Dish shrinks pay TV subscriber losses to 133,000 in Q4 . . .

[pattykay]

So you cut out half of my statement and then argue with me over what I said - by reading half my statement?

so you can't cut out half of what I said and then argue the remainder is not true.

Sorry, I was not aware that we were required to quote the entire post every time we want to reply to a post. That would make for some really long posts, with the quote boxes alone, regardless of how much or little I say in my response. The whole point of only quoting part of a post is to reply to that specific statement within the post. Nitpicking a specific statement does not mean that I am disagreeing with the rest of what you said. If I do not reply to the rest of your statement, I probably even like what you said to some extent, whether I actually give it a Like or not.

And the point is you can get cable AND your RSNs for CHEAPER than DISH. And these people have left now. DISH is dropping subs like crazy.

And my point earlier in the thread was that these people have likely already left, which is why Dish's losses are less now than they had been in the quarter immediately after the loss of the RSN's. So, this is not as big of a contributing factor to their losses going forward.

I think it is the reason why Dish's losses were so much higher in Q4 2019 (which is kind of the subject of this thread). That is the year when those RSN's were lost. So naturally, the Q4 2020 losses would be lower, since those who wanted to watch those sports channels would have already left long before then.

Today it is not cheaper, we can no longer get out of market locals, and we can no longer get out of market sports games.

I am sure you meant "we can no longer get in market sports games." Out of market packages are still available for those who wish to pay for them. There are even single-team out of market package options now, which did not exist back in the day. Again, this is just a minor nitpick of your post, and it does not mean that I disagree with the rest of what you are saying.

As for DISH dropping certain channels to keep prices down -- RSNs, HBO & Cinemax, etc. -- it makes sense, IMO.

As for DISH's decision to drop RSNs, I still say it makes sense. It helped DISH to hold the line on price increases.

It still doesn't make sense to me. Did they "keep prices down"? Did it "hold the line on price increases"? Not only was there no price decrease when the channels were dropped, but the following years' price increases were just as high as they had been each of the prior years when Dish had still been carrying the RSN's. If Dish were truly trying to keep prices down, then I would have expected a year with no increase, or at least some slightly smaller increases for awhile. (Maybe only an increase of $4 instead of the usual annual increase of $5 per month.) I think many of us here were expecting the same thing at the time when the RSN's were dropped, and were surprised when we did not see any savings reflected in the following year's package pricing.

You will notice that low cost satellite provider Orby failed today; Orby charged $40 for bare bones channels, no fluff, no sports. DISH will absorb most of those customers - manipulating the short term sign up numbers.

That is not "manipulating." That is simply taking advantage of a business opportunity. Now, if you could prove that Dish was somehow responsible for causing the demise of Orby, then I might see the point about it being a Dish "manipulation."

 

[PortlandChris]

Sorry, I was not aware that we were required to quote the entire post every time we want to reply to a post. That would make for some really long posts, with the quote boxes alone, regardless of how much or little I say in my response. The whole point of only quoting part of a post is to reply to that specific statement within the post. Nitpicking a specific statement does not mean that I am disagreeing with the rest of what you said. If I do not reply to the rest of your statement, I probably even like what you said to some extent, whether I actually give it a Like or not.


And my point earlier in the thread was that these people have likely already left, which is why Dish's losses are less now than they had been in the quarter immediately after the loss of the RSN's. So, this is not as big of a contributing factor to their losses going forward.



I am sure you meant "we can no longer get in market sports games." Out of market packages are still available for those who wish to pay for them. There are even single-team out of market package options now, which did not exist back in the day. Again, this is just a minor nitpick of your post, and it does not mean that I disagree with the rest of what you are saying.



It still doesn't make sense to me. Did they "keep prices down"? Did it "hold the line on price increases"? Not only was there no price decrease when the channels were dropped, but the following years' price increases were just as high as they had been each of the prior years when Dish had still been carrying the RSN's. If Dish were truly trying to keep prices down, then I would have expected a year with no increase, or at least some slightly smaller increases for awhile. (Maybe only an increase of $4 instead of the usual annual increase of $5 per month.) I think many of us here were expecting the same thing at the time when the RSN's were dropped, and were surprised when we did not see any savings reflected in the following year's package pricing.


