DISH -VS- VOOM - A Settlement has been reached!

[HDRoberts]

Initially VOOM tried to schlock their entire 15-channel lineup but nobody had the bandwidth and/or wanted to pay what Dish was paying. If DirecTV would have signed-up for the 5 channel "Best of Voom" package then VOOM would have been obligated to offer Dish the same deal (i.e., Most Favored Nation) according to the affiliation agreement. To be honest, if someone like DirecTV or Comcast would have subscribed to the "Best of Voom" package then perhaps VOOM may have managed to gain a foot hold. I really like the Best of Voom package, but such is life. Ultimately VOOM decided to bleed Dish, and Dish signed a bad contract that allowed VOOM to bleed them for 15-years. In retrospect, there should have been additional incentives in the agreement for both parties to act in good faith. C'est la vie!

Hmmm. If you really thing about...DirecTV killed VOOM!!!

Do you have the actual clause? I'm not sure someone else has to sign a deal. Simply offering a deal may be enough, depending on how it's worded.

Even if not, this should be a big deal to a jury. Dish can show they (1) had a contract that guaranteed the same terms as others get, (2) Voom offered better terms to someone else, (3) Dish asked for those terms, and (4) Voom declined. Really kills Voom's argument that they worked with Dish in good faith.

 

[NotMe546]

Do you have the actual clause? I'm not sure someone else has to sign a deal. Simply offering a deal may be enough, depending on how it's worded.

Even if not, this should be a big deal to a jury. Dish can show they (1) had a contract that guaranteed the same terms as others get, (2) Voom offered better terms to someone else, (3) Dish asked for those terms, and (4) Voom declined. Really kills Voom's argument that they worked with Dish in good faith.

I hope so. The dolans so need a kick in the a&&!!!!!

 

[Voyager6]

Do you have the actual clause? I'm not sure someone else has to sign a deal. Simply offering a deal may be enough, depending on how it's worded.

Even if not, this should be a big deal to a jury. Dish can show they (1) had a contract that guaranteed the same terms as others get, (2) Voom offered better terms to someone else, (3) Dish asked for those terms, and (4) Voom declined. Really kills Voom's argument that they worked with Dish in good faith.

The Disney vs Dish suit also hinges on the MFN Clause. The NY Court initially said that it didn't apply but the Appeals Court saw it otherwise. It will be interesting how it is applied in this case.

 

[navychop]

I hope so. The dolans so need a kick in the a&&!!!!!

I was thinking a little further forward......

 

[riffjim4069]

Do you have the actual clause? I'm not sure someone else has to sign a deal. Simply offering a deal may be enough, depending on how it's worded.

Even if not, this should be a big deal to a jury. Dish can show they (1) had a contract that guaranteed the same terms as others get, (2) Voom offered better terms to someone else, (3) Dish asked for those terms, and (4) Voom declined. Really kills Voom's argument that they worked with Dish in good faith.

Both parties did not act in good faith IMO. However, it would appear that Dish/SATS illegally terminated the agreement because VooM would not renegotiate the deal and they decided to milk Dish Network for the next 12-years (not exactly looking after the best interest of your business partner); Dish signed a very bad deal (the proof is in the details); Dish decided it was cheaper in the long run, and a better strategy, to walk-away from the VooM contract. Unfortunately, due to Dish destroying/not preserving evidence, their expert witness(es) have been barred from testifying about damages and the jury will receive an adverse instruction from the Judge that is akin to pointing a loaded gun right at the Dish Network bench.

Dish will most likely lose this case...they may be in the process of minimizing damages by not renewing their carriage of the AMC channels since they cannot do so at trial. We shall see. Besides, VOOM does not need to show they negotiated in good faith...just that they complied with the terms of the affiliation agreement. The only thing that is in question is the spending requirement and, to be honest, the point is moot since VOOM has produced reams of evidence that Dish was aware of how shared administrative and overhead expenses were accounted for under the contract; and let's not forget they found no discrepancies in more than 2 1/2 years the financials were forwarded to them along with finding no discrepancies when they audited VOOM HD Networks in October, 2007.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Jim your missing the big point that Dish wanted to keep boom but only 5 channels of it. It was Voom who said its all or nothing.

if they didn't say that the 5 Voom channels would probably still be on dish today.

 

[eurosport]

Jim your missing the big point that Dish wanted to keep boom but only 5 channels of it. It was Voom who said its all or nothing.

if they didn't say that the 5 Voom channels would probably still be on dish today.

Because that's what the contract stated. Charlie decided to play by his own rules and hopefully will get what he deserves. Don't get me wrong, I still have Dish, but that whole Voom thing still chaps my a$$. I hope Rainbow/Cablevision gets the 61.5 satellite back too!

 

[riffjim4069]

Jim your missing the big point that Dish wanted to keep boom but only 5 channels of it. It was Voom who said its all or nothing.

if they didn't say that the 5 Voom channels would probably still be on dish today.

I understand what you're saying Scott, but Voom had a 15-year contract in which Dish was required to pay $3.25 per month for 90% of all basic HD subscribers (Penetration Requirement) in 2005 to $6.43 per month per 90% of basic HD subscribers in 2019. Based on VOOM's calculation of 11-million basic HD subscribers, they would be taking in roughly 700M in the final year of the contract. I'm not sure how many HD subscribers Dish currently has, but I would have to believe it is in the 7-million range. Since Dish was required to pay something like $4.46 per subscriber in 2012 under the affiliation agreement, VooM would be pulling-in something like 350M in subscriber fees from Dish this year.

Unless Dish offered VooM something like 1.5B to buy-out their contract prior to renegotiating a new 5-channel lineup (or pay the same price as the 15-channel lineup), then it would be borderline criminal for VooM Execs to acept this "deal" since they have have a fiduciary responsiblity to Cablevision shareholders. Other than VooM claiming that Dish threated to terminate the affiliation agrement if they didn't agree to retier VooM HD, I haven't seen one shred of evidence to suggest that Dish offered anything to compensate them for a 5-channel lineup. Heck, I haven't even seen one document that Dish has filed on eCourt to suggest they wanted to subscribe to a 5-channel lineup...just comments made here and that other site nobody ever visits.

Again, unless I see something where Dish agreed to buy-out there contract with Voom, the point is moot. VooM would be foolish to agree to anything less than what they were guaranteed under the 2005 affiliation agreement.

 

[osu1991]

Dish saw the writing on the wall and did what it needed to do to survive. Dish had a fiduciary responsibility too. So lets pick 15 HD channels that can be dropped and put Voom in those slots. Just how many subscribers does Dish have in 2012 if they are missing the HD versions of ESPN, ESPN 2, TNT, USA, etc... because the channel slots on the satellites are filled with Voom. People already complain about the lack of 24/7 RSN's, lets add most major cable networks HD feeds and see what happens.

Voom was bleeding Dish dry, they could have helped out and ensured both companies mutually benefited and prospered long term. They chose not too and Dish wouldn't have been able to compete or survive long term with that contract. None of us knows for sure how it will end, but my guess is they settle and I doubt its any where near the numbers being tossed around. 750 - 900 million and a long term agreement for the AMC nets. Of course I may be off my rocker too.:loco:

 

[JM42]

I understand what you're saying Scott, but Voom had a 15-year contract in which Dish was required to pay $3.25 per month for 90% of all basic HD subscribers (Penetration Requirement) in 2005 to $6.43 per month per 90% of basic HD subscribers in 2019. Based on VOOM's calculation of 11-million basic HD subscribers, they would be taking in roughly 700M in the final year of the contract. I'm not sure how many HD subscribers Dish currently has, but I would have to believe it is in the 7-million range. Since Dish was required to pay something like $4.46 per subscriber in 2012 under the affiliation agreement, VooM would be pulling-in something like 350M in subscriber fees from Dish this year.

Unless Dish offered VooM something like 1.5B to buy-out their contract prior to renegotiating a new 5-channel lineup (or pay the same price as the 15-channel lineup), then it would be borderline criminal for VooM Execs to acept this "deal" since they have have a fiduciary responsiblity to Cablevision shareholders. Other than VooM claiming that Dish threated to terminate the affiliation agrement if they didn't agree to retier VooM HD, I haven't seen one shred of evidence to suggest that Dish offered anything to compensate them for a 5-channel lineup. Heck, I haven't even seen one document that Dish has filed on eCourt to suggest they wanted to subscribe to a 5-channel lineup...just comments made here and that other site nobody ever visits.

Again, unless I see something where Dish agreed to buy-out there contract with Voom, the point is moot. VooM would be foolish to agree to anything less than what they were guaranteed under the 2005 affiliation agreement.

That's also a great summary of exactly why dish had to walk away. Voom simply wasn't worth that kind of money and would have hindered Dish's growth.

The original contract was a bad deal for both sides.

There will be settlement, it will be big, and Dish will still be better off than if they had kept the original agreement. If you ask me, BOTH sides were playing toward this outcome.

 

[Hall]

Jim your missing the big point that Dish wanted to keep boom but only 5 channels of it. It was Voom who said its all or nothing.

Maybe Dish should have thought of that before signing the agreement then, huh ? As it was though, they wanted to change the rules after the fact and VOOM stood their ground, i.e. they insisted on following the contract. Who can blame them ?!?!

 

[riffjim4069]

That's also a great summary of exactly why dish had to walk away. Voom simply wasn't worth that kind of money and would have hindered Dish's growth.

The original contract was a bad deal for both sides.

There will be settlement, it will be big, and Dish will still be better off than if they had kept the original agreement. If you ask me, BOTH sides were playing toward this outcome.

That sums it up pretty well. Initially, I though this matter would wind-up costing Dish in the 700-900M range, which was much less expensive in the long-run than paying VooM for the next 12-years on their contract. However, after receiving sanctions for spoliation of evidence (barring Dish's expert witness from testifying about damages), along with the judge's instruction advising the jury to consider evidence Dish destroyed as being beneficial in supporting VooM's case...well, I'm thinking this figure could be much highter. I think Dish is once again going to get screwed by their legal strategy. We shall see. Regardless, CableVision gets $$$, Dish raises rates, and the Soup Nazi says, "No VooM for you!"

 

[riffjim4069]

A lot more documents (70 total) were posted on eCourt earlier today, to include Dish/SATS affidavit in opposition to VOOM's motion to exclude Dish's expert witness. This witness is an expert in forensic accounting, fraud and damages. Anyway, the motion will be argued next month.

 

[The Fat Man]

Because that's what the contract stated. Charlie decided to play by his own rules and hopefully will get what he deserves. Don't get me wrong, I still have Dish, but that whole Voom thing still chaps my a$$. I hope Rainbow/Cablevision gets the 61.5 satellite back too!

I don't. Many locals are there on the East Coast are there.

 

[riffjim4069]

The parties were in court on 7/27 and meet today, 8/3, to apparently argue motions involving damages and expert witness testimony. The trial date is still set for 9/18. Although there were a number of documents filed publically with the eCourt, 99% of the good stuff (deposition and financials) was redated (see attached Dish/SAT subscriber numbers from 8/21/2008). Seriously, the documents are worthless and I have no idea were they were made available to the public since a blank sheet of paper contains more information.

Hey, I do I get one of those Free Employee Subscriptions.

 

[PATECO]

Hey, I do I get one of those Free Employee Subscriptions.

Become an employee or a dealer.

 

[NotMe546]

Hey, I do I get one of those Free Employee Subscriptions.

Become an employee or a dealer.

 

[dare2be]

LOL, I believe that was a typo, and meant to say "do I get one?" Either that, or he was saying he does and the other poster thought he was asking. Yep, still confused over a typo.

 

[riffjim4069]

We haven't been Dish subscribers in almost 5-year...however, we received an email from AMC TV telling us their version AMC was yanked from Dish Network. It's nothing new, but they do seem to be more aggressive. So far everything VOOM alleged in their May 2008 complaint has been proven to be true, not disputed by Dish/SATS, or supported by the publically available documents posted on eCourts. Based on the tone of this correspondence, I get the feeling Charlie offered VOOM a low-ball figure to settle the VOOM vs Dish lawsuit and threatened not to renew the AMC Networks contract if they didn't. Needless to say, both parties will not be exchanging Christmas Cards this holiday season.


Dear DISH Subscriber:


Did you know that AMC just received the most Emmy nominations of any basic cable channel? 34 nominations for shows like "Breaking Bad", "Mad Men", "The Walking Dead" and "Hell on Wheels". Yet despite the popularity and demand for these shows, DISH continues to black out AMC, IFC, WE tv, and Sundance Channel. To add insult to injury, DISH continues to charge you for them; you just no longer receive them.

DISH's decision to drop AMC, WEtv, IFC and Sundance Channel had nothing to do with our fees, or our shows. In fact, unlike almost every other dispute you see between providers and programmers, and despite DISH's misleading claims to the contrary, this is not about fees.

The simple truth is that DISH is using their consumers as pawns to attempt to gain leverage in a lawsuit involving an old and unrelated business venture that has nothing to do with AMC, nothing to do with our shows or fees, and certainly nothing to do with DISH subscribers, who just want to watch the shows they love and are paying DISH for. You will not see any AMC Networks' shows on DISH any time soon.

In other words, since DISH's reason for depriving you of AMC programming is based on a lawsuit that won't be resolved for a long time, this problem won't be solved shortly, unlike other disputes between programmers and providers, which typically are resolved in a matter of days (weeks at most).

If you want to watch "Breaking Bad"," Hell on Wheels," "The Walking Dead" and "Mad Men," you will have to switch TV providers. We can help you do that. The good news is, every other cable, phone and satellite company
-- except DISH -- carries AMC in their basic package. Many providers are offering special incentives for people to switch. Call now at 1-855-2-DROP-DISH (1-855-237-6734) and let us help you gain access to the shows your friends and neighbors are watching.

We can help you regain access to AMC, IFC, Sundance Channel and WE tv by calling the above number, visiting Keep AMC Networks or contacting us on Twitter @AMC_Assist.

Thank you for your support of our shows and our networks. We want you to be able to watch the TV you love, and we'll do whatever we can to help make that possible.

Sincerely,
AMC Networks

 

[riffjim4069]

LOL, I believe that was a typo, and meant to say "do I get one?" Either that, or he was saying he does and the other poster thought he was asking. Yep, still confused over a typo.

I posted my rhetorical question because I thought our Dish retailers and employers still had to pay for their service. But perhaps I'm wrong...or else the "Free Employee" account is simply for those work at the Company HQ.