money. Addtional revenues are always spent. The result is taxes are never lowered when governments acquire new reveue streams.
But on the other end, with the economy down and less revenue flow to governments it would be prudent to find other sources. Wagering is a viable source. This is not a pissing contest. This is reality. One way or another we all pay for government's insatiable desire to transfer as much wealth from the people to itself. Additional revenue streams only go to slow additinal tax levies.
Steering this back to the issue at hand, it makes no difference to me which way Dish goes with the Horse racing service vs adding HD.
I maintain that you in particular are placing the desires of one niche group over another.
I have not seen an answer to the question which asks is one niche group more imprtant than another.
Let's stick to that and that only.