That is not "manipulating." That is simply taking advantage of a business opportunity. Now, if you could prove that Dish was somehow responsible for causing the demise of Orby, then I might see the point about it being a Dish "manipulation."

You are full of it. Your indiscriminate splicing of what I said changes it to something I never said. You seemingly like to make stuff up to argue, I guess. Your "minor nitpick" is not minor. The whole concept of the RSN is for your own sports teams. By saying that people will be okay with a national channel that shows one or two games a week is not even close to the same thing.

RSN people did not immediately leave. It took me awhile to leave and others leave in their own time. DISH's numbers are poor because people are still leaving. NBA didn't even begin until mid-December. Baseball is just starting spring training. People will continue to leave. Some stuck around in hopes by the time baseball comes back the channels will be restored. We'll see. I think unlikely, but you never know.

I never said or implied DISH did anything wrong with respect to Orby. I said any gains DISH makes from the loss of Orby has a way to manipulate, temporarily, it's gains or losses. It's not like it is from this whole new pool of customers. The industry will shake out - is shaking out. Streamers were hot for awhile and may be for a bit more but as bandwidth caps become more and more common those services are not sustainable.

 

[PortlandChris]

Back in the day, a lot of folks who had other options (e.g. local cable company) went to satellite because it offered better picture quality and better technology/equipment, plus access to every channel under the sun, some of which weren't available from the local cableco. For many, especially those who went with DTV, opting for satellite wasn't mainly about saving money (in fact, it may not have been cheaper at all), it was about getting a better product.

As for DISH's decision to drop RSNs, I still say it makes sense. It helped DISH to hold the line on price increases. Fixed costs account for very little of the monthly price a customer pays, it almost all comes down to variable costs, i.e. programming costs. The great majority of cable TV subscribers don't care about RSNs. Sure, some folks have left DISH because they no longer offer RSNs. But others have stayed (or joined) because of DISH pricing that's more attractive to them than DTV (which still has RSNs). Both DISH and DTV have bled subscribers in recent years, but I think it's been worse at DTV.

I am not disputing that there is a business case for dropping RSNs. There certainly is.

My point is that by going with DISH you will pay more and get less these days for anyone in an urban area with some choice. If you have no choice then you are stuck.

For a combo internet package and DISH you will pay $40 to $50 more a month - and GET less. Cable/internet bundle includes the RSNs for $40 or $50 monthly less. So for apples to apples you need to drop DISH another $5 or $10 (since you have no RSN).

I had DISH for 15 years and Directv for 2 years in the middle. DISH has the best technology, hands down. But 17 years ago I went to satellite because I got MORE than cable and spent less. Today it is the reverse, you get LESS and spend more.

Hopefully DISH will be able to find some bundle deals with the wireless services it now can offer. I do expect more consolidation to come....all the big names are now behind all the streamers with ABC/Disney buying a decent stake in FUBO.

 

[sam_gordon]

You are full of it. Your indiscriminate splicing of what I said changes it to something I never said. You seemingly like to make stuff up to argue, I guess. Your "minor nitpick" is not minor. The whole concept of the RSN is for your own sports teams. By saying that people will be okay with a national channel that shows one or two games a week is not even close to the same thing.

I suggest going back and reading your post that started this without your bias. Here's you quote again...

DISH booted almost all RSNs and made it so anyone who wants to watch sports can no longer do so.

That sentence has two statements in it...
1) DISH booted almost all RSNs (True)
AND
2) DISH made it so anyone who wants to watch sports can no longer do so. (False)

Instead of saying you missed a word ("DISH made it so anyone who wants to watch those sports can no longer do so"), you keep doubling down saying what you said was accurate. It really isn't.

Moving on...

 

[PortlandChris]

I suggest going back and reading your post that started this without your bias. Here's you quote again...

That sentence has two statements in it...
1) DISH booted almost all RSNs (True)
AND
2) DISH made it so anyone who wants to watch sports can no longer do so. (False)

Instead of saying you missed a word ("DISH made it so anyone who wants to watch those sports can no longer do so"), you keep doubling down saying what you said was accurate. It really isn't.

Moving on...

