I hate to break it to you, but Bravo has much gayer content on it than Logo. I hope your kid has been protected from it and your kid hasn't turned gay yet.
Dish non responsive to its customer wants
- Thread starter Matthew s
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 108
- Views 9K
The decision not to carry Logo is a very simple business decision. There simply is not enough demand for this channel for E* to justify the cost (in dollars and bandwidth) of carrying it. All the other consipracy theories like them being influenced by Focus on the Family etc. are completely ignorant mud slinging.
There are a lot of channels that E* carries that they wish they didn't have to carry. Those channels make their way into the lineup as a product of content providers bundling these crap channels with their more popular channels. In this case E* has the fluff channels shoved down their throat. Maybe some day Logo will be bundled together with a popular channel. Until a contract like this arises where E* is 'forced' to carry Logo, it would not be financially prudent for them to do so.
There are a lot of channels that E* carries that they wish they didn't have to carry. Those channels make their way into the lineup as a product of content providers bundling these crap channels with their more popular channels. In this case E* has the fluff channels shoved down their throat. Maybe some day Logo will be bundled together with a popular channel. Until a contract like this arises where E* is 'forced' to carry Logo, it would not be financially prudent for them to do so.
1 You might be right. I have been researching. Focus on the families stance on LOGO, Charlie Ergins political donations, and the types of demographics Dish is marketing to. I haven't found hard evidence only hints.
2 can you explain why most major cable systems, and Directtv can find LOGO finacially viable yet Dish can't.
This is a Time Warner market and we don't have Logo on cable here, digital or analog according to my info.
If I recall Time Warner is the 2nd largest cable carrier in the US.
This would be the same Time Warner that treats NFL Network as a 'sports pack' channel, if memory serves.
I think you're barking up the wrong tree here...
If I recall Time Warner is the 2nd largest cable carrier in the US.
This would be the same Time Warner that treats NFL Network as a 'sports pack' channel, if memory serves.
I think you're barking up the wrong tree here...
Actually, TW does carry LOGO, maybe not in all markets, but they do have the channel in their lineup. So, I guess the tree can still be barked up.
We're the 2nd largest media market in the state here and it's not on cable here... At the very least they don't think every market needs it, which, again, sums up the reason why Dish doesn't see the point in having it.
ESPN promotes the WNBA. The WNBA embraces gay athletes and fans. QED, ESPN is another cog in the "gay agenda" and you should immediately stop watching it.
ESPN promotes the WNBA. The WNBA embraces hay athletes and fans. QED, ESPN is another cog in the "gay agenda" and you should immediately stop watching it.
Does hay athlete = horse?
Yes apparently.... and I'm sure you'll be there for Queer Eye's final season this month.
BRAVO'S "TOP CHEF 3 MIAMI" RETURNS AS NO. 1 FOOD SHOW ON CABLE
Released by Bravo
[NOTE: The following article is a press release issued by the aforementioned network and/or company. Any errors, typos, etc. are attributed to the original author. The release is reproduced solely for the dissemination of the enclosed information.]
BRAVO'S "TOP CHEF 3 MIAMI" RETURNS AS NO. 1 FOOD SHOW ON CABLE
BRAVO'S "TOP CHEF 3 MIAMI" RETURNS AS NO. 1 FOOD SHOW ON CABLE
Third Season Premiere Served Up More than Two Million Total Viewers
NEW YORK June 14, 2007 Bravo's pop culture culinary and ratings sensation "Top Chef 3 Miami" premiered last night as the No. 1-rated food show on cable television across all demographics, according to Nielsen Media Research. The season premiere attracted 1,407,000 adults 18-49 and 2,024,000 million total viewers.
Last night's 10 p.m. "Top Chef 3 Miami" premiere increased from cycle two "Top Chef's" 11 p.m. premiere (10/18/06) by five percent among adults 18-49 (1.407 million vs. 1.337 million) and total viewers by eight percent (2.024 million vs. 1.872 million). Of note, "Top Chef's" season two premiere's lead-in was "Project Runway's" season three finale, the highest rated program in Bravo's 27-year history, making the "Top Chef" cycle-over-cycle increase all the more impressive.
Additionally, last night's broadcast in which Clay was eliminated for his "inedible dish" outperformed "Next Food Network Star" season three 9-11 p.m. premiere (06/03/07) by 100 percent among 18-49 (1.407 million vs. 705,000) and by 26 percent among total viewers (2.024 million vs. 1.606 million).
the futon critic - the web's best primetime television resource
I don't think I've watched anything on Bravo *ever* except for their celebrity poker show, but that's been a good year or so ago. Same goes for a few other channels, but it's one channel I could care less if D* dropped for something else.
"The decision not to carry Logo is a very simple business decision. There simply is not enough demand for this channel for E* to justify the cost (in dollars and bandwidth) of carrying it. All the other consipracy theories like them being influenced by Focus on the Family etc. are completely ignorant mud slinging."
Then could you explain, please, why Dish took five years to pick up Oxygen? I know for a fact, as I heard customer service reps say on more than one occasion that O was the number one request and they had many, every day, yet nothing. It is even backed and owned by someone with sort of a following named Oprah. You've heard of her, right? Why do we have it now? Because in negotiations Lifetime called Charlie's bluff and left the lineup and he
blinked and added it. He thought one channel for the ladies was enough apparently, so your excuse of "no demand" only goes so far.
Then could you explain, please, why Dish took five years to pick up Oxygen? I know for a fact, as I heard customer service reps say on more than one occasion that O was the number one request and they had many, every day, yet nothing. It is even backed and owned by someone with sort of a following named Oprah. You've heard of her, right? Why do we have it now? Because in negotiations Lifetime called Charlie's bluff and left the lineup and he
blinked and added it. He thought one channel for the ladies was enough apparently, so your excuse of "no demand" only goes so far.
What's LOGO? I can't believe the things people get all worked up about. If there's something better elsewhere, then get it there.
I'd just as soon not have my bill go up because E* decides to add LOGO, whatever that is. I'm already paying for half a dozen or more Spanish language channels; I don't want to pay for LOGO.
I'd just as soon not have my bill go up because E* decides to add LOGO, whatever that is. I'm already paying for half a dozen or more Spanish language channels; I don't want to pay for LOGO.
this is logo
LGBT TV Shows & Specials | Documentaries | Travel Advice | Gay & Lesbian Films | Music Videos | Logo Online
LOGO is just as if not more important to me then all those sports programming crap is to the sports jukies, that I am forced to pay for. I would rather not see my bill go up for all the sports crap, crappy jesus channels, and the crappy shopping channels. Yet I have to pay for all that crap.
Besides why should I go to the expense of switching to directtv if dish is going to carry the channel.
Which still does not make them any less crap. My point is that many, who think logo is a waste and do not want to pay for it, is to remind them that there are people out there that may think the channels they like are a waste and don't want to pay for them.
