Dish to Drop Weather Channel?
- Thread starter zippyfrog
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 189
- Views 20K
Because people who want more, do not want to pay for it. I have 2H/2J, pay $38/month, and it is worth it to me currently. Again, when I lose my benefits I may sing a different tune, but even when I was paying full price last year, it was fine with me. I dropped Starz and Max, because they were worthless to me. The next idea is remove all packages, everyone gets the top pckae, but make everyone pay the current industry average, with no choice on what they are funding. That way it is fair to everyone(it's not fair to those that would have to pay more than they were before... Making a point Dare).
I am a firm believer, if you want Dish or Direct(living in the boonies and not having alternate options is a bad excuse as you choose to live there, and that is the cost of your wonderful country living.), and you want more than a basic 211 receiver(which I remind you, you can pay $40 one time, and turn it into a DVR with no monthly fee) then you pay for it. If you do not want to pay for it, then you don't get it. Ultimately it is your choice. Also, I beleive the leased 211+$40 fee, would cost less than a TIVO lifetime or monthly subscription, ultimately making them the better value.... But that is just my opinion. It also fits the request earlier of a basic dvr that offers live TV and to record something when you hit record. The 722, hopper, 922, 612, 512 etc are not the dvrs you described earlier.
I have no problem with equipment fees if you lease them. If you OWN the equipment, paid full price to OWN the equipment, the equipment fee becomes nothing more than a "because we can" fee.
I can see reduced fees for buying equipment, but the DVR and the outlet fees are still components of the fees. No way a $50-99 Joey commands $7 month just for the equipment. It is the programming access outlet that the content owners command.
I would think it would cause people to stop purchasing equipment unless they want to turn it off for periods of time throughout the year. This is one thing I do agree with DTV about. equipment is property of DTV, no matter where you got it. Ruins that whole argument.
If someone buys a receiver knowing about the fees going in, then it would be ok to assume they agreed to the fee initially, so it can not be that bad. I understand some people get pissed when things like the hopper fee going from $7 to $10 to $12, but folks are told all prices are subject to change at anytime. So, basically, save money and lease, Unless it would be more beneficial to own(camping, account stacking, rving, maybe a kid coming home from college for the holidays)
I get where you are coming from Tony, but a great comparison would be like saying "I bought my car, and own it, and I want to continue with OnStar and Satellite radio for free, because I own the car". It is a ridiculous statement I know, but it is the same concept, compared to someone leasing their vehicle.
Get rid of it and give me a discount on my bill..I could care less if I flip over thru it again and never again see Prospectors staged shows again.
No matter how long and hard you guys try to convince me otherwise, I see DVR fees ON OWNED equipment as "Because we can" fees and nothing more. Additional outlet fees are another item. I am unconvinced that this isn't a "because we can" fee as well, but I am not as adamant about that subject.
Guys, OTA and Tivio Roamio is and will be the only option for no fees..oh well yes, Tivo's. And one I am not taking.
Last edited:
A DVR allows a viewer to watch content at their leisure and avoid commercials. It also allows the storing and viewing of content even after the channel that the content came from is no longer subscribed to. How can you not logically see that content owners are going to demand in their carriage agreements that they should get more money from subscribers that have access to DVR features? As a Trek fan, I have to say that is just illogical.
Three letters.... V C R
How many monthly fees were required for that? There was also VCR+ that made it a breeze to get only the new episodes.
DVRs are nothing different. The only difference is that content providers convinced subscribers that it was a premium service. It's not.
http://www.cnet.com/topics/dvrs/best-dvrs/
How many monthly fees were required for that? There was also VCR+ that made it a breeze to get only the new episodes.
DVRs are nothing different. The only difference is that content providers convinced subscribers that it was a premium service. It's not.
http://www.cnet.com/topics/dvrs/best-dvrs/
OK then, now who's in favor of Dish keeping the Weather Channel? No Ayes...OK, meeting adjourned!
And to add to that, why would DISH or any of them pay big bucks for, and keep updating the software that runs the receiver and then give it away free? If you could buy a DISH receiver without the software what good would it be as a DVR? Remember you are not paying a lease fee, you paying for the owned software.
You own a TIVO too but pay fees, in fact the newest model with OTA you have to pay forever, there is no lifetime subscription.
You own a TIVO too but pay fees, in fact the newest model with OTA you have to pay forever, there is no lifetime subscription.
The money grab and extortion opportunities by the conglomerates grew by leaps and bounds in recent years (post 1996 Telecom Act).
I think the biggest difference was the assault from analog to digital. VCR won in court every time, where TIVO lost, for copyright infringement. You can still currently record to DVD as well, however depending on equipment used for whichever device, will require HDCP be passed for a large handful of channels. That should be enough evidence towards that.
The push to digital by the industry was precisely to get around the "fair use" analog court losses and implement a new and more restrictive DMCA where the content and charges can be more tightly controlled. Remember, DVD recording is still only on analog sources. You want to record digital HD content? Pay the licensing (DVR fee) for the privilege.
Cable and Sat companies love outlet fees as they are almost pure profit, they don't have to pay Disney, AMC or anyone for that product, with programming they must purchase and try to resell it for profit, which is getting harder as the programmers keep raising cost, dish charging $12 month for a hopper is easy money. Directv charges me $3 for Whole home DVR, the DVRs are already capable of this, they are charging for an imaginary service(enabling it) to make money. So yes you are 100% correct, they charge it because they can get away with it :-( Sucks, but its part of the biz unfortunately.
What was Dish's Net Profit per sub last year? If anything like the previous year, then their profit was less than their average charge per sub. I find it hard to beleive that it is a "just because we can" fee when if we were to remove that fee, for every sub, there would be no net profit, thus forcing those without DVRs to pay more because the cost of programming packages would have to go up significantly. We are all talking about why they charge the fee just because they can, but don't you think that would be reflected on their annual financial statements as a much much larger gap? That was one of the points trying to make earlier. Dare2 I think understood it. All that sAid, if you have dish, and do not want to pay thAt fee, get a 211, and record to EHD and give up all the software that takes money to continuously improve and correct.
I am in the business, earnings reports etc. If you want the details they are easy to google.
The assumption you pay the monthly fee for software upgrades is silly, apple doesn't charge for their software upgrades, even on older devices, buy the equipment they support it, I suppose they could start if they wanted too though.
Similar threads