False Sam. My post that started all of this reads:

I think the two reasons for DISH's subscriber loss - regional sports channels AND the costs of DISH are higher than with cable when you bundle internet.

I was with DISH for 17 years, but dropping the sports channels was it. I paid more than cable to avoid cable and I was generally happy.

But I realized I was paying $40-$50 a month more with DISH and my internet connection combined than if I bundled it with cable.

Drawbacks with cable is the equipment is crap, and I miss prime time anytime. The plus: I can get ALL of my sports channels and I pay $50 less right now and it will be $40 after the year ends.

Very clear I said Regional Sports Channels.

And then below I said :"I can get ALL of my sports channels"

The rest of this is YOU and this other guy splicing my statements, which turns it into something I never ever said.

Facts Do Matter Sam.

 

[pattykay]

False Sam. My post that started all of this reads:


Very clear I said Regional Sports Channels.

And then below I said :"I can get ALL of my sports channels"

The rest of this is YOU and this other guy splicing my statements, which turns it into something I never ever said.

Facts Do Matter Sam.

Your post that started all of this was post number 10. You just quoted post number 26. Also, each time that the other guy and I quoted the snippet of your earlier post, the quote box automatically included a link to that entire post (the little blue curved arrow at the top of the quote box) so that anyone can go back and read the context of the part that is being quoted, so that they can read your statement accurately.

Anyway, moving on...

 

[PortlandChris]

Your post that started all of this was post number 10. You just quoted post number 26. Also, each time that the other guy and I quoted the snippet of your earlier post, the quote box automatically included a link to that entire post (the little blue curved arrow at the top of the quote box) so that anyone can go back and read the context of the part that is being quoted, so that they can read your statement accurately.

Anyway, moving on...

Alright, we're going back there - and even then I flat said RSNs were pulled off DISH, which was the whole subject of discussion forward from my perspective.

Your idea that sports is simply satisfied with 1-2 games a week from a broadcast channel is not the same thing and you know it is not, the rest is you twisting what I said, and that pisses me off.

 

[Juan]

Alright, we're going back there - and even then I flat said RSNs were pulled off DISH, which was the whole subject of discussion forward from my perspective.

Your idea that sports is simply satisfied with 1-2 games a week from a broadcast channel is not the same thing and you know it is not, the rest is you twisting what I said, and that pisses me off.

You don't remember the charlie chat with nfl jerseys

 

[PortlandChris]

You don't remember the charlie chat with nfl jerseys

I remember Charlie Chats back in the day when you could actually ask questions and talk to the man. I enjoyed time with DISH, in the beginning it was great - we'd get access to content local cable could not give us and it was cheaper. DISH's technology is the best, for sure.

Right now it is impossible for DISH to compete head to head. They do not own the wires, and everyone wants fast internet. Comcast and the others figured out the way to protect themselves is to charge less for TV, but whack you on the internet. Bundle for a price that Satellite can't compete. Then the streamers have come along and then cable whacks back with data caps.

The bottom line is that the only way out of all of this is for municipal owned broadband, but that's just not likely to occur in any great numbers.

 

[Juan]

I remember Charlie Chats back in the day when you could actually ask questions and talk to the man. I enjoyed time with DISH, in the beginning it was great - we'd get access to content local cable could not give us and it was cheaper. DISH's technology is the best, for sure.

Right now it is impossible for DISH to compete head to head. They do not own the wires, and everyone wants fast internet. Comcast and the others figured out the way to protect themselves is to charge less for TV, but whack you on the internet. Bundle for a price that Satellite can't compete. Then the streamers have come along and then cable whacks back with data caps.

The bottom line is that the only way out of all of this is for municipal owned broadband, but that's just not likely to occur in any great numbers.

They pretended you could watch any game you wanted with red zone

 

[PortlandChris]

They pretended you could watch any game you wanted with red zone

I do not remember that, didn;'t Charlie Chats go away like 10 or 12 years ago? When was Red Zone founded?

 

[Juan]

I do not remember that, didn;'t Charlie Chats go away like 10 or 12 years ago? When was Red Zone founded?

I couldn't find the chat but found this

 

[pattykay]

They pretended you could watch any game you wanted with red zone

I was actually thinking of the even earlier Charlie Chat, from about 20 years ago, when they were promoting the regional distant broadcast networks. They started offering a la carte network channels from a limited selection of cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, and Denver). Prior to that, only New York and Los Angeles had individual channels available a la carte. All other distant network cities had required that you qualify for all four networks. So, with this change, Dish started promoting it on the Charlie Chat as a way to get more NFL games, for those who "qualify."

But yes, now that you mention it, I do remember the RedZone chat also.

 

[Juan]

I was actually thinking of the even earlier Charlie Chat, from about 20 years ago, when they were promoting the regional distant broadcast networks. They started offering a la carte network channels from a limited selection of cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, and Denver). Prior to that, only New York and Los Angeles had individual channels available a la carte. All other distant network cities had required that you qualify for all four networks. So, with this change, Dish started promoting it on the Charlie Chat as a way to get more NFL games, for those who "qualify."

But yes, now that you mention it, I do remember the RedZone chat also.

Yes yes yes

 

[pattykay]

Alright, we're going back there - and even then I flat said RSNs were pulled off DISH, which was the whole subject of discussion forward from my perspective.

The (now often) quoted part of that post is the only sentence where you specifically mentioned RSN's. Here is the rest of that post:

The bottom line is DISH costs more than cable when you need internet as well. The bundle is a better deal overall. DISH just cannot compete.

And cable has sports channels.

DISH booted almost all RSNs and made it so anyone who wants to watch sports can no longer do so. Those customers are leaving or have left. This is just plain fact.

DISH calculated that there were many customers who would prefer lower rates and no sports. Fair enough. But those who want to watch sports were faced with needing to leave.

For the entire rest of that post (both before and after the "RSN" sentence) you were speaking generally about "sports channels" and "no sports" and "want to watch sports."

After sam_gordon quoted the middle section of that post, you then specifically asked sam_gordon about RSN's, when that was clearly not what sam_gordon was talking about:

Really? We've watched a bunch of sports on Dish, even within the last week.

And which Regional Sports Channel are you watching? Cause DISH booted 90% of them

Your idea that sports is simply satisfied with 1-2 games a week from a broadcast channel is not the same thing and you know it is not, the rest is you twisting what I said, and that pisses me off.

Now, to borrow one of your lines, "That is not what I said!" Not all sports fans are fans of their in-market team. I have repeatedly been referring to out-of-market sports packages, such as NBA League Pass, NHL Center Ice, and MLB Extra Innings. Dish still has all of those packages, and fans of those teams (who live in the right place in order to "qualify") can still watch all of the games that Dish carries as part of those packages, not just 1 - 2 games a week as you keep saying. This is without even mentioning many other sports that have their own specialty channels (golf and tennis, just to name a couple) that are not affected by the loss of RSN's at all. So, there are still some sports fans who are satisfied with the channels that Dish does still have available, and that is all that sam_gordon and I are saying. I never said that all sports fans (especially fans of in-market major sports league teams) should be satisfied with what Dish still has, nor that they should continue to stay with Dish even when they are not satisfied. So stop pretending that is what I am saying. That pisses me off!

 

[dishdude]

I was actually thinking of the even earlier Charlie Chat, from about 20 years ago, when they were promoting the regional distant broadcast networks. They started offering a la carte network channels from a limited selection of cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, and Denver). Prior to that, only New York and Los Angeles had individual channels available a la carte. All other distant network cities had required that you qualify for all four networks. So, with this change, Dish started promoting it on the Charlie Chat as a way to get more NFL games, for those who "qualify."

But yes, now that you mention it, I do remember the RedZone chat also.

Everyone qualified lol. I miss the days of the east/west network offerings.

 

[PortlandChris]

The (now often) quoted part of that post is the only sentence where you specifically mentioned RSN's. Here is the rest of that post:

For the entire rest of that post (both before and after the "RSN" sentence) you were speaking generally about "sports channels" and "no sports" and "want to watch sports."

After sam_gordon quoted the middle section of that post, you then specifically asked sam_gordon about RSN's, when that was clearly not what sam_gordon was talking about:





Now, to borrow one of your lines, "That is not what I said!" Not all sports fans are fans of their in-market team. I have repeatedly been referring to out-of-market sports packages, such as NBA League Pass, NHL Center Ice, and MLB Extra Innings. Dish still has all of those packages, and fans of those teams (who live in the right place in order to "qualify") can still watch all of the games that Dish carries as part of those packages, not just 1 - 2 games a week as you keep saying. This is without even mentioning many other sports that have their own specialty channels (golf and tennis, just to name a couple) that are not affected by the loss of RSN's at all. So, there are still some sports fans who are satisfied with the channels that Dish does still have available, and that is all that sam_gordon and I are saying. I never said that all sports fans (especially fans of in-market major sports league teams) should be satisfied with what Dish still has, nor that they should continue to stay with Dish even when they are not satisfied. So stop pretending that is what I am saying. That pisses me off!

You twist, shake, and roll in my words, but whatever. But I will add to only one point - that is that NBA League Pass, NHL Center Ice, and MLB Extra Innings are replacements for Regional Sports Channels. They are not. All of those league package blackout in the team's home market. You can't watch your home team.

What this WAS - was a discussion of WHY DISH is loosing so many customers - before it was hijacked. A substantial reason for this is the booting of Regional Sports Channels. That's what I initially said and what I still say.

DISH is certainly free to boot the RSNs. I will be the first to state that these channels are expensive and not for everyone. Pay providers ALL together let this get out of control in the first place.

Further, aside from news and sports, there is no real need for live television. So without this no one needs any of this. Orby just showed us that operating a bare bones satellite service without sports and news. As far as I can tell CNN CSPAN, and CSPAN2 were the only channels that ORBY had that broadcast live television, other than locals. So a bare bones service without more is simply not sustainable. DISH will continue to lose customers, making fixed costs harder to cover.

And at the same time.....RSNs are under a threat as well. They can't exist without viewers.

I believe we are still a few years away, but I see the only solution to this is move RSNs into higher tiers. They are never going ala carte. But the question will be what goes with them to the higher tier, because you know this is how this industry works....bundles.

 

[Juan]

You twist, shake, and roll in my words, but whatever. But I will add to only one point - that is that NBA League Pass, NHL Center Ice, and MLB Extra Innings are replacements for Regional Sports Channels. They are not. All of those league package blackout in the team's home market. You can't watch your home team.

What this WAS - was a discussion of WHY DISH is loosing so many customers - before it was hijacked. A substantial reason for this is the booting of Regional Sports Channels. That's what I initially said and what I still say.

DISH is certainly free to boot the RSNs. I will be the first to state that these channels are expensive and not for everyone. Pay providers ALL together let this get out of control in the first place.

Further, aside from news and sports, there is no real need for live television. So without this no one needs any of this. Orby just showed us that operating a bare bones satellite service without sports and news. As far as I can tell CNN CSPAN, and CSPAN2 were the only channels that ORBY had that broadcast live television, other than locals. So a bare bones service without more is simply not sustainable. DISH will continue to lose customers, making fixed costs harder to cover.

And at the same time.....RSNs are under a threat as well. They can't exist without viewers.

I believe we are still a few years away, but I see the only solution to this is move RSNs into higher tiers. They are never going ala carte. But the question will be what goes with them to the higher tier, because you know this is how this industry works....bundles.

So again..why directv losing even more customers?

 

[MikeD-C05]

Everyone qualified lol. I miss the days of the east/west network offerings.

I used to have East /West and Superstations. I would use the east coast for 2 network recordings and the west coast for the other two networks using my Webtv/dishplayer. It was like my own "primetime anytime" before there was a primetime anytime.

 

[PortlandChris]

So again..why directv losing even more customers?

Directv has more customers to lose and has emphasized different markets. And ATT no longer breaks out Uverse and Directv numbers. But yeah, they've lost a lot. ATT has largely made a decision to abandone its Uverse service and wants out of Directv altogether.

And AT & T pushed some customers from Directv to AT & T Now. Some get it for free with their telephones.

AT & T has publicly said that they have widdled away all the customers that lose it money, so maybe there is something to be said there.

ATT has refocused itself to put more emphasis on content - HBO, Time Warner, CNN, TNT, etc.

But at the end of all of this is one simple fact - bundled cable tv and internet is cheaper.