DISH Reaches Long Term Agreement with DISNEY / ESPN / ABC

[Tampa8]

So you would be good to pay for a Sports package. That's what many are saying and there would be no talk of DISH dropping ESPN.... You would save some money not paying for regular channels except perhaps for locals or a lower package, and everyone else saves bigger money or gets more in their package by not paying for all the sports channels. Win Win.

 

[rwjga]

Sports is a must.

Sports and News is the only reason I pay for TV. News is mostly available on the internet for free. Sports is more limited, but it would be easy for ESPN to establish a pay streaming site. Doing so would keep many of the viewers they would lose if Dish went away. Dish would not have an easy way to fill the sports void and would suffer subscriber loss. Dish has the weaker hand in this ball game I think.

 

[Tampa8]

When it comes to ESPN - I agree. I maintain it's a more mainstream/watched than some think. It would make the perfect channel to be one of the only ones in the regular packages if you could move all others into their own package.

 

[king3pj]

So you would be good to pay for a Sports package. That's what many are saying and there would be no talk of DISH dropping ESPN.... You would save some money not paying for regular channels except perhaps for locals or a lower package, and everyone else saves bigger money or gets more in their package by not paying for all the sports channels. Win Win.

Not exactly. I am one of the people who said I only pay for satellite because of live sports now. That doesn't mean it's all I watch. What it means is that I can get everything else I watch cheaper from OTA and iTunes season passes. That would no longer be the case if I had to pay for sports only packages from Dish and then pay for all my shows individually from iTunes as well.

None of this actually matters though. ESPN and the other big sports networks are never going to agree to not being in packages. It's an interesting conversation to have here but not all that realistic.

 

[jagowar]

For those who say they don't want to pay for channels that they don't watch, then list all of the channels you watch so everyone can reply whether they watch them. We ALL pay for channels we don't watch. The issue with ESPN is that their is no legal alternative to find the same programming elsewhere. When AMC was dropped, you could buy the shows on Amazon or iTunes. For ESPN, I want to watch the games live. And I can't just switch to Fox Sports 1 or NBCSN because there are specific games I want to watch. I am not just watching games in general. I watch to watch certain teams.

This is the key.... sports is the one type of programming is best live and can't be easily replaced by netflix or any other on demand service. Sports is honestly the ONLY reason I keep subscribing to dish.

None of this actually matters though. ESPN and the other big sports networks are never going to agree to not being in packages. It's an interesting conversation to have here but not all that realistic.

Also agreed.... but I can see espn going out one day and making watchespn its own a la carte service and charging something like $20/month for it. I think the day that happens traditional pay tv services are in big trouble.

 

[Yespage]

Sports and News is the only reason I pay for TV. News is mostly available on the internet for free. Sports is more limited, but it would be easy for ESPN to establish a pay streaming site. Doing so would keep many of the viewers they would lose if Dish went away.

This is overlooking one important factor here. ESPN doesn't want people to pay for their service that want to use their service. They want everyone to pay for their service! Setting up an external streaming pay plan just gets people to pay that want to watch it. This isn't like HBO where it is a premium so it isn't as important because only those that pay directly for HBO get it.

 

[Centex]

When it comes to ESPN - I agree. I maintain it's a more mainstream/watched than some think. It would make the perfect channel to be one of the only ones in the regular packages if you could move all others into their own package.

Agreed. And for most people, it is not "Sports Center", or All Sport all the time, rather, it is "my team" mentality. My dad is a perfect example--he would never just sits and watch ESPN, but he will watch the Dallas Cowboys, The Texas Tech Red Raiders, and the National Finals Rodeo. While he doesn't put a lot of thought into sports programming or channels, if it were removed he would change providers.

 

[dare2be]

Don't get me wrong, I follow and watch my hometown teams as much as the next guy. People can try to paint a picture of taking tv too seriously, but, as mentioned, the traditional pay TV services are in big trouble if there is no fiscal responsibility in exclusive sports contract bidding. I get and appreciate the model of subsidizing channels we don't watch, both sports and non-sports alike, but the model will break when one area shows no fiscal responsibility and lets the heavy subsidies fall on all subscribers. It baffles me that people act blind to the fact that sports programming costs are rising out of control, and it's primarily due to the one-upmanship of signing exclusive contracts (read: cornering the market). In any other industry, leaving cost controls unbounded and basically non-existent would be a one-way ticket to oblivion. The public would vilify and refuse to participatee in such a situation, but many sports fans keep asking for more, no matter what the cost.

 

[Gobucks]

All you hear now a days is how expensive cable and satellite is. My grandmother was done with TWC. So I set her up with Dish. She gets the Top 120 channels and an HD box for $55 a month give or take a $1. She will get the HD for life deal and pay just $29.99 plus tax for a whole year. She gets all that plus ESPN to watch The Buckeyes and college football. If you don't want a DVR or multiple DVR's plus every channel on the planet Dish is pretty cheap. So just remember that all you have to do is drop all your extra's. If you want extra's it will cost you. ESPN or not. I think some of us forget that.

When I told her she will pay $55 a month she was she was so happy. I would gladly pay her bill for her but she won't let me. So she will get all the channels she watches for a damn good price.

 

[slick1ru2]

Been a Dish customer for like 8 years. Before that Comcast. Before that Direct and Voom. My alma mater plays on ESPN. Its bad enough suffering through SD ESPNU. If ESPN is dropped I'll have to go through the hassle of changing carriers. I am really going to miss Epix but I understand that Amazon Prime gets their better content now after a delay. These two need to kiss and make up and bring back all the HD content that's gone.

 

[Scherrman]

I still stand by Dish having THE best and cheapest two-room solution available. Who else allows you to watch programming on two different TVs, have one in HD, DVR on both TVs, get 120 popular channels including sports and pay less than $60? If you get rid of all the extra crap then it's the best deal around.

 

[Gobucks]

I still stand by Dish having THE best and cheapest two-room solution available. Who else allows you to watch programming on two different TVs, have one in HD, DVR on both TVs, get 120 popular channels including sports and pay less than $60? If you get rid of all the extra crap then it's the best deal around.

That's what I was saying. My grandmother is so happy now!

 

[rajmarie]

I still stand by Dish having THE best and cheapest two-room solution available. Who else allows you to watch programming on two different TVs, have one in HD, DVR on both TVs, get 120 popular channels including sports and pay less than $60? If you get rid of all the extra crap then it's the best deal around.

That's a big reason I am with Dish also though I am in AT200.

 

[TheKrell]

I still stand by Dish having THE best and cheapest two-room solution available. Who else allows you to watch programming on two different TVs, have one in HD, DVR on both TVs...

It would be an even better deal if Dish did the right thing and enabled anamorphic widescreen on the TV2 outputs! :rant: I no longer have an SD TV. Can you even buy an SD 4:3 TV these days?

 

[Scherrman]

It would be an even better deal if Dish did the right thing and enabled anamorphic widescreen on the TV2 outputs! :rant: I no longer have an SD TV. Can you even buy an SD 4:3 TV these days?

Time to put an HD receiver there.

 

[TheKrell]

Time to put an HD receiver there.

But then the cost goes up a minimum of $7/mo. I occasionally record off the composite outputs of my 722's TV1 outputs at something like DVD quality. Nobody in my family objects to the PQ quality of DVDs on our widescreen TVs. But everybody complains vociferously if the picture is picture-framed. When we use the TV to zoom the SD TV2 output both vertically and horizontally, then that produces a picture that I don't care to watch. So, that TV2 output is not too useful for many of us. This is the 21st century, for crying out loud. Why can't Dish do the right thing and allow anamorphic widescreen on the TV2 output?

 

[Yespage]

But then the cost goes up a minimum of $7/mo. I occasionally record off the composite outputs of my 722's TV1 outputs at something like DVD quality. Nobody in my family objects to the PQ quality of DVDs on our widescreen TVs. But everybody complains vociferously if the picture is picture-framed. When we use the TV to zoom the SD TV2 output both vertically and horizontally, then that produces a picture that I don't care to watch. So, that TV2 output is not too useful for many of us. This is the 21st century, for crying out loud. Why can't Dish do the right thing and allow anamorphic widescreen on the TV2 output?

My Samsung whatever whatever series has a 16:9 zoom that works pretty well for getting most of the screen to fit (as per the "HD" version of the channel) using TV2. It isn't perfect, but I'm actually very pleased with the PQ. Not HD, maybe not even DVD, but pretty close.

But I am with you, it'd be nice if it would work without manipulating the TV.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

After todays ruling by a Federal Judge against ABC and in favor of DISH and the DISH Hopper could upset things...

Thats THREE times now a Federal Judge has ruled in favor of DISH.

 

[Huntr]

So you would be good to pay for a Sports package. That's what many are saying and there would be no talk of DISH dropping ESPN.... You would save some money not paying for regular channels except perhaps for locals or a lower package, and everyone else saves bigger money or gets more in their package by not paying for all the sports channels. Win Win.

I don't really care which way it works, as long as my bill is cheaper and I get the channels I want. Doesn't matter, though, because this talk is basically moot. There is no way Dish goes w/o espn long-term. It's just not happening.

 

[dare2be]

But then the cost goes up a minimum of $7/mo. I occasionally record off the composite outputs of my 722's TV1 outputs at something like DVD quality. Nobody in my family objects to the PQ quality of DVDs on our widescreen TVs. But everybody complains vociferously if the picture is picture-framed. When we use the TV to zoom the SD TV2 output both vertically and horizontally, then that produces a picture that I don't care to watch. So, that TV2 output is not too useful for many of us. This is the 21st century, for crying out loud. Why can't Dish do the right thing and allow anamorphic widescreen on the TV2 output?

The killer is, have you noticed that the TV1 modulated signal out to the TV2 coax IS anamorphic widescreen?