So what? The channels haven't been in HD for 5+ years. Anyone currently under contract entered that contract knowing the channels weren't in HD, anyone not in contract can go to another provider. If the HD versions are that important, the consumer shouldn't be subscribed to Dish.
The "so what?" would be that we are probably past the point of offering SD-only versions of HD channels. We are done buying non-HD TVs, ok?
If a given provider wants to remain a legit alternative in today's market, they should keep up. To your post above, if Dish is happy embracing the stigma of the "non-HD alternative", then great. I don't think any rational observer sees this as a winning strategy. The bill is not *that* much lower. Current contracts aside, future business pretty much requires this get figured out.
I can't imagine Dish responding with "if you don't like it, go elsewhere." Because people WILL go elsewhere.
Reading between the lines, ESPN is sure asking for a lot. But I think both parties know that this deal is huge and could determine not only the future of their respective businesses, but help direct the industry as a whole. I just hope cooler heads prevail and this thing does not blow up